Which could come from the United States is not freely available for same way that ours is. What are the options for dealing with that . What are options dealing with that . Potential options for dealing with that are looking at data points, we do not have a position on this particular issue, in my personal capacity, i dont know that we can or would want to completely subscribe to the chinese model of locking this down, looking at data that is accessible, and a faster option. If we can build a bigger database to rival the chinese system does it create a situation where their trove of data . It would be accessible to those participating . It could be different elements of different natives attributed or accessible to certain researchers, and cybersecure so you can understand the integrity of the data sets, thats critically important. It is not generally available. We dont have a position on this, theres different ways one could go about this. As you say, when we talk about research data, it becomes different than when you are talking about data related to intellectual property. Commissioner glass . I just had a followup on the commissioners question. I dont know the field but in terms of genetic sequencing, do we have knowledge, to what extent the chinese actually have from the United States, people who participated in various studies, trying to understand the open data, can you walk me through that. We dont have the information of what exists, we have some information of the number of sequences, this is looking at genetic sequences from plants, animals, microorganisms which is helpful to understand what products can be made. There are examples of attacks on Us Health Insurers like anthem, 2015 hack of which information was stolen including health and identification numbers, there is anecdotal evidence of some of this but in terms of comprehensive assessment, what exists in biological databases, the information is something we dont have access to. In this age when people are putting solicitations on social media to do dna for ancestry. Com and whatnot, to what extent do the chinese potentially have access to that data. If you could do that to the point of previous commissioner and mention cybersecurity and what it means to access the type of information, another could be packing into us databases . The ancestry. Com that they own, the largest collector of genetic data. I dont know the ownership of cgi, i dont know but i think it is a complex web of business entanglement. We had a recommendation two years ago where we strongly recommended transparency in advertising with ancestry data is a chinese owned company. Its not marketed as that. I want to commend that, you are one of the first or the first to talk about the strategic, appreciate the long history of the commission. Two minutes left but jeffrey nadaner, appreciated your comments, with agreement with what you are saying, given your experience, do you think you invested in the right thing in terms of sequencing of our investment meaning there has been a lot of priority producing the finished product potentially more finished product here. Have we done these kinds of investments the right way . I know you are talking about trade and safeguards and things like that. From your perspective, are these investments done appropriately to ensure longevity of the investments . The question is right on point. This is a wider American Standard over 45 decades. Of involves a lot of Capital Expenditures and the profit is lower, not saying its a good profit but if the profit is lower, then we say let other countries in the last few decades, let china assume those Capital Expenditures. We are biasing the economy in many ways with shareholder value, the way the tax system works, we are biased toward Industries LikeFinancial Services and software which dont often have the same Capital Expenditures you have in terms of Mineral Processing so the prophet is greater and we like to focus on the end product, the integration of certain manufactured goods. That the problem fundamentally that is a problem of incentives in the economy. Its not a question of preaching to people but if we gave the right tax incentives there would be no reason for companies and entrepreneurs not to jump on it. Cochair hel berg. Thank you to our witnesses for their and stateful insightful testimonies. How old is chinas ev industry . I cant give you an exact day but ive been working on evs for at least 30 years. Mostly early on for the us. It is an established fact the chineses ev makers, . China has reached that status that i have seen. The chinese ev maker would destroy the entire western ev industry without terror from western evs, do you agree with that . One hundred 10 . Do you support tariffs on chinese evs . I support tariffs on chinese evs and component parts. With a huge domestic auto industry, japanese and koreans, if we dont protect lower levels they will simply not be able to compete against chinese subsidies. Do you believe bio warfare, a standalone war fighting demand and National Security issue, and how vulnerable are we to bio attack in light of recent advances in biotechnology . Thank you for the question. In terms of the second half, with availability of the system to treat individuals was benefited to get to a vaccine in a shorter time, the potential to revolutionize the. A great new diagnostic threats, by no means are we prepared for what is coming. As the commission, a couple papers on the intersection of ai and bio, where we look at large language models. The distinctions between large models, trained on biological information. In our findings it is the latter, with biological information that has the potential to create novel biological agents in the future with capacity, something that is robust today. But it is something to be mindful of as we develop these tools and put guardrails in place. That its now technically possible to develop pathogens that are explicitly targeted at individuals with a specific genetic profile or specific groups with a genetic profile, is that true . Ive not seen thats technically possible. Can you help us understand a little bit if china can help us understand a little bit n if china has masted issue as part of the policy planning . Sure. I think its clear china as you partake of both economic and nationals could be priority. They have stated goal of military fusion. Any technology or knowledge to receive some commercial entities will be used for b military advantage and miller to finish with respect to the biotech could mean many different things. Things. It could look like weaponization of biotech in ways that dont align with our system. The could also look like enhanced supply chains and critical capabilities provided for the military by biotechnology. Do you believe the u. S. Government should explore and consider the feasibility need and desirability of establishing a new defensive by a force at the Department Funds could to protect our homeland against potential bio tax against from our averages . I dont have that file dont our commission in his particularly focus on biotech. Our mandate is not necessarily that of defense but were looking at biodefense where it relates to advance biotechnologies. Okay. So just to clarify, you do believe biotechnology has serious implications for national sigar . Yes, of course,. And are you able to comment on the bio labs covered incumbent . No. Or sorry, i dont, im not tracking that. Chinese bio labs are uncovered, illegal chinese bio labs recent uncovered in california with thousands of mice, pathogens ranging from hiv to covid to a lot of different strains. Is that something you are a web . No. Sorry, i am not. Vice chair price. First of all, thank you all for your testimony today. Its been very interesting. Ms. Luong, i want to go back to your second recommendation and for you to flesh it out a little bit more, specifically the changes that you are suggesting from exclusively used to intended and exactly why, could you talk