Advertisement
*
Reproduction permitted for personal use only. For reprints and reprint permission, contact reprints@wistechnology.com.
Biotech Takes

The SBIR clock is ticking

Members of the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee and the House Small Business, and Science and Technology Committees are meeting, yet again, to see if this time they can resolve the impasse of two very different SBIR reauthorization bills, (Senate S.1233 and House H.R.2965).

You will recall that Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), chairwoman of the House Small Business Committee, holds the very anti-small business view that VC-owned technology companies should be able to participate fully in SBIR/STTR competition. Amazingly, she has for the last two years, prohibited any testimony on behalf of small businesses in her committee and also on the floor of the House. In contrast, the Senate's bill preserves most of the SBIR program for small company by capping participation of VC's, a compromise that last year was agreeable to both the VC and small business lobbies. But the Velazquez would not budge from her position.

Will this year be different?

When the full House considered its SBIR reauthorization bill, Velazquez got the Rules Committee to prohibit consideration of a Edward Markey (D-MA)-led amendment that would have made the bill similar to the Senate version. She did this because it was widely expected that the Markey amendment was favored by most members of the House and would have passed.

Several House members, led by Markey, who disagree with the obstructionist Velazquez and do not like her bullying, are trying an end run around her by sending a letter to Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Chair of the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, expressing their support for the Senate's SBIR reauthorization bill. This letter represents an attempt to let the Senate conference committee members know that most Representatives disagree with Velazquez's bill.
Advertisement
The more members of the House who sign the letter, the greater chance that the conference committee will approve S.1233 as the final version. You can help by emailing the Markey letter to your Representative and ask that s/he sign on this week. Time is of the essence since an acceptable compromise must be made by next Tuesday, July 28. While you are at it, ask your Rep to consider how they are going to explain to small businesses in their state why they voted against small businesses so that rich VC's could have access to more Federal funds.

SBIR updates and links for contacting your Representatives and Senators can be found on www.SBIRreauthorization.com.

Recent columns by Steve Clark

Steve Clark, Ph.D., a former professor and medical researcher at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, is a free-lance writer and consultant on biotechnology issues. His blog BioScience Biz can be read at http://stevensclark.typepad.com/bioscience_biz

The opinions expressed herein or statements made in the above column are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Wisconsin Technology Network, LLC.

WTN accepts no legal liability or responsibility for any claims made or opinions expressed herein.

Comments

Jonathan Pearl responded 7 months ago: #1

And just why in the midst of this is our very own Tom Still, head of the Wisconsin Technology Council representing BIO and NVCA instead of the needs and interests of WI high-tech businesses?

In a letter sent before the house vote on H.R. 2965 he wrote: "Why isn't Wisconsin getting more grants? Perhaps because fewer companies can quality as a "small business." Perhaps he should spend more time talking with successful Wisconsin small business, like the dozens of us who have received SBIR contracts and grants in the past few years.

He cites both BIO and NVCA in his letter, but fails to mention a single WI SBIR firm. It's as if we don't even exist to the WTC. I suspect he'd get a rather different few and more helpful suggestions on how to raise the stature of WI by listening to those who have done it, rather than heeding the self-interest of large venture capital associations.

There is a dangerous set of assumptions that Tom Still seems to be sustaining that: the best science is conducted at universities and guided by peer-review; and that investment from large Venture Capital firms can serve as a meaningful proxy for the value of innovative ideas. Both assumptions are verifiably and patently false! The three decades success of SBIR disproves them. And according to the major National Academies report on Venture Capital and the NIH, more non-VC-backed firms commercialize the results of their SBIR efforts than VC-backed firms do.

The principal issues however focus not on VC ownership but rather on retaining the proven effective three-tiered system of SBIR, preserving the integrity of Phase I for required feasibility studies prior to advancing to Phase II, and on keeping award sizes reasonable (more at the Senate's proposals than the House's), because more SBIRs means more good ideas have a chance to reach the marketplace where they will save money, save lives, and create jobs.

-Add Your Comment

Name:
E-mail:

Comment Policy: WTN News accepts comments that are on-topic and do not contain advertisements, profanity or personal attacks. Comments represent the views of the individuals who post them and do not necessarily represent the views of WTN Media or our partners, advertisers, or sources. Comments are moderated and not immediately posted. Your email address will not be posted.

WTN Media cannot accept liability for the content of comments posted here or verify their accuracy. If you believe this comment section is being abused, contact edit@wistechnology.com.

Advertisement

-Most Popular Stories

Advertisement

-Featured EventsMore…

-More Stories

WTN Media Presents