Work of our National Innovation initiative. Now, another 17 years later, here we are again, once again finding ourselves at the precipice of transformational change. Today well hear stories about these changes as theyre foundational to our Flagship National commission on innovation and competitiveness frontiers. The commission cochaired by the Council Board on this stage is a multiyear effort to reimagine americas innovation potential and to chart a new path for competitiveness in the 21st century. And as this slide shows, just a little less than a year ago, with our core leadership team, we began to build this effort. And by august we had pulled together a powerful and diverse set of commissioners, nearly 60 leaders from across this country from industry, from academia, from our Labor Union Community and our National Labs. And the commission has already started their work. As deborah mentioned, todays launch is our 2020 roadmap of activities that we hope will change the future trajectory of American Innovation capacity. And to make all of this happen, this fall we have built a growing, blossoming community of hundreds of advisers, communication leaders, and innovation practitioners who will create over the coming year this new innovation agenda and this new movement for america. This morning our Commission Leadership is going to share their Top Priorities for this go forward strategy. Mehmood, i would like to turn to you first. Looking at a future centered around a more sustainable approach to production and consumption and the benefits that would accrue to greater attention there, you have to be concerned about our nations stagnation in investments and long term r d. Can you talk to us a little bit about what you see as the risk of the stagnation and what might be the opportunity if we were to reignite our investments along r d . Thank you. Look, i think we touched on it with deborahs comments but let me just frame it up again. Any country, in particular the United States has led the world in terms of Economic Growth and development for its citizens based on innovation. There is no innovation without invention. And every innovation starts as something, a process, a product, an ingredient, that was invented. That requires r d invention. Every investment depends on the r d ecosystem and its up to other sectors to take those inventions and translate them to applications in society. So much of the benefit we as a country have achieved from this started with that r d investment. If we go back over the last five, six decades, the u. S. Was the primary driver in the world of r d investment. More than half the worlds r d investment happened across the United States, different government bodies and of course the private sector. Today china accounts for a quarter of r d investment on the planet, just over. Were now at about a quarter. We have about 20 more annually gap continues to narrow. When that happens, well no longer have the fuel that drives future innovations and ultimately the job creation and opportunities that go with an innovation ecosystem. Thanks, mehmood. You talked about the china challenge. We see a squeeze in the u. S. On the fundamental side of launch and research. China is investing much more in the complication aapplication a development. I think that triggers, and michael, i would like your comment on this, we have to rethink the model. Michael, youve provocatively called on a modernization model for america, we have to be unbelievably creative. What might that model look like in the future and how is this commission poised to help us think through and present to the United States a new way of thinking about innovation . Thanks for the small question there. Lets back up a little bit. The census will report 330, 335 Million People, the most diverse country in the world. Unbelievable complexity, everything you can possibly imagine. Were still living off the successes of the past, the fumes of the past to some extent in terms of our designs of the past. We wake up today with this democracy thats evolving at this rapid rate, socially and culturally, we wake up today with true global competitors, which i think is good news for the planet and good news for humanity Going Forward. That means then we have to go and look at how do we modernize everything, how do we modernize our institutions of higher education, how do we modernize the entire educational system, how do we change the notion that education is a sector as opposed to responsibility for all sectors. How do we embrace the notion that Human Capital is in fact an objective of every organization, Human Capital development, Human Capital enhancement. How do we find ways to modernize, modernize, modernize, use technologies. How do we create opportunities for people to learn across the entirety of their life, seamlessly . How can they move in and out of formal educational experiences, how can they get recognition and credit for informal educational experiences . How can we empower 60yearolds, 70yearolds, 80yearolds in the future . We have an archaic, segmented, fragmented, isolated, sectordriven model. We dont have connections. We dont have linkages. We have the means and capability and tools to do all these things. We just have to look at the fact that our systems are antiquated. Theyre underperforming. And just accept that. Its a weird thing to me to watch people go in, its like sending in line after line after line of people and say, we need to make k12 better. No, you need to make k12 different. You need to rethink it from the very core. You need to rethink some universities and some colleges. We need to rethink how they work. Weve been