about that a little bit more . Yes, absolutely. Thanks for the question. I have spentti a lot of time thinking about what the definition of an eye system is, and i think at least according to the treasury, the definition of ai system is quite broad. And the goal of the policy objective here is to restrict investments coming from the United States to china specifically for military purposes and the language and that is stated to say exclusively used for military purposes. According to my research its quite difficult to delineate the difference between military purpose, and ai system that is disclose of use for military purposes because there is a prophet of motivation findth vessel. When Ai Developers think about what model is put on the commercial space they do want to create an adjustableat foundational base that could be finetuned for many purposes, for commercial uses, for military uses. So its quite difficult to capture transactions that are going towards ai companies that exclusively developing a a systm for military purposes. That said, i think if we revise the language to intend it in part use promotional purposes cant capture the ai system that could potentially be transforming between military space to the civilian space and vice versa seamlessly. Thank you. And mr. Nadler, we catch off a little bit when you got to the point on your recommendation. I think you got most of it in but is anything else that you want to expand on in two minutes . Permitting process, the process should be limited to six months and then appeals of three months each. And then we have to curtail injunction abuse. This is an abuse of the courts. By ending private party lawsuits, instead the suing party should remain with our elected representatives and the states and localities. Thank you. Commissioner shriver . Thank you to our witnesses for your excellent statements and contributions here today. Ms. Long, i wanted to start with you and also the same recommendation that commissioner price asked you about. Your recommendation to restrict Capital Investment in the areas of a. I. For military purposes, is that just the right thing to do or would that actually have an impact . What magnitude or percentage are they relying on u. S. Capital because you described a very heavy investment on the chinese state. Thank you. In my research when i look at the extent and scope and size of u. S. Capital flowing to chinas a. I. Development, its really small. U. S. Investors are not dominant investors in china and actually domestic investors and thats a quite common thing in the private investment world, similar in the u. S. , u. S. Investors are dominant investors in our ecosystem. That being said, there are other components that are quite important that the u. S. Spends to bring to china, including not just the actual money itself but the intentional benefits that come along with the capital. And i think thats the one component that is concerning to a lot of policymakers here in d. C. Because the expertise and the networks and the managerial opportunity for these investors, that they are bringing to china is helping the chinese fund the capital ecosystem maturing. Its a bigger ecosystem than the United States and thats a important component. That said, the military part is quite small because its merely again, its difficult to differentiate different applications of a. I. , which is the fund space and the commercial space. In china because of the civil fusion policy that can be transformed easily between the commercial space and military space and i actually have to caveat that by easily theres an effort or pathway for that to happen but when you adopt a system for a. I. Space it has to be finetuned for military purposes. It wont take a long time for the Chinese Government to figure out how to do that more effectively and theres a ton of problems with the policy as well. Mr. Nadaner, you concluded your statement it will take years to unwind this. Can you take your best stab at it, what does wild success look for us if you adopted some of these measures, tariffs and investment incentives, whats the magnitude of this . Its a large magnitude but weve shown the ability to do significant things when we allow ourselves to do it. I would say if we adopted those lets say by the end of this year we adopted the tariffs, the tax credits for large Capital Expenditures for batteries and then followed along the lines of senator tim scott and cory booker on capital gains, freeing them up for investment, i think within 10 years we would be in very good shape. But if we go very slowly and allow nepa to continue its operations, well find that 40 years will go by with nothing. So wild success is 10 years. Pretty good in the manufacturing business. Dr. Rozo, i wanted to ask you about a different wild success. What if the chinese are wildly successful on the investment and research and development side, particularly this nexus you explained between a. I. And biotech. We had conversation earlier about the threat and risk is abstract and therefore people arent moving with the sense of urgency. Im grateful your organization exists and working on these problems but we grapple with what does worst case look like, what does chinese wild success look like . Thank you for the question. I think its multifacet and we talked about the potential for misuse of biotechnology and what that would look like if an adversary has different ethics and values around using technology and what that would mean. There are human as he cant pictures of this technology we have to aspects of this technology we have to grapple with and how mastery could impact the supply chains and how it might affect our relationship with china. The medical implications of biotech is well understood and we think pharmaceuticals but on the supply chain side this is a growing part of the biotech sector, really using biomanufacturing to create novel roots of production of critical chemicals. An example of what b. C. G. Has accomplished is a chemical called b. D. O. , a chemical now derived from petroleum and is a 5 billion for this chemical and is water bottled in front of me. This right now is mainly manufactured in china but theres a u. S. Firm that used Synthetic Biology to create a cell factor that can produce biobased b. D. O. And theyre building a facility in iowa to make this bioversion of this chemical. So bringing the supply chain back from china, creating jobs in iowa and using corn as the starting material is a great new story and the potential of how many parts of our supply chain we can do that for, were really just beginning to scratch the surface of that. But this is an area where the market may not exist today for products. If were replacing products in our supply chain that are already very cheap, the market may not be there today. So its an area where we see that china may have an advantage with state down policies and incentives for manufacturing infrastructure for industrial manufacturing they could outperform us at this sector that is still advancing so its something to be mindful of and is an area were particularly viewing as something with absent action we may fall behind because the market doesnt exist for these type of products. Let me start with you, dr. Rozo and try to keep some of the responses short so we can get through these. It appears to us in the synthetic biotech that your comment about a chat e. B. T. Moment it seems theres more capital constraint in the sector over the last couple months that what was, and very appreciative to what youve done throughout your career and serving on this commission but the Inflection Point here in the u. S. Seems to be a little farther down the road. What do you attribute that to . I think exactly as you say, the markets look very different today than they did a few years ago, so borrowing money is expensive right now and for an industry like biotech where its still relatively expensive to do the r d and get a product from lab to market, there are certain