be offensive to those people later on. i've had my feelings hurt before, and i know what it feels like, and i don't think that's useful to do. >> host: and we're going to close the program from "quitting america," randall robinson writes: i tried to love america, its praises, its well-ordered marrow, its surplus pertinence, but i could not love a place, i could not love things. no one in good health can. imagine a world of material wealth devoid of people. what's to love? nothing. i tried to love america, its people, the dominant majority, their depiction of me, their treatment of mine. i have tried to love america, but america would not love the ape -- ancient, full african whole of me. thus, i could not love america. i had come to know too much of her work. i tried to love america, its

credos, its ideals, its promise, its process, then i stopped trying to love america. i have not despaired the moment, for with it has come a measure of unexpected contentment. it settled upon me like an ancient ancestor's ceremonial robe, warm and splendid and as old as time, mislaid but valued all the more for its belated retrieval. randall robinson, thank you for being on "in depth."

nasa administrator, charles bolden and science adviser, charles holdren testified before the house science committee on tuesday. this is about an hour and 45 minutes. >> the committee on technology will come to order. good morning. i'm going to recognize myself

for an opening statement and the ranking member from texas will be recognized as well. today's hearing is on a subject important to our nation and to our world. this is the first hearing of two on space or it's worth reviewing u.s. government efforts to track incoming asteroids and meteors. although many may be only aware of the subject due to recent events, it is actually one as old as our planet. i'm going to hold up a copy of "time" magazine for 20 years ago with the topic was featured on the cover. here is time of cosmic crash 20 years ago. i don't offer your ahead of their time are not, but it has been around a while. this is given by former staff member when i researched the subject 20 years ago as well. though the issue has been around a number of years come in many questions still asked and answered. the questions are brought in

complex of how to track an object millions of miles away to how to respond if an asteroid or meteor is headed towards earth. the two events of friday, february 15, the harmless fly by the vestry 2012 nni so has this impacted his meteor -- are stark reminders of the need to invest in space science. the asteroid passed just 17,000 miles from earth, listen to your circumference. 50 years ago we would've had no way of seeing the asteroid coming and even so is discovered at amateur astronomers. the u.s. has come a long way in its ability to track characterize asteroids, meteors and meteorites that we still have a long way to go. nasa believes it's discovered 93% of the largest in the earth orbit one kilometer or larger. what about the other 7% remaining or even no smaller

than one kilometer estimated to be the thousands being a as small as 100 years could destroy an entire city upon direct hit. the meteor that struck russia was estimated to be 17 meters and wasn't tracked at all. the smaller they are, the harder they are to spot if they can be late for it. the broad scope include participation in research institutions, industries and amateur astronomers in their backyard on home computers. some challenges require innovation, commitment and diligent. this is one of them and the community will lead for all the attention and publicity to two events of figure 15 received it was still too late to have acted to change the course of the incoming objects. we are in the same position today and for the foreseeable future unless we take action now to improve our means of

detection. i do not believe nasa is going to somehow defied budget gravity and get an increase in everyone else is getting cut, the way to find this to prioritize nasa's projects and squeeze as much productivity as we can out of the funds we have. examining and exploring ways to protect near-term asteroids and meteors as a priority for the american people and should be a priority for nasa appeared were fortunate the events of last are simply a coincidence rather than a catastrophe. however, we still made investments and improvements incapability to anticipate what may occur decades from now or tomorrow and that concludes my opening statement and the gentleman from texas is recognized for hers. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman and good morning. i'd like to welcome each of our witnesses today -- to today's

hearing. i'd like to thank you for your patience as we postponed securing a couple couple weeks ago. is the chairman has indicated, this is called in response to recent events in which a large meteor expectedly exploded, damaging property and injuring people in almost the same time that a small asteroid passed less than 18,000 miles from earth's surface. those two events apparently were unrelated. they both serve as evidence that we live in an active solar system with potentially passing through our neighborhood with surprising frequency. the theory is increasing scientific evidence that impacts asteroids and comets have had profound consequences for life

on earth at various times in the past come even contributing to the extensions. for such incidents are aware it's not something we want to have been and if we can avoid it i think it will increase our scientific understanding of near earth objects and their potential impact, the earth that has had congress to take the subject seriously in recent years and in that regard, this committee has taken leadership roles on these issues dating back to the efforts of former chairman george brown junior in the early 90s come a time when references to killer asteroids could feel the need to get since then, members on both sides, including representative rohrabacher, and giffords have taken an interest in this topic and progress has been made.