doing this at my institution with some progress, not at warp 8, but maybe a little bit better than impulse power. And so point being, relative to modernization, we have to basically face you want to fact that the country has matured socially and culturally. The world has matured economically and competitively. Now is the moment for us for this next burst of modernization across all aspects of what we do. Brian, i would like to turn to you now and perhaps build and riff a little bit off michaels point about modernization. As we think about modernizing america, optimizing our environment for innovation, what is your vision for regulatory or other reforms that will be necessary to help support and enable entrepreneurs and innovative activity . I think the key point is embedded in what was just talked about, which is the structure of the worlds economies are much different. So when we talk about comparing ourselves to, you know, china in innovation and r d dollars, we have to be the leader because were the Worlds Largest economy and we want to grow. Thats not the right comparison. The right comparison is how much more do we have to spend to maintain that position. The second construct is there is a finer demand in talent than 17 years ago. Chinas economy 17 years ago was about a trillion and a half, a trillion. Now its 14. That means the structure has changed dramatically in terms of consumption. The indian european dominance there is changing. Against that, you think, we used to lead standards setting, whether its pollution, safety. How do you lead it when its about information privacy, and how do you lead it when theres two systems developing, how will we interface with that system . All of us are in the national and Global Business chains. To interface with economies that are in a different environment than we have. Near term legislation, i would focus on a couple of things. One is Research Funding which my other colleagues will talk about. An example of driving that is what the executive order earlier this year, Artificial Intelligence and the emergence around that, defense infrastructure, funding, those are important elements. Another thing is i think we have to keep our eye on revitalizing patent reform. Deborah mentioned earlier, not only trade, but duration to get the payback period so innovation keeps coming. The world has benefitted by the u. S. s innovation. And then you have tacs. The near term issue, and deborah mentioned earlier, with these deficits, at some point thats going to become a review of where can they collect money. And theres two ways to collect money. Raise the rates, which could happen, and then you have the problem with the competitiveness, the tax rate against the world where the world is much more interesting to companies for final demand and things. Thats one issue. The second issue is also what snech incentives we take out. We cant use the incentives for r d and new Energy Sources which are major drivers of activity. When people need money, those things can go. You have to remember the charitable deduction, the University System which gets a lot of funding from charities to do this innovation. You start taking away the resources. One of the things you have to be careful of, its not just tax rate. Its the issue of what the incentives are and how do we preserve them. So i think about it, international property, trade negotiations, how thats protected, the duration that have, the tax policy, not losing incentives, you know, those are the key sort of regulatory legislative areas i think about. Brian, can i follow up on one point . In launch, many of the issues you just raised are teased out. But another one that comes up with around capital structure. Is the United States poised to compete globally with capital cost structure . Will we be able to build the innovative structure of the future today . We shouldnt say we all have the answers here, groups have to go out and look at it. Inherently we have the deepest Capital Markets and best carpet formation. So i think the question is not that, its making sure we hold onto that. That is also emerging in other countries so we have to be careful that the amount of private equity around the world and the amount of private equity in the United States doesnt go around the world, because the rules are clear and stuff. 1 of the counties in the u. S. Have 30 of gdp. One of the things we have to think about is how the Capital Formation and the benefits are distributed better. We have the issue of Human Capital, that michael mentioned. How do we make sure it participants across the board. Not only do we have to think about the cost of capital. We cant have Capital Formation deserts, we cant have innovation funding in seven major counties and not anywhere else because it will be problematic, we wont get the depth of talent. The cap return is there, the money is there, i wouldnt worry about that. We have to watch incentives as we talked about before. Are we reinvesting in that Human Capital ability . Lets stick on the Human Capital point. Lonnie, ill turn to you, im interested in how you, the ibew, are thinking about that future Human Capital. What ideas are you all generating, how do we train, reskill American Workers for this innovation space . Theres no doubt about it, the skill sets needed for the workers of the future are much different than they are today. So were constantly working on update dating our construction branch, the way we change. The type of work were doing is much different. I visited one of our Training Centers just a couple of weeks ago and theyre actually starting to do some virtual Type Training where you put on the head