Brian Schatz

The legislation that Senator Schatz is working on, I think trying to increase our collective understanding is critical, it's fundamental.

I think there's another part of this discussion, which we've heard less about, which I think is really important.

I'm worried about diversity in the industry.

I think part of what we have to do is recognize that in areas like health care and agriculture, it's a pretty much unalloyed good to have more data, to save lives, to make agriculture more productive, for instance.

We would like to thank Ranking Member Schatz for his tireless work as an original sponsor of the OPEN Government Data Act.

We urge Congress to pass the Open Government Data Act, which would make non-sensitive government data more open, more available, and more usable for the general public.

The government should not purchase or use AI systems if we can't explain what it does, especially if these systems are making decisions about our citizens' lives.

AI is advancing fast. Each year, processing power gets better, hardware gets cheaper, and algorithms are easier to train thanks to bigger and better datasets.

There also needs to be more transparency and consumer control on data collection.

It can be empirically valid, right? I mean, the simplest example is here's where crimes have been committed in the past.

It's hard to believe that there is no AI policy at the Federal level, and that needs to change.

Can you assure me that as NOAA Administrator, you will comply with NOAA's scientific integrity policy and defend the rights of your scientists?

Can you assure me that as NOAA Administrator, you will support the agency's climate research portfolio and advocate for sufficient levels of funding to advance research relating to climate change?

What problem are we solving with deregulation?

What are we fixing, and for whom?

We've got our heavy endurance cutters in the State of Hawaii, and a lot of them actually move east, not west.

I think we need to understand what is truly providing this what seems to be a protection or reduction of overdose deaths.

If Congress would change regulations, we would have more freedom both to investigate and to give therapy.

I don't think we can wait to have the perfect evidence for everything.

States with medical cannabis laws had a 24.8 percent lower mean annual opioid overdose mortality rate compared with states without medical cannabis laws.

In other words, if someone does yoga or acupuncture or dance or art or whatever it is, that's success already, you don't have to get the clinical data to indicate that their pain is reduced.

But I'm just wondering whether there's not a space before you do all your double-blind studies and establish that the stuff works, if you don't look at it another way, which is if you're--diversion, right?

Thank you, Mr. Simcakoski. I really appreciate everything you've done over the many years and the sacrifice that you've made.

There is no question that opioids are fueling a public health emergency.

It's not fair and it's why this dais has an obligation to make a law and not just drag you back and forth and wave our fingers at you.