i hope today's hearing will provide us with a good update on the federal government's effort to potentially mitigate such hazards near earth objects. much has been accomplished over the last decade and i look forward to hearing about this after his. in addition, i'd like to know if there's additional steps we should be taken as a country with an expanded detection program or international collaborations of other such measures. what we have much to discuss today and is distinguished panel of what mr. hope was an oversight, i look forward to hearing from each of you. at this point of a two year the remaining part of nighttime to the ranking member of the subcommittee for her comments. >> thank you, madam chairwoman and thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to know for the record that this hearing is part 1 of the committee's examination of activities

related to near earth objects. subcommittee chairman alonso and i will hold part 2 in early april and this'll be be a continuation. i wanted to know for the record, madam chairwoman, but just a month ago after the events they made thin as, my colleague who is a former assistant to the physics labs praetorian i co-authored an outbid in the "washington post," trained to put into plain language what the challenges are, the research challenges, what the thread starts at the american people have some understand it as both chairwoman -- ranking member and chairwoman have noted this not new for this committee, but poses challenges for the american people, especially when it comes to resources. it is fitting the committee is considering u.s. government agency roles and responsibilities in your earth

object detention not only because they've been at the forefront of u.s. policy in near earth objects for the past two decades. this committee for related provisions in 2008 nasa authorization in subsequent policy direction that called for the office of science and technology and emergency response and recommend the agency for protecting the united states. nasa always seem to call for 9/11 assistance in all three founders is in stark contrast to the across the board cuts that nasa programs face under the law. i'm struck at how this complex planetary protection issue is and how much further we need to go in and looking forward to today's testimony and with that i yield. >> thank you him and thank you, ms. johnson and ms. edwards. other members opening statements

will be made a part of the record here our first witness is the honorable john p. holdren come assistant to president for science and technology and cochair of the council of advisors on science and elegy. prior to current appointment he was a professor at the kennedy school of government and department of earth science at harvard. mr. holdren graduated with aerospace, engineering and theoretical plasma physics. general william al shelton is the commander of the united states air force space command. prior to assuming his position, general chilton was the assistant vice chief of staff and direct your of air staff at the pentagon. he organizes come equips and maintains mission ready space and cyberspace forces and capabilities for the north american aerospace defense command in u.s. strategic command. general shelton graduated with a bachelors degree in

astronautical engineering and holds a masters degree in this field for the u.s. air force institute of technology. our final witnesses charles s. bolden junior, space administration. administrator bolton served as a pilot in the marine corps earning the rank of general. in the course of his military career, participated in several international campaigns and tested a variety of ground attack aircraft until a candidate in 1980. administrator bolden held positions at nasa and was able to participate in and support service they shuttle flights and he traveled to orbit four times aboard the space shuttle, traces the mission commander. for his many achievements come administrator bolton was from the hall of fame in a 2006. he earned a bachelor's degree in science and u.s. mail academy and a masters degree in distance

management for the university of southern california. we look at all. thank you for being here and director train three, if you begin. >> chairman smith, ranking member johnson, members of the committee. i'm pleased to be here to discuss u.s. activities to detect, detract, characterized the earth objects and develop the capability to deflect that any discovered to be on a collision course with the earth. this is of course a particularly timely topic for reasons all of you mentioned in your opening statement. near earth objects are defined as those whose orbits bring within about 31 million miles of the earth, a third the distance to the sun, some of them close enough to make an eventual collision of possibility. visit maximum physical dimension of more than a meter or generally referred to as either asteroids or comets, while smaller objects are referred to