headset, youre able to simulate going through some operations, open up a cabinet, connectiheck connections, and if you do something wrong, there will be an explosion, it will tell you you did something wrong. Were changing the way we do the training so they get it more, like you said, in reality of what theyre going to have when theyre out in the field. Also in our other branches, even manufacturing and others, you know, its a different skill set in the future manufacturing as well, because of, you know, the continuing of expansion of robotics and other changes, you know, these workers need to have a different training, a different skill set to be able to adjust to those type of jobs. We work very close with our employers and all of our branches and developing, were constantly changing and innovating what we do to meet the needs of the future as technologies change, we Work Together with them to make sure their employees and members are getting the proper training to be prepared for whats to come in the future. Thanks, lonnie. I know youre representing nearly 3 nearly. 75 million workers across the country. Everyone up here is engaged with work forces doing very different things, probably very different than they were two to three years ago. Any other thoughts on what this future of work look like and how our commission might really think about leveraging what in some sense could be a demographic advantage in the United States. Michael or we just trademark at my university the phrase universal learner, universal learning, in opposition to universal income. The notion that somehow were going to give up on the ability of people to be able to perform for high compensation levels or increasing compensation levels in the economy of the future. So then were going to tax those that are making more resources and then move those taxes to people who are no longer able to perform in the economy. We might as well give up if we move in that direction. So the notion that we have is, how do we create an opportunity across all organizations, across a persons entire life, to be engaged in the opportunity for universal learning, all stages of life, all aspects, everything. That will require all of our institutions to rethink themselves. That will require corporations to rethink themselves, the government, the schools, the universities. Everybody. And the notion of moving Human Capital to be as important as financial capital, as important as natural capital, and raising its status and rethinking the whole thing is what we need to do. That will require all of us to rethink everything. Brian . Two aspects. One, that dialogue also fits with all the research thats being done on aging and things like weve done a lot of work with people on this. And people want to are never going to stop working. Theres also an intellectual societal demand to keep learning and working. People are living to their mid80s, 90s, they dont want to stop at 60. Were talking about retirement, the second career. To match the education process or whatever the exact term you used against that, i think thats something we and the commission need to be think about it, which is how do you reinvent careers all along. The second thing, the way we judge success in terms of innovation and competitiveness. The world is not necessarily only the Median Income and the top incomes and all the stuff like that. Its really, we in the United States should have the best starting jobs. They should be the best jobs in the world. And they should be a standard of living the world envies. Everything else is gravy. They should be growing, they should be doing. That might be completely different than the Jobs Available in our company 20 years ago. The starting wage for our employees next quarter is 40,000 a year for everybody, even a kid working the summer. But the amount of work, the productivity they have to have, they all work hard, to pay for that, takes innovation and a process. So we have to remember that the goal is not to produce the people who end up on top because thats going to kind of take care of itself. The goal is to bring everybodys standard of living to be the envy of the world. Weve lost that as a core goal in some ways. Thats a great point. Let me build on two points. Were not talking about hypothetical or theoretical. Let me quote a statistic, which i think will crystallize this. For the first time in the history of humanity today, there are more people over the age of 65 than under the age of 5. Its never happened before. The global population period is if you are a 5yearold, whether its your child or grandchildren, and you can fast forward 15 years from now, theres going to be a young workforce that is having to take care of more people over the age of 75 and 80 than theyve ever had to do. In fact theres more people to take care of than people who are working, if we dont change anything. For the leadership of this country and across the world, we have to ask ourselves, do we sit and twiddle our thumbs or look at that statistic and say, what are we leaving behind and more importantly, who is going to take care of us . And we have to change this for ourselves, not for that generation, because were putting way too much burden on a young generation of 5yearolds who are going to become 20yearolds taking care of a lot of 75 and 80yearolds. So what are our options . Well, we can watch the Economic Impact that have, or come up with a very different construct for education. Just because you turn 60 doesnt mean its mandatory retirement. There are still professions when youre at 60 or 65, its mandatory retirement. It doesnt make sense anymore. Ill give you an example. Currently