 Probably the single most important development that's had the widest ranging impact is the impact of the internet, the world wide web, the advancement in telecommunications, digital technologies, even as little ago as a dozen years or so when I first started working in the government. We didn't have email at our desk and then gradually all these tools begin to come into place and it really has speeded up the impact of technological innovation and technical advance. It has opened up the world to communicating in new ways and with new people that we wouldn't be able to before. It has changed the way science technology and innovation is done. It's now possible for researchers in two different parts of the world to collaborate with each other in real time working over the internet. It's also dramatically changed the way business is done. It's now possible for the smallest company in the most isolated part of the world to become globally known and have a global impact because of the reach of the internet. It also means that the way that we work has changed dramatically and we're now all subject to more competition than we ever were before. Companies can put together global supply chains where they're getting their research done in one country, their marketing is done in another country, their manufacturing is done in a third company, engineering and architecting is done. You may have teams collaborating where a group in India is working while people in the United States are asleep and you can therefore work 24 hours a day developing new products and bringing forth the next generation. So the pace of our lives has picked up in a number of ways and the way I think we do business has fundamentally changed in ways that we're only really beginning to see. Just to speak of a couple of other areas, I think we have seen a lot in the last few years of the biotech revolution and I think that we probably haven't seen anything yet when we get there. There are several hundred biotech based products that are probably, you know, have been working their way through the regulatory process. Again, the whole process of understanding the human body and developing therapies and cures that are unique to each individual that is a whole area that I think is coming. There are many things that governments I think can and should do. One important area that has always been important and has been a foundation of the U.S. economy is a federal government role in investing in research and development and traditionally that role in the United States has been toward investing for government mission related purposes. National defense, homeland security, health and welfare, space exploration and the innovation benefits that have come out of that research investment for many, many years were largely accidental, if you will. We would invest as a result of our missions and because U.S. industry was the most competitive in the world for a number of years, particularly the decades coming after World War II, we could rapidly reduce government funded inventions to commercial products and services. That landscape is now changing. Now that we live in a globalized economy, countries around the world I think have figured out how important science and technology is to the foundations of the economy. In the United States over half of our long-term economic growth is a result of technological innovation and countries are really figuring this out and they are working on strategies to make targeted investments in critical research areas to attract R&D talent from other countries. In fact, many of the Asian countries have been extremely successful trying to attract graduates of U.S. universities, you know, foreign to us but native sons to return home and work in their own industries. Putting incentives in place to encourage commercialization and to encourage activity to come within their boundaries. We in the United States I think have a somewhat unique challenge because we've always had this sort of accidental approach whereas other countries have been more purposeful in what they've been doing and because of our size and because of our strength over the years we've been able to rely on that accidental approach. I think that we now need to be much more purposeful and work on investing not just in basic research which so many people here in Washington is critically important to be on the leading edge of science and technology but it's also very important particularly when we look at these new areas like the energy challenges and the need really to do pre-commercial collaborative work to do pilots and demonstrations to move ideas a little bit farther down the chain toward commercialization than we might have been thinking was an appropriate role for the government in the past. In addition our education system is critically important. We need to make our entire population much more scientific and technologically literate. We all need to know how to use computers. We all need to know how to use the tools that will show up in our workplace. We all need to understand the history of science and technology why it's important why it needs to be nurtured and then we really need to encourage a cadre of really bright really innovative really imaginative people to become our next generation of scientists and engineers and we need to continue to attract those great minds from elsewhere around the world into the United States who can keep us on the leading edge of science and technology and then I think we need to be thinking in the United States about ways that we can encourage economic activity, encourage foreign investment, encourage research and development to be performed in the United States, other foreign companies to come to the United States to do their engineering to do their manufacturing because those are the things that are going to keep us growing over the longer run. I could go on for hours but those are sort of the basics. I see the research, the talent, the incentives for commercialization and collaboration and then I guess I would add a fourth piece. Our infrastructure is really important. The laboratories where people do their work all the way up to the airports and the roads and the bridges and the physical infrastructure that's so important to move people and things around the country. I think that there has over the years been a tendency for people who work in the technology and innovation policy arena to kind of all talk among themselves rather than to engage broadly in the political dialogue and really educate and inform and bring along the policymaking community. I think that there's been an enormous amount of improvement over the last I'd say 20 years that I've been following these issues. I think there are a larger number of members of Congress and senators who really understand the importance of science and technology to our society in a variety of ways. More governors are getting engaged and understanding it. But I do think that we really lack the same kind of consensus around the importance of innovation and nurturing innovation that we have in some other areas of life, you know, social security or some issues like that. And I really think that that to break through and to have the kind of policymaking agenda and structure that we need, the American public needs to become more engaged. And to me, you can't have a great social security program if you don't have a growing economy and if people aren't paying their taxes in. So I see that them as being hand in hand. And your children can't have a great future with lots of job opportunities if we don't have new industries, growing industries, leading edge products and services, because that is what's going to end up driving the opportunity and creating the the kinds of jobs that I want my children to have. As one of the real risks in the world, generally, I think globalization is a good thing. And I think it's wonderful that other countries are developing their scientific and technological capabilities, increasing their standards of living that has innumerable benefits to the United States. However, what it also does is create a rising group of competitors that we didn't face. Historically, and it creates an environment in which any product can be produced anywhere in the world and any job can be performed anywhere in the world. And as we see some of these new industries and new technologies come online, some of our existing infrastructure may become obsolete. I mean, take the auto industry, for example, one out of about every seven American jobs is tied to the auto industry in some ways, a very, very important industry to our economy. If the generation of manufacturers is successful in what they're trying to do, where they will someday have a car that's powered by a fuel cell rather than by a traditional internal combustion engine, you will not need a transmission plant, an engine plant, the same kind of assembly plants that we have now throughout the United States. And we can either be a part of that revolution, and we can build those capabilities in the United States and keep those great jobs in the United States. Or if we don't make the investments, and if we don't make the commitments to it, it'll be very easy to locate all of those new plants, you know, in other countries that are more hospitable to the new kind of manufacturing. So I think it's, you know, on the one hand, it's an incredible opportunity for us to stay at the leading edge of the new industries and the new technological capabilities. But there's also a threat there too, that if we don't, then there's other people out there ready to eat our lunch and move everything outside the United States as well. So