as meteoroids. our called meteors upon fiery transit of your status here in the pieces to strike the surface are called meteor rates. dozens of asteroids and meter or more insights into the atmosphere each year of which only one on the average is as big as four meters. asters of the sizes burn up harmlessly high in the atmosphere. damage on the surface is likely only when the kinetic energy of the object is in the range of a few hundred kilotons of tnt equivalent or above. that corresponds at typical closing velocities to an asteroid about 15 meters in equivalent diameter. the 17-meter asteroid that blew up over a show in figure 15 released 440 kilotons of energy. astor is it that much energy strike the earth only every 100 years or so.

larger events like the 1908 asteroid explosion over siberia, which released about 15 megatons of energy and level trees over an area of more than 850 square miles are believed to be once in a thousand year events. if an asteroid explosion of that size were to occur over an urban area, it could cause hundreds of thousands of casualties. the probability of this occurring is much smaller than the one and one does in your probability for one hitting the earth at all and that is because land covers only 30% of the area of the earth and urbanized areas cover 2% to 3% of the land area. as a result, the odds of a near earth object strike causing massive casualties and destruction infrastructure are very small, but the potential consequences of an event or so large that it makes sense to take the risk seriously.

both the congress and recent administrations have done so. in 1998, congress passed mass of locating within 10 years at least 90% of all ngos of the diameter of one kilometer or greater, does the potential to threaten civilization and in 2005, congress directed nasa to catalog and characterize 90% of all ngos within 140 or greater by 2020. the one columbia was cool was in 2011 and 90% of neos is more challenging but it pays. the office of science and technology policy to develop a policy for notifying relevant authorities of an impending threat to recommend the entity responsible for protecting the nation from unexpected neos

collision threat notification. in an october 2010 letter, i reported on our progress on those tasks. the budget for near earth observation program has increased about fivefold since 2009 from a little less than 4 million to 20.5 million in fy 2012. beyond detection and tracking of objects, the administration is committed to exploring and developing capabilities to protect the earth in general and the united states in particular from cyberthreats. nasa coordinates with department of defense, stephen homeland security including the federal emergency management agency. i think the committee for support and interest in this issue and i'll be pleased to take any questions the members may have. >> thank you, dr. t. and three.

general shelton. >> distinguished members of the committee, it's an honor to appear before you today. it's also a privilege to appear with my colleagues in teammates in the space community. space situational awareness underpinned her entire spectrum of space activities and space command is proud of our crucial role in monitoring the space domain. specifically we provide capabilities employed ultimately by united states strategic command to detect, detract, identified and characterize human made objects in earth orbit. our sensors also are capable of detecting natural phenomenon like bullets, however to detract asteroids is dependent upon nasa and other organizations such as the massachusetts institute of technology's lincoln laboratory. for example, during their recent mastery 2012 day 14 event, joins

his operation in california use tracking data for near earth object program office at the jet propulsion laboratory to perform screenings to ensure the safety of satellites. we remain committed to working closely with partners to ensure comprehensive space situational awareness for the nation. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you and look forward to your questions. >> thank you, general shelton. administrator bolden. >> thank you for the opportunity to discuss the earth orbits. before he began, and i too congratulate you on your payment is the new chairman of the house science basin to elegy committee and i look forward to working with you in that capacity. timothy thank you, mr. chairman for the recent op as he wrote that caught my attention which

is important. the events of february 15, 2013 were a stark reminder of why nasa has for years and when this is so timely and import. the administration and nasa enable a human exploration of the mastery. the predicted approach of a small asteroid called 2012 da 14 in the unpredicted explosion of a small asteroid about 15 miles above russia that dr. holdren talked about earlier have focused public attention on the necessity of tracking asteroids and objects and protect in our planet them. something this committee and nasa have been working on for over 15 years. nasa has been focused on tracking asteroids and protecting our home planet will be for these recent events. nasa's focus in this area is evident from our fivefold in greece in near earth object