every air Traffic Controller in the country is on mandatory overtime. We dont have enough. We know theres a crisis in pilots, aircraft mechanics, i can go on and on. There are a lot of opportunities to retrain, redevelop. Smart people can get redeployed. And whats it going to take . The leadership of sectors at this table, in this room, and say, what is the new construct for employers, educators, and policymakers . This cant be done in isolation. But it is happening now. We shouldnt be thinking about this as something that will happen in the future. Anyone with a young child, ask yourself what that future will look like. To build on what weve discussed already, i think the way we approach learning has to evolve dramatically. The idea that you can go to school, learn something and build a complete career is no longer true. You have to constantly learn. And you have to be taught to learn continuously. And i think this is why its also important to actually educate, whether it is in Technical Schools or universities, in a much more researchintensive environment, because when youre learning in a researchintensive environment, youre being taught for the workforce of the future, because research in itself is driving innovation. So youre actually learning in an environment where theyre focused on the future. So i think its really important to make sure that not only traditional universities but also working at the interface of universities, National Laboratories, industry, work towards creating a curricula that nod only teaches you how to learn continuously but also in a Research Incentive environment so youre being trained for the jobs of the future. Deborah, if you want to weigh in, we have a major report, work, that encapsulates 20 years of effort. I know this is an issue close to your heart, and obviously fundamental to our efforts. Well, i know were going to talk about this later in the day, you know, the importance of our s. T. E. M. Pipeline and workforce, but also ensuring that the next generation also has what we call the traditional education of the liberal arts, the social sciences, the humanities, because so many of the issues well be dealing with do take that type of higher value thinking and also the creativity and imagination that come from the arts and things. Thats something as well that we need to make sure, starting, you know, prek and all the way up, that we value the liberal arts as well as ensuring that we have more americans that have the quantifiable skills that infuse every component of work as well. Thomas, i want to pivot a little bit, although its connected. You lead one of the nations preeminent National Laboratories, crown jewels of our innovation infrastructure in this country. But as michael mentioned in august at our meeting where we developed launch, what we want to do with this commission is not just focus on a National Innovations system, but in some sense building on the assets around the country and optimizing for many different types of innovation systems. So im wondering, can you talk a little bit about how youre trying to turbo charge your own region and what lessons might we take back to the nation . Thank you for the nation. Let me start by giving you an anecdote. When i was a practicing scientist in the mid90s, i had the privilege on working on one of the Fastest Computers in the world, its an intel paragone. There is one in sandia. It required a major economy like the United States, a Major National laboratory, a Laboratory System to field that. It cost hundreds of millions of dollars. If you have an iphone 6 or better, you have a device that is faster than the fastest super computer in the world about 20 years ago. There are about 2 billion such units worldwide. So there is a democratization worldwide. The idea that we can compete globally based on the the intense innovation that occurs, two dozen counties in the United States spread along the coast, i think is not scaleable or sustainable. In fact there are a number of reports, you know, the brookings has something called the Growth Centers or jumpstarting america is another book. All of these, the idea is the innovation system, you really need many more Innovation Centers across middle america, cities that have the ability and the potential to step up and be part of the solution. As was mentioned, i lead Oak Ridge National laboratory, but im one of 17 such National Laboratories spread across the United States. And just for my own understanding, i tried to overlay these National Labs along the 330 or 40 cities that are sort of ready to be it has most of the ingredients to be part of the solution. And the reality is at the intersection of National Laboratories, universities, and these cities that already have much of the ecosystem thats necessary is a tremendous opportunity to jumpstart innovation. And thats something were working on. If you think about oak ridge, department of energy, not just Oak Ridge National laboratory but between y12 and the cleanup mission, department of emergency invests about 4. 