Executive Summary

Globalization has fundamentally transformed the American economy. Regions — defined by economic rather than political boundaries — are the new building blocks of prosperity. The drivers of economic growth are changing, dramatically and swiftly, bringing knowledge, innovation, and entrepreneurship to the forefront. As a result, our regions are competing globally in a fierce race for talent, capital, investment, skills, and expertise.

While the drivers of economic growth have changed, and while economists have discovered a host of new strategies that offer extraordinary potential to help regions compete globally, our nation continues with policies, organizational structures, and investment strategies built for a past era. Current federal economic development policy — which largely assumes a homogeneous, industrial economic landscape — has not changed for 40 years. The degree to which America’s regions and communities can successfully compete in the global marketplace will determine whether residents of these regions will live in an environment of need and scarcity or one of abundance in the decades ahead. In short, given that the nation’s economic health is inextricably linked to the competitiveness of its regions, a national dividend will accrue from federal investments that strengthen regions and the communities that exist within.

The Strengthening America’s Communities Advisory Committee

A response to this need for change is the Strengthening America’s Communities Initiative (“the Initiative”), announced in February of 2005 as part of the FY 2006 Budget Request of President George W. Bush. The Strengthening America’s Communities Advisory Committee (the “Committee”) was appointed to advise the U.S. Secretary of Commerce on policies, principles, and guidelines associated with the implementation of the Initiative.

The Committee focused its attention on policy considerations and basic principles that should guide the reorganization of federal economic and community development programs. The Committee did not assess or evaluate which federal programs would be best to consolidate, the individual performance of existing programs, or an appropriate level of appropriations for the Initiative.

The Secretary appointed Committee members to serve for a two-year period, and asked the Committee to submit a report of initial recommendations within three months.

Over the past several months the Committee held meetings in Fresno, California, Kansas City,Missouri, and Clearwater, Florida, and worked by teleconference to accomplish this end. In addition, subcommittees convened work sessions throughout this process.

» Page 2 of 3