touches since 2010 and literally dozens of people are involved with some aspect of her neo-research across nasa and its centers. in addition to resources into understanding asteroids, the agency partners with university astronomers, space science institute and agencies across the country working to better understand these near earth objects, often with interagency transfers and other contracts are massive. the public attention is not hard to understand. the coincidence of having these two very rare events happening on the same day along with the unfortunate injuries of over 1000 people on the ground made this a big news event. however, we should remember the probability in the next 100 years is extremely remote. to put these in context, very small objects enter the atmosphere all the time. current estimates are an average

about 80 tons of material in the form of dust into the atmosphere every single day. objects the size of a basketball arrive on sedan objects as large as a card right once per week. are earth's atmosphere protects us in nearly all are destroyed before hitting the ground and pose no threat to life on earth. however, the potential consequences of a significant impact or potentially great indeed. it is prescribed in the national they will pursue, tracking shared drives objects to reduce the risk of harm to humans from an impact on our planet. nasa is developing new details and capabilities including the multipurpose crew vehicles on the space launch system of the solar system beyond orbit as is

stated in his 2010 speech at the kennedy space center, nasa's intention is to send astronauts for the first time in history and nasa is working to accomplish this mission by 2025. nasa leads the world in the detection of characterization and is responsible for 90% of all known neos. there should be a chart coming up soon. as shown in this graphic, the cumulative discovery of asteroids picked up dramatically with the start of the spaceguard program and the number of known asteroids has grown from a few hundred to 10,015 years and it's not insignificant that it goes almost asymptotic when you look at 2005, when the congress, nasa and administration picked up emphasis on it. nasa continues to make progress set by the congress.

today 9600 asteroids have been found premerger asteroids pose a threat to the plan as a whole and we've identified tracking this relationship. we've got 95% of the largest neos over one kilometer inside. 60% of the neos is the graphic shows we still have some work to do to find neos in the 140-meter class. next graphic, please. you can see here where we're lacking is the size go down. i remote ground-based observations have been augmented by reconnaissance data from her science missions. from 1997 to 2001, nasa's asteroid rendezvous flybys flew by asteroid belt before landing

on a near earth asteroid 433 arrows could last up is departed best and is now on its way to a 2015 rendezvous. the solar systems are discussed trade, launching in 2016 the mission would return a sample of up to 2.2 pounds from an asteroid to earth in 2023. of course nasa is working to accomplish an astronaut visit to mastery by 2025. this mission and activities necessary to ensure success should result in the nature and composition of neos and to approach and interact with asteroids. nasa has a long history of serving, and masters but importance has become apparent, nasa has increased detection reconnaissance and characterization. pick an incomplete understanding one kilometer sized and making

progress from smaller but still dangerous objects. while we emphasize the risk from impacts or remote, we remain committed to fulfilling responsibility to find and track near earth objects. we'll continue to update the congress on what we find. thank you for the opportunity to testify today and i look forward to responding to any questions you may have. >> thank you, administrator bolden. omega is the first one to dr. holdren. there seems to be agreement that we are able to detect 90% to 95% of the earth objects larger than one kilometer. somewhere around 60% of the objects over 300 meters. i haven't heard yet nor have they seen what percentage of the near earth objects to incoming asteroids of 100 meters, what percentage of those are we able

to detect? 100 meters i think you described in your written testimony as the size of a city destroyer. what percentage of the near earth objects can we detect and do you have a figure for that? >> i believe at this point that would be under 10%. the number for 140 meters and above is 10% and 100 year little under 10%. >> you agree with that? >> i was on the chair where it looks like less than 10% -- >> how many objects are not able to detect a city destroyer's? >> mr. chairman, that's one thing i cannot take for the record. >> i can answer that question. the estimates of how many

objects exist come in near earth objects in the range of 140 meters or above are between 13,020,000 objects. that's the number of which we detect it 10%. that is the much more challenging goal, which the congress put before us to identify 90% by 2020. >> roughly 2000 objects we are not detecting. >> more. because the number we are detecting is 10%. you're going the other way. unfortunately -- >> is going to the larger figure and that's why senator dawson. >> the number of city killers is very large in the range of 10,000 or more.