5 billion in knoxville oak ridge area. The university of tennessee is about 2 billion. The Tennessee Valley authority thats located at oak ridge or knoxville, is about a 10 billion utility. There has to be a way to bring these assets together to be part of the solution. And i think thats a really important attribute that one needs to pursue. Michael, i dont know if you also want to comment on this, you raised the point back in august about innovation systems. But perhaps talk a little bit about the transformation youre seeing in the southwest that youre leading, and i think to thomas point, how do we really begin to turbo charge other regions across the country to contribute to the innovation story . Yes. So the key everywhere is to break down the fixed model. The fixed model says you retire at 65. Thats stupid. The fixed model says youre only educated building up to go to college and then youre done with your education. One of the advantages in a place like arizona where ive been living the last 17, 18 years, is nobody believes in anything there, theyre openminded to anything, and thats a good thing. They dont believe in government, they dont believe in this, they dont believe in that, thats all good. And what that means then, what that means then is that you can step back and just start assembling groups of people, assembling groups of institutions to rethink things. And so we brought in 300 private sector Educational Technology companies, were probably pound for pound ten times more efficient than we were in impacting peoples lives. All of us, all of our institutions, all of our sectors, all of our places, if you want to innovative, youve got to go back to the design. Theres no innovation thats a function of tweaking something. Its about the design of the institutions, the design of the relationships between the institutions, the design of the government, the design of the universities. And so one of the things we found in our neck of the woods down in the southwest is, openness to questioning and looking at and reshaping the design from which then were getting dramatic enhancements of outcome. Brian, did you want to make a comment . Just to follow that on, in my day job i go around the country and see lots of cities, and it really follows on the point, if each of these places has a series of things, which with the Proper Organization design, as michael said, could jumpstart something. What they cant all do is the same thing. If everybody is chasing the shiny object. 5g is an issue that every city has to deal with. Everybody has power, to the point that theres a utility, theres an infrastructure around that utility. We need to think about things which are innovative and scaleable and also universally sort of available, the University Systems are distributed through the country, and how you think about place in that way. Otherwise youll end up with that continuing concentration of the resource of the capital, the talent, into very narrow places. So i think thats key. On behalf of the Business Community, we push a lot, even in our relationship, around our headquarters, around schools and things, the Business Community says how can we help and how can we think about innovative ideas. Its your system but will where do we interface from prek to third grade, turning principals to community college, technical education, tell us where you need help and how do we scale it. Scaling is something we have to think about differently. Deb, the council initiated really back in the 90s some pioneering work on regions of innovation, innovation clusters. Obviously this conversation has evolved over the past 15 or 20 years. What are you seeing as Key Attributes for this American Innovation tapestry and Distinctive Assets we can build upon. Building on what colleagues have said, clearly many of these challenges and opportunities require Public Private partnerships and they require a different generation of partnerships among the different sectors. How academic institutions are working together, the National Labs, companies, both in sectors and outside. I think we are still bearing the fruit of 30 years ago, of tremendous innovation and Public Private partnerships. Weve done a lot of great work on Technology Transfer and commercialization. And some oneoff partnerships. But we havent done anything in 30 years to redesign the fundamental challenges of what we need to do for some huge things we must address. And the example i will give, there was a reference to 5g. And i hear others saying, well, i hear the u. S. Is behind because of our federal Communications Commission and not being able to do things on a national scale. But the one thats really serious, and the council has been working on this with the department of energy and others and many in this room, if we do not lead as a nation in the development and deployment of the next generation advanced microelectronics systems beyond moores law, everything were talking about is going to be at huge risk. And were not going to be able to do that with traditional venture capital, with a few partnerships between a few companies and maybe a few labs and universities. We have to do this in a big way and redesign the Public Private partnerships for the big, critical things our country needs. And thats something that i believe and hope the commission is going to really work on in a big way. Its a new design frontier. Mehmood, did you want to i just want to i guess we have to ask ourselves, to deborahs point and points that others have made, the innovation that we see come into the marketplace, whichever sector, obviously is an important driver. But there is a worrying investment issue underlying this as we look at whats happening in the u. S. I think brians point was right on. You have to look at what you need to get done. However, think of it this way. For the first time in our history, we have more r d investment in the industrial sector, the private sector, then the government sector. While you might look at that, if youre on the industry side, great, were growing our investment, but for the most part industry investment in r d is an applicationdriven innovation engine, however that pipeline dries up and ends if there isnt the basic research that goes in. If anybody has spent any time