As a chief architect of the CHIPS and Science Act, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chair of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, delivered the following opening statement at today’s hearing on the implementation of the CHIPS and Science Act that authorized nearly $250 billion to spur American manufacturing, research and development, create thousands of jobs and build a highly-trained workforce. The Committee will hear testimony from U.S. Department of Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo and National Science Foundation Director Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan. Watch the hearing live here.

Chair Senator Cantwell’s Opening Statement As Delivered: VIDEO

Welcome, Secretary Raimondo and Director Panchanathan. Thank you for being here today.

A little more than a year ago, Congress passed the landmark CHIPS and Science Act. It was a clear commitment to America's competitiveness and the idea that we need to innovate in the United States. 

Clearly, we were doing a lot in innovation, we were publishing a lot, but we needed to translate more, patent more and really help our manufacturing base be competitive for the future. 

The two witnesses before us today led on the delivery of those commitments and are here to tell us today about the substantial progress their agencies are making during the first year of the implementation of this act.

We have already seen the CHIPS and Science Act spur more than $200 billion dollars in private sector investment from semiconductor [companies] across the country, to other investments. And the federal government's role in this is so important because the commitment to the CHIPS program office within the Department of Commerce is generating more than 500 statements of interest from companies looking at new projects and innovation. 

Today, we will have a chance to ask the Secretary about those proposals, building resiliency, and a long-lasting semiconductor ecosystem in the United States. Since we had a chance to discuss this earlier, I’m pretty sure we are going to hear today about how we’re never going to be in this problem again, as it relates to [advanced] chips. That we are going to have a good plan to help on a supply chain development for that. That our DoD stature is going to continue being on the cutting edge of chips. And I think you are going to tell us that the diversity of applications and the robustness of it, means that the ecosystem that we are trying to restore and grow is alive and well. 

We have also seen NSF begin to roll out Innovation Engines. With more than $43 million going to planning grants to tap into innovation across the country. I love that the Director during our efforts basically coined the phrase “innovation anywhere, opportunity everywhere.” And I definitely think that is what we are looking for in this legislation, both in the spreading of the amount of EPSCoR funding and in diversifying a workforce… across the United States. 

For example, in the State of Washington, a Spokane company won a Regional Innovation Engine award to advance energy and decarbonization. We all know that innovation and expertise helps us generate jobs and tackle some of our most pressing problems.

And we know that what we have to do on this Committee, besides hearing from these witnesses today, is push our colleagues to fully fund the aspects of CHIPS and Science that were funded.

In fact, the Committee’s two previous attempts at competitiveness bills fell short because the funding was not realized. One, because we faced an economic downturn and then the other, our very first effort on competitiveness, also didn’t make the mark from an appropriations perspective. 

We know that our foreign adversaries are not waiting. We know that our strategic competitors are also moving ahead. And we need to make this investment to – what we would say – de-risk the supply chain, and make sure we are innovating and translating our science faster. 

As we look to the future, we need to work together to ensure that the U.S. remains competitive in the global marketplace on other issues like artificial intelligence, 5G wireless systems and quantum computing.

That will require the United States to do a couple of things: the ability of the U.S. to produce chips to support this innovation. That is why the advancement, and hearing where we are with the applications, is so important. Second, we need a resilient supply chain that can withstand disruptions like we saw in the past, either geopolitical tensions, natural disasters, global pandemics, whatever, we need a more independent supply chain. And a workforce that is well-skilled and technical to the types of technologies that are being used today.

I personally believe this is one of the biggest gaps left to be addressed in the CHIPS and Science Act. We have some money, both for semiconductor training and workforce advancements and some on the science side through NSF, but a lot more needs to happen. In the United States, the jobs of tomorrow are here today, but the skill level of the workforce to do them is not. 

And so, the more that we can take advantage of the job creation that’s happening, by marrying that up, something the Secretary knows from her days as governor – the more we can streamline that and marry that up together -- the more this engine is going rev and keep affecting the U.S. economy.

Today, the U.S. manufacturers only 12% of the world's semiconductors, compared to where we were in the 1990s at 30%. The question really today is, are we seeing the right level of investment to make a return to the market share that we think is important? 

My guess is we’re going to hear -- both from the private sector investment that has already been made and the robust response to the programs -- that the investments want to be in the United States. 

I think we can't emphasize enough how important it was to bring this manufacturing back. Consumers saw car prices rise as much as 40%. Truck manufacturers like PACCAR in my state weren't able to get semiconductors… literally weren’t able to ship product. 

Supply chain resiliency also created deadlocks for other industries and impacted national security. 

I hope that we will all work together on better tools for the future. I will have some questions about that in my question and answer period. But the semiconductor industry today is facing a gap of 67,000 people by 2030. That’s just semiconductors.

I know we in my state, as it relates just to STEM, have a gap of 60,000 workers across various sectors, not just semiconductors. Clearly, we need to make the investments in the scholarship programs and in the STEM apprentice workforce for tomorrow to realize all this investment that is now being made in the United States of America.