>> not reassuring, but what is reassuring to see him likelihood that one of the city destroyer as it hit. as you point out 2% to 3% of the first area is urban area. thank you. >> administrator bolden, what programs can do what improvements can we expect in the next two years or five years to better detect thousands of near earth objects that might be life-threatening? >> we continue our collaboration with international partners. as dr. holdren mentioned, he didn't specify, but a spanish astronomer -- telescopes for example to better detect these clicks >> this these foreign assets.

we need assets able to look and cooperate right now with a private company called e. 612 that will be engaged in the identification and had my hope is there'll be more. >> would we be able to detect that we are not detect the now. >> of attack about 140-meter class, our estimate that the going down will be 2030 before were able to reach the 90% level to detect and characterize those. >> thank you for the answer. maybe we can help you out. last question for you. as the department of defense aware that it floated over

russia? >> not until we were tipped off by nasa. >> those after-the-fact or how far before? >> i want to say he was two or three days preceding. you said the explosion. >> i was talking about the meteor. >> we had no insight. we were aware of the event when it occurred. >> how then are we going to be aware that incoming missiles over russia. we were aware of the event. >> we would have to take that into a different form to talk in more detail. >> thank you. that concludes my questions.

>> dr. holden, in 2010 the congressional response to the 2008 nasa authorization act with roles and responsibilities for nasa, fema, dod and state. who has the overall responsibility? i was wondering who in this administration who has the single responsibility to oversee these other dvds? >> nasa has the over gene responsibility. on the question of mitigation, who would have the responsibility if an asteroid were discovered on a collision course would be the asteroid and the amount of notice we had.

for some missions, you would want nasa to be in charge. further deflection missions, you would want beauty to be in charge. it does not make sense from the mitigation mission to specify in advance which agency would do it. the notification responsibilities are unambiguous. >> so when there is mitigation, duality come together? who takes the lead? what determines who takes the lead? >> we would all come together and we are in fact exercising those kinds of communications. as an exercise coming up in the middle of next month we will exercise those communications of the exercise responsibilities. there's a workshop coming up at the begiesponsibilities. there's a workshop coming up at the beginning of next month in which this interagency interactions will be further

discussed and delineated. >> thank you very much. >> gentleman from california, mr. rohrabacher is recognized for his questions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. were talking about space debris and nearer thought chicks. it seems to me that these two issues are not just american issues and when were talking about the cost of all of this, what are we talking about in terms of over a 20 year period the cost of actually coming up with a system of deflection and the cost of actually making the determination with was heading in our direction? >> mr. rohrabacher, you can give you an estimate.

we do it incrementally, so we believe we have to detect and characterize first and then concern ourselves as dr. holdren said that the mitigating action or deflection action. we have two concepts. one is about three quarters of a billion dollars port infrared-based sensors that is placed in space, something that orbits of venus releases in geosynchronous orbit. b-6 12 is about half a billion dollars, so we are roughly in that range. >> just for that one sensor? >> to try to put something in space that would help us identify and characterize. all three of us agree ground-based systems are great. but if you really want to find and detect asteroids early

enough that we can do something, you want that vehicle. >> i'll give you an example of two. don't take it for the record to get back to you. you're asking for a lifestyle costs for a program to mitigate. we have not developed. >> is in the billions of dollars, correct? >> upon detection devices almost a billion -- >> that would provide protection for the united states but for the world. >> this is not an american issue. anything we do protect the planet and that's why you hear me talk about the critical importance of international collaboration. >> what steps have we taken to

bring countries together they contribute billions of dollars as well as their own? >> the u.n. organization, you have copious has a very act good, ongoing activity and that cannot detract teen in participating. >> there's not just one organization that is aimed specifically or when was the last meeting of groups of people who represent countries that might want to get involved and have an overall plan? >> congressman rohrabacher, there was a meeting in vienna mid february this year under the auspices on peaceful uses of outer space. it has agreed stand up in an international asteroid warning network to stand up as well an

