SSTI Digest

Richard Bendis has significant experience building biotech clusters in formerly “flyover” regions (e.g., places that lack the infrastructure to support tech-based entrepreneurs and companies). Around 2009-2010, he was giving a presentation at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, D.C., on how to build these regions around an industry-driven private-public partnership. After the talk, someone from Johns Hopkins approached him and said they had been trying—with little success—to build a biotech cluster in Maryland. They asked him to come to Montgomery County, Maryland, the epicenter of the region's life sciences industry.

The new year begins with a layer of both fiscal and political uncertainty. For at least 18 states, it will be a year of change in political leadership. After several years of continuous revenue growth, states are crafting their Fiscal Year (FY) 2027 budgets amid slower growth, rising costs, and heightened unease. At the same time, the 2026 gubernatorial campaign season also begins in earnest. More than three dozen governorships are on the November ballot, and at least 18 states (see map below) expect to elect a new governor due to an incumbent either being term-limited or choosing not to run for re-election.

State R&D incentive programs such as tax credits are widely used to stimulate innovation, attract investment, and support long-term economic growth. But how do we know which programs truly increase R&D activity rather than simply subsidizing what companies would have done anyway? A recent article by Elizabeth Gray and Alison Wakefield of The Pew Charitable Trusts discusses the role that rigorous evaluation plays in assessing program performance, refining incentive design, and informing better policy decisions.

The proposed Biomanufacturing Excellence Act of 2025 would establish a single National Biopharmaceutical Manufacturing Center of Excellence within the U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). H.R. 6089 was introduced by Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA) with bipartisan cosponsors and paired with a Senate companion bill (S. 3188) led by Senators Chris Coons (D-DE) and Ted Budd (R-NC). It authorizes $120 million in FY 2026 for NIST to conduct a competitive process to select one non-federal entity to build and operate the center. Eligible applicants include public-private partnerships, institutions of higher education, and multi-institution consortia. Because only a single awardee will be chosen, the proposed legislation likely sets up what is likely to be a stiff competition among many states which have made life sciences and manufacturing key elements of their innovation strategies.

Last week (Jan. 3), Maryland’s state comptroller released the state’s first State of the Economy report. The 110-page document uses publicly available data, academic research, and government studies to analyze relevant economic indicators within the state. It compares that data across neighboring states and nationally to better understand the current economic climate and to help Maryland policymakers understand the sources of weakness, as well as identify the strengths and opportunities available, and to leverage those resources for more sustained, long-term economic growth.

The idea of changing the 40 hour workweek standard has been floated for decades, and more frequently discussed in recent years as companies confront pandemic-related stress, burnout and the “Great Resignation.” But, even as some smaller U.S. companies (mostly in tech) have moved toward offering a shorter workweek, the idea has not become mainstream, despite some states’ best efforts.

In his budget proposal, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore proposed $10 million in funding for a new program that would provide grants of up to $2 million to defray specified costs associated with an eligible innovation infrastructure project; the projects are intended to support innovation in eligible technology sectors including advanced manufacturing; aerospace; agriculture; artificial intelligence; biotechnology; blue technology; cybersecurity; defense; energy and sustainability; life sciences; quantum; and sensor and robotics. The governor also proposed $1 million in new funding for the creation of the Maryland Equitech Growth Fund, which would use multiple investment vehicles including direct investments, grants, and loans leveraged with private capital to promote a culture of innovation and entrepreneurship and to meet the goals of promoting equitable economic development in Maryland’s advanced technology sectors.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury announced today that five states — Hawaii, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan and West Virginia — have had their State Small Business Credit Initiative (SSBCI) capital programs approved by the agency. Not all programs to be run by these states have been announced at this time, but they include: HI-CAP Invest program, which will support impact funds; GROWKS Angel Capital Support Program; Maryland’s Neighborhood Business Works Venture Debt Program; and, West Virginia’s seed capital co-investment fund.

With a 20-year history, the Maryland Technology Development Corporation (TEDCO) is reporting an economic impact in 2021 four times greater than what they experienced in 2013. A new independent study found that its six core programs have provided “significant value” to the state’s start-up community, supporting over 10,000 jobs and more than $2 billion in statewide economic activity as of 2021. Meanwhile, BioCrossroads, a non-profit based in Indianapolis, has reported growth in its life sciences initiatives over the past 15 years. BioCrossroads conducts market research and promotes business and technological innovation in life sciences across Indiana. Both TEDCO and BioCrossroads have utilized public capital to develop industry within their respective target states.

As governors continue to roll out their State-of-the State addresses in the month of February, we continue to see a heavy focus on recovering from the pandemic. Given most state’s fiscal condition, governors have been generally hesitant to roll out new initiatives during this time, although broadband continues to receive attention, especially with the renewed attention surrounding its importance during the pandemic. Some states, like Maryland and West Virginia, who are emerging from the pandemic on a better footing than they perhaps anticipated, are ready to forge ahead with tax cuts in an effort to attract business and new residents. Other states, like Illinois, are grappling with projected deficits while trying to maintain services. And a new bond proposal in Maine could help connect workers to jobs in high-growth industries while also spurring development in the state’s industries. This week we catch up with those governors who gave their addresses during these first weeks of February and review each of them for news or initiatives relating to their state’s innovation economy.

With nearly 40 of the state governors now having given a state of the state or budget address, innovation themes continue to echo in their reviews of past accomplishments and plans for the coming year. There is a priority on education (both on teacher salaries and preK initiatives as seen in Alabama, in addition to higher education and a focus on its affordability with Connecticut proposing free tuition for community college for recent high school grads and Pennsylvania putting additional dollars into scholarships), energy, workforce, broadband and a special emphasis on distressed communities in Connecticut and Tennessee. While SSTI continues to review the addresses and features excerpts as they relate to innovation intiatives in this series, remaining speeches will be scattered over the coming weeks.

Alabama

In 2019, the administrations and legislatures in many states grappled with if and how to adjust state economic development initiatives to leverage the federal Opportunity Zone (OZ) program. The actions of 12 states that implemented new activities are described below.

Notably, many of these state efforts require applications and reports on OZ projects — unlike the federal OZ incentive. Some created a new requirement specific to OZs and some states placed the OZ benefits within existing initiatives that already require such information sharing. Investor use of state OZ benefits, therefore, may be one means by which the costs and benefits of the federal program will be able to be evaluated.