Massachusetts has experienced a full assault on the basic pillars of our innovation economy. Clean energy programs and infrastructure, biomedical research funding, immigration, and core funding and academic freedom at our state’s leading universities have all landed in the crosshairs of the Trump administration’s reckless cuts and ideologically extreme policy agenda.

While President Trump wraps this all in America First rhetoric, these moves will severely undermine our country’s ability to compete economically and remain a global leader in cutting-edge research and development. Given the outsized role these areas play here, the threat to Massachusetts is particularly acute.

The Commonwealth needs to act boldly and creatively to respond to the threats to its innovation economy. Fighting to reverse these moves in Washington should be a top priority, but we surely can’t count on that happening. We may not be able, on our own, to mitigate the full impact of these harmful policies, but we can take action at the state level to counter their effects.

Over the summer, Gov. Healey unveiled a proposal to do just that. The Discovery, Research and Innovation for a Vibrant Economy, or DRIVE, Initiative includes a call for $400 million in state appropriations to help make up for some of the lost federal funding.

Committing public dollars to help bolster or jumpstart economic activity is not something that should be done lightly without due diligence and careful consideration. But in weighing the governor’s proposal, legislative leaders don’t have to look back too far for an example of unquestionable success with such a strategy.

It may be hard to remember, but Massachusetts wasn’t always the leading state for the innovation economy. In 2003, despite our state’s deep strengths in finance, health care, and higher education, the major economic story of the day was Boston losing Fortune 500 headquarters.

The Commonwealth had invested heavily in remaking Boston’s downtown and waterfront, but 20 years ago the Seaport was best known for inexpensive parking lots. The state’s economy had crashed in 2001, and it was only slowly regaining the jobs lost during the recession. In 2004, the Boston Foundation bemoaned the fact that greater Boston “lacked the collaborative gene,” which was essential to competing in the global knowledge economy. There was significant pessimism disguised as realism – which all made sense if you were a fan of the Boston Red Sox during the many decades leading to October of that momentous year.

As seen in the sudden reversal that year of our baseball fortunes, however, the world changes – sometimes quicker than you expect. I served in the Patrick administration during both of the governor’s terms, eventually as the state’s first assistant secretary for innovation policy in the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development, and witnessed this firsthand.

Working under Secretary Dan O’Connell and the late Secretary Greg Bialecki, both of whom helmed the housing and economic development secretariat under Gov. Patrick, I had a chance to see and participate in initiatives that had a catalytic effect on the state’s innovation economy.