in academy research, you actually dont know the endpoint in the majority of research thats done. You sort of know the general direction. And so much of it is serendipity, chance. It happens. So its important to nurture that National Ecosystem of creativity in that academy environment that then feeds into this. And just because industry stepped up and increased its investment is not necessarily a good thing. I think to me the macro Public Private is, how do we get the government and regional, state, national, whatever, to continue to invest in our academic and lab infrastructure, because we on the industry side absolutely live off that, right . Thats the first thing. Yes, we need the capital, but theres no capital to deploy if i dont have an idea that i can do something with. We need that. Thats one important point thats important to the way we think about this. To the point that was made, yes, we have to do it in a broader geographic matter than just concentrated in two or three dozen hubs as happens right now. The second point in this is, if were going to actually continue to do this in this new world, most of the new innovation thats happening is actually happening at the convergence of traditional disciplines. The traditional disciplines by which weve defined institutions, a department of biology, a department of engineering, a department of chemistry, those institutions no longer work because the innovation thats happening isnt happening many biologists these days are more mathematicians than they are biologists. We continue to look in these traditional silos. Your institution has been one of the ones at the forefront. We have to ask ourselves right down to that fundamental, how are we going to create ecosystems even within our institutions so that we truly create thought and idea generation but also then to move that idea forward, which brings resources, right . So these are all the things that our commission needs to now put on the table. And thats a key part of our work in the next couple of years, as we bring this and hopefully bring recommendations and road maps to policymakers, leaders, academic leaders and also private sector leaders. Lonnie, i know you want to weigh in here. One of the things thats been mentioned a couple of times, i heard the word infrastructure. If we dont invest in infrastructure, our roads are crumbling, our bridges are crumbling, our electric grid system needs to be updated as we continue to transform into more wind and solar. Wind is typically out in rural areas, its not in the metropolitan areas. So youve got to have the grid system to provide that power where it needs where the demand is. Were a long ways from doing that. And if we dont start really investing in our infrastructure. High speed rail, for example, i was in china and got to experience riding on their high speed rail, its amazing. And you talk about other countries being advanced from us, i mean, theyve got the opportunity to move a lot of people, you know, in a fast manner, a safe manner, and bring people that live hundreds of miles away into the job site and get back on the high speed rail and go home in the evening. Mass transit, its really everything that we do, if were truly going to be continue to be a leader in worldwide technology, we have to focus on infrastructure, because if we havent got the roads, if we havent got the transportation, if we dont have Safe Drinking Water for our families, those water lines, there are still wood pipes in some areas of the country. Youve got wood pipes thats taking water under the ground and leaking millions of gallons of water, by the way, are being leaked from that infrastructure. So we really have to focus on that, if we are truly going to lead i think Going Forward in this country. Brian . Inherent in the discussion is the leadership of the United States through its education system, its research platform, also in its acquisition of talent. Mehmood told his personal story last night, but we have to get this straight. Because the United States went from 170 Million People working to 150 Million People from 1969 from today. The population only went up by 100 Million People and a lot of that was immigration because the natural population rate was relatively stable, dating back to the late 60s, early 70s, and different trends in society. We have to get immigration right and we have to be able to bring talent to our universities, we have to bring in talent to our companies and at all levels of the labor force. As much as we talk about the aging population, were going to run out of people. Productivity can only go up so fast. Then the population is also the economy. The unique thing about the United States is population grew, its economy grew. Thats why your 17 to 18 trillion from before the crisis, the United States, 14 to 20. And so we have to and that was driven by all the stuff were talking about but also by people saying, this is the best country to come and be in. We cant forget that. And so theres bipartisan proposals, any number of them will work, weve just got to get something clarified so we can get going. Thomas . I just want to say as a director of a national laboratory, i certainly endorse and support the idea that we need to continue to invest research and Development Dollars in infrastructure. But i think its probably also important to recognize, like the last three years, this is probably the best time in the national Laboratory System where our budgets have seen a 30 plus percent increase, and its resulted in new and improved infrastructure, the beginnings of new and improved infrastructure in important areas like industries of the future, Artificial