O’Malley’s $1.1 billion biotech initiative applauded

To counter my rant in the next post, here’s a more level headed evaluation, as printed in the Frederick News-Post:

Originally published June 24, 2008

By Ike Wilson
News-Post Staff

	AT A GLANCE Bio 2020 Initiative:n The creation of the “Maryland Biotechnology Center” — a “one stop shop” to showcase and support biotechnology innovation and entrepreneurship in Maryland, and consolidate various State, academic and private sector ventures; > Expanding and improving Maryland’s Biotech Investment Tax Credit; > Growing Maryland’s technology incubator network; > Continuing to grow the state’s Stem Cell Research Fund created in 2006 to promote state-funded stem cell research and cures through grants and loans to public and private entities in the state.

Gov. Martin O’Malley’s recent announcement of a $1.1 billion biotechnology initiative will further boost Maryland as a competitive technology hub, several local business people agreed.

Under the BIO 2020 Initiative, announced by O’Malley June 16, Maryland will invest $1.1 billion in its bioscience industry over the next 10 years — the largest per capita investment in the biosciences made by any state in the country — to attract and grow biotechnology companies in Maryland.

Frederick Innovative Technology Center Executive Director Michael Dailey and local government officials met the governor at a biotechnology convention minutes after he made the announcement at the Johns Hopkins Institute for Cell Engineering, where scientists are working with stem cells.

Dailey called the governor’s initiative “a tremendous opportunity for bio-tech entrepreneurs in Maryland.”

The initiative includes increased support for start-up companies as well as increased support for incubators in Maryland.

“I believe this support will establish Maryland as the premiere destination for new bio-tech companies and we are all looking forward to the growth and increased employment this initiative will generate,” Dailey said.

FITCI will use the additional funding to attract new clients to the center, and support them and existing clients, and increase the size of its facilities, Dailey said.

“With the governor’s plan, I believe FITCI is in a very favorable position to continue its success,” Dailey said.

Patrick Haley, chief executive officer of APE-BridgePath Scientific, said Monday he was excited about prospects the initiative will bring to Maryland.

“The proposed breakdown in funding between marketing efforts, academic institutions, private companies, state-funded grants and investments, incubator program enhancements, targeted research areas, such as stem cell and nanotechnology, life science, tax incentives, and the like is an excellent blend,” Haley said.

Haley said Maryland is already a leader in the biotech marketplace due to the concentration of life-science firms, research and development, academic institutions with strong science programs, and supportive governmental environments at the state and local levels.

He said the existing amount of federal research dollars awarded to Maryland schools and universities, the large number of federal governmental agencies located in the state and a highly-trained workforce are also significant factors.

“If the funding is distributed as proposed, it will leverage the state’s talents and strengths,” Haley said. “Bio 2020 is a natural fit for Maryland. I am pleased to see that a program is in the works that matches up so nicely with the state’s core competencies. I believe this program and others like it are a sound fiduciary decision.”

In a press release, O’Malley said the BIO 2020 Initiative will leverage Maryland’s science and technology assets and workforce to attract and grow bioscience opportunities in Maryland.

“Maryland is already nicknamed the ‘home of the genome’ and now must work to strengthen our position as a national and world leader in the research and development of ‘personalized medicine,’ groundbreaking new science which holds within it the potential to reshape the landscape of 21st century medicine,” O’Malley said in the statement. –

Key elements of the BIO 2020 Initiative are based on early recommendations from the Maryland’s Life Sciences Advisory Board, which began work last fall on a statewide strategic plan for bioscience in Maryland. The board is planning on publishing a full report later this year.

EDIT 6.26:  I hadn’t noticed that FNP doubled up on the quoted text.  I cut & paste the article becasue I was in a hurry yesterday.  Thank you to my editorial staff for pointing out the error.

MD 2020: Remembering my Youth

BioRegion News reporter Alex Philippidis posted excerts from a press conference governor O’Malley has at Bio 2008 last week in San Diego.

Here’s the skinny (or you can read the whole article here with free registration):

Maryland will use the $1.1 billion to expand several existing programs and create some new ones. The anchor of Bio 2020 is a planned new Maryland Biotechnology Center that would serve as a proverbial “one-stop shop” or single agency for life sciences companies seeking to relocate to Maryland or expand within the state.

Maryland would spend $91.5 million over 10 years, starting with $6 million in FY 2010, to launch and operate the center. The center “will be a one-stop facility that showcases and supports biotechnology innovation and entrepreneurship in Maryland [as well as] an accessible and welcoming office staffed with knowledgeable and enthusiastic experts,” according to a promotional brochure from the state’s Department of Business and Economic Development.

The center would house the Maryland Technology Development Corp. or TEDCO’s tech transfer support operations; the life sciences industry regulatory functions now overseen by Maryland’s Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation; several industry experts charged with building and expanding state relationships with federal labs, universities, and businesses; as well as a statewide group charged with marketing the state’s science and technology efforts.

So I have to rant a bit on this story. Instead of calling this bold initiative “Bio 2020″, because this makes it sound that this government spending would only benefit Biotech people, why not call it MD 20/20? “MD” as in Maryland, not Mogen David. “MD” as in most of the money will end up somewhere brick & morter in new buildings at Johns Hopkins and Montgomery County. As in hind sight is 20/20? As in our Wild Irish Rose of a Governor is spending money like a drunken sailor?

I am not opposed to government spending to help build our industry and provide jobs. My point is merely that we see the money go down into a hole and we never see the results. Basic research is necessary and needs to be funded. This is what the NIH and Johns Hopkins are all about. But this research is already funded to the tune of billions of dollars annually in Federal government (as in NIH) and endowments (or in the case of JHU, double dipping on both fronts).

I hope that the lions share of the MD 20/20 funds go to private/public companies who’s existence is based upon being successful and producing a product that people need, want and will spend money for. The illusive, so-called “translational” research that actually produces something tangible, rather than another Monolith where a bunch of government bureaucrats sit around wringing their hands worrying how they are going to spend all of their grant money so they can get more next year.

That’s what turned me off to basic research 20 some years ago.  Every Year, as grants would come due, my PI would insist that I overspend each grant by between 5-8 %.  So I would drop $25-50,000 in a week on stuff like a new HPLC that we would never use, or may use eventually or new computers (which were just getting popular back in 1985), or some new camera for taking pictures of gels for publications.  Never anything we really needed, but we needed to overspend each grant so we coan go back and state “you didn’t give us enough money last year, so we’ll need to increase our funding by at least 10% next year becasue we’ve already overspent by 8% and need to pay for that stuff on top of our increased research.”

I don’t know, maybe I am just barking up the wrong tree, biting the hand that feeds me..