Intelligence, quantum information science, advanced manufacturing, additive manufacturing, 5g, synthetic biology. Were at the cusp of turn things around. We need to do more. This would be a really important time for the commission to figure out how do we leverage these investments in infrastructure, new and different Public Private partnerships, so we become engines of innovation. Were running out of time. I want to mention an important point in time coming up. January 16th well be out at Arizona State university kicking off the major beginnings of the generative process for this national commission. In the minute that we have left, anyone on the stage, call to action, a charge, one thing you hope that many of the people in this room who will be with us out at asu will take away, will bring to asu, will help to create an idea, a thought, something perhaps to inspire folks as we begin our journey in 2020. I dont think in the 30year history of this council weve had a bigger initiative. And if not now, the old saying, then when . This is something that were doing not only for ourselves but for generations to come. And i think a lot of people can look back and say, what is it that we collectively did to change the trajectory . Were actually trying to change the trajectory. Thats never easy. We have all the talent to do it. January, im glad its going to be in arizona and not minnesota. The only thing i would add is that this really does give us an opportunity to put positive energy into the political system. So if you think theres not enough positive energy, well, then we should label ourselves as guilty. What are we offering . What are the ideas were putting on the table, what are the new designs moving forward . People are hungry for how are we going to be competitive, how are we going to continue to be successful here in the United States. So this is an opportunity, the whole commission is built on the constructive. Its built on the advancing of ideas to solve some of these issues and move ourselves forward. Weve got to challenge ourselves, maybe 3 cs, weve got to be very curious, and its got to be comprehensive. It cant just be incremental. Great. I want to thank the panel, much appreciation. We look forward to working with you over the coming year. Thank you. Thank you. [ applause ] well, speaking of Public Private partnerships and collaboration between government, academia, industry, our tremendous national Laboratory System, as well as the critical driver of energy that enables everything we do, its my great pleasure to introduce the recently confirmed secretary of energy, the honorable dan brouillette, to give us some remarks about his agenda and priorities, very important to the commission and our nation. Let me just share that secretary brouillette has had a tremendous background. Three decades of experience in both the public and private sector. Most recently he was the Senior Vice President and head of Public Policy for usaa, the nations leading provider of Financial Services for the military community, before joining usaa, secretary brouillette was Vice President of Ford Motor Company where he had led many of the automakers domestic policy teams and served on the north america operating committee. Weve been very fortunate, the council, to work with the secretary when he was deputy. He was very much involved in our seminal study on Cyber Infrastructure as applied to both the energy and manufacturing transformation. Its our great honor to welcome secretary daniel brouillette. [ applause ] thank you so much, were very honored. Thank you for having me. Thank you for having me. Three decades of experience, i guess that means im old, or im getting old. Thank you, deborah, for that kind introduction. Its an honor to be with you and with all of you this morning, at this forum for the council on competitiveness. As deborah mentioned, we were involved in the infrastructure study. I spoke to this council in 2018. As you know, a lot has happened since that time. I am deeply thankful to President Trump for his trust in nominating me to serve as the 15th secretary of energy. And to the bipartisan members of the u. S. Senate for confirming me to this position in so speedily a manner. And believe me, it has been quick. Secretary perry left this Department Much better than he found it. And i am absolutely grateful for his service to our department and his service to our country. And i personally am thankful for his leadership and his friendship for over two decades now. For me, there couldnt be a more exciting time to serve as Energy Secretary than right now. Under the leadership of President Trump, doe is igniting growth. Were unleashing innovation and were spreading opportunity across the nation. Were working to reduce the cost of doing business, to bring american jobs home, to make america more competitive than its ever been in a Global Economic marketplace. For far too long americas Corporate Tax rate was one of the highest in the industrial world. But weve lowered it from 35 to 21 . Increasing Global Competitiveness of american businesses. For decades, american entrepreneurs were held back by onerous regulations that served not as rules of the road but as barriers blocking the road to progress. So this administration has eliminated 22 existing regulations for every new regulation imposed. For years, america was saddled with trade deals that were blatantly unfair to american consumers, businesses, and workers. So this administration has negotiated for better agreements. Congress is moving in a bipartisan way to adopt the administrations usmca deal with canada and mexico which will expand American Energy export opportunities to both our southern and our northern neighbors. The combined impact of these policies is significant. Since President Trumps election, our economy has added more than 7 million jobs, including 500,000 new jobs at u. S. Manufacturers. And the Unemployment Rate is the lowest its been in 50 years, nearly my entire lifetime. More than my lifetime, i should say. Maybe i can lie a little bit. But thats not the whole story. The other major factor in our rapid Economic Growth is the competitive advantage provided by low cost and abundant energy, which has been driven by decades of innovation. You here at the council on competitiveness have worked successful with our National Laboratories to publish reports and recommendations that support this effort. And we appreciate your assistance. You all know the story of Energy Innovation from breakthroughs in hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling to the falling costs for deploying renewables. Innovation has brought an Energy Revolution that is fueling Economic Growth. When when the department of nnch energy opened its doors we has gas lines and ration days. We had higher manufacturing costs and fewer jobs. Today we are the worlds second biggest generator of wind and solar jrj and number one in producing both oil and natural gas. Half of what the eu pays and one third of the energy costs in germany. Because of lower energy costs, the president s council of economic advisers june report came out not that long ago. Notes that u. S. Consumers now say more th save more than 200 billion a year. Theres much more to come. At dueecuting the president s vision on an all of the above strategy that will support export, the development of carbon captured technologies. Revitalization of Nuclear Energy and Energy Storage and energy fishts technologies. Its all being led by the power of innovation. Were now the World Largest producer of oil and gas and we are also the world leader in reducing Energy Related carbon e emissio emissions. The lesson sould ncould not be. Im also committed to focusing on the frontier of Innovation Challenges so we can help launch the industries. We call on the help of our National Laboratories. Some of whom i know are here today. They have some of fastest super computing in the world. Were proud to make their performance, this High Performance competing facilities available to researchers from industry and basacademia so the are able to generate the intellectual benefit. They hold enormous promise for our country. We integrate three disruptive Computing Technologies of the future. Each respect monumental opportunities for growth pch. They will change the way we think. They will change the way re research and the way we interact. Im excited about their potential. The experts are World Leaders like advanced large scale 3d printing. If you havent had an opportunity to see the shelby cobra that was 3d printed, i urge you to take a moment to look it up online if you cant see it physically. Components for new zero emission coal generation. Were finding new ways to extract valuable and advanced materials from old source like using coal to make carbon fiber and produce area earth elements. Partnerships yield great minds that are clearly greater than the sum of their parts. Along those lines, in order to further increase the competitiveness of u. S. Manufacturers, doe experts have provided Technical Assistance to over 220 manufacturing partners through our Better Plants Program and our partners saved the cumulative 6. 7 billion. These have been noteworthy but we need your help to take another big step. Were focusing on ensures that its successfully commercialized here at home. Doe has centralized our commercialization efforts. You may not be familiar with one of otts brand new initiatives. We just haeld oeld one in argan laboratories in kmig. Focus on the Big Questions in research and development and our next lab be held by the large Berkeley Laboratory in late january. It will focus on bio manufacturing. I would encourage each of you to participate if at all possible. We have a long and important history in biosign at the department of energy and also includes bio engineering and bio security as well. You probably know or some of you know that our Super Computers were used to map the human genome. Its not well known within the world but yes the department of energy was key to that important project. It will been important leader that future. American manufacturing and business has a former executive, i know this first hand. You face fierce competition from abroad. This administration is committed to the fair treatment of you are businesses and trade and decreasing over burdensome regulation right here at home. Were committed to a low cost, advanced energy fufuture which think will underpin it. Those that will fast track americas economic revital and lead to sustained long term growth. Our focus will be on innovation and were counting on partners like you. Id like to close by thanking you for what you do here at the council and through your own universities and your own companies and businesses. It meeps the world to us at the department of energy. Thank you for your support. Thank you for your collaboration and allow me to thank you personally for the honor of being being with you today. Thank you. [ applause ] were featuring American History tv programs as a preview of whats available every weekend on cspan 3. We focus on the vietnam war. Discuss the effects of its use and continued Health Problems associated with a toxic chemical. Also historian christian opi and peace activist talk about civilian initiatives during the war