international body that we deal with the mitigation question. there is already underway something called the asteroid impact of deflection assessment, which is a joint effort of the by the european space mgc and nasa. i should add the network we are to have his international in character. it was a spanish observer who first discovered the asteroid detonated near miss. the minor planet center, which is funded by nasa and hosted by the harvard smithsonian observatory is under the overall auspices of the international union. >> i would suggest the number one the cost of deflection of course were talking about the cost of detection and one

situation the cost of having a deflection system is even more. i suggest this is one area of leadership the united states could take a role in an would be good for all and create an internationals. but we want to create your i suggest especially including rush on this and they may be able to make some major contributions to save us money and make a more effective system. with that said, i like to include all countries except china. thank you. >> the gentleman from maryland, ms. edwards is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to ask dr. trent three. the national science has indicated the new start of a large do not take intended to

detect and catalog potentially hazardous objects. what i would like to know is what the technological contribution would be if you were to make the overall detection and catalog in the possible. general bolden, utah about the prospect of, you know, a land based system versus systems we would put outside in our solar system, but the cost to me it seems to be rather significantly different. then i would like to have some understanding of whether there might be some cost sharing that nasa might consider with improvements to try to optimize it for nasa's years and get a sense as well of whether the challenges we're facing in not meeting the 2025 deadline

guideline that we've highlighted from the committee, are those technological challenges principally? are they funding challenges? is it some combination of cooperation challenges? today to understand that, especially in this fiscal environment. >> the survey telescope would be an important addition to our capabilities, but it's important to understand all these capabilities work in tandem to him. that is they share information. some of the telescopes are better at detection. others are better characterizing the orbit for determining reflect dignity and the likely composition of the object. one always has to think of this as a network. we have telescopes in arizona.

they have telescopes in italy. with we've telescopes in the czech republic and they are all linked together and they are all part of a network that provides the overall capability we have to detect these objects. the lsd alone when it comes to fruition would still not be able to enable us to identify and care to raise 90 plus% of the objects in less than a dozen years. but in combination, the orbiting infrared telescope of the kind administrator boldness talking about could lower that time to something in the range of six to eight years. >> the only thing out loud, we flew infrared imaging satellite

called wise and repurpose it on target to look for asteroids that we discovered yours in the deep field of the solar system, the universe actually. it's that type of instrument that i talk about that is what b-6 12 wants to do. we are looking at ways to cause shared the organization that congressman rohrabacher type about. the five-member five member organizations of what we call the international space station team and that's 15 plus nations, russia, japan, canada and the united states although our primary responsibility is operating the international space station with the heads of agencies get together with talk about everything in one of the big thing is the threat of earth asteroids. i risk of getting in trouble because congressman rohrabacher and i have an agreement to

disagree and i will say it will be the decision of this congress as to whether or not we ever cooperator participate with china. it's the elephant in the room here to talk about it because my public affairs two indications people tell me not to talk about it. i don't do with china by direction of this congress. we are the only agency that is not a bilateral communications with china. this is an issue for the world here this is not an issue for the united states. although congressman rohrabacher and i -- >> on the congressman rohrabacher take his time. i wanted general bolden, you know, the whole identified mission the president has sent out to go to an asteroid seems seems rather lackluster. others had questions about whether or not to vehicle or react to the about the trade-off instead. >> the gentleman from texas,

chairman emeritus is recognized for his questions. >> of course they thank you as we all do for holding this important hearing and i thank the witnesses for their valuable testimony. i had the privilege of serving on this committee sent 3 testimony. i had the privilege of serving on this committee sent 1981 in this topic has been the subject to periodic review of legislative direction as the witnesses noticed in the 90s during consideration of a bill, this matter came up and was really a discussion about asteroids, had a hearing on asteroid is mr. rohrabacher remembers and was reported at that time one had just passed the earth that no one knew anything about, but missed us by 15 minutes. i hate to ask, was that as good as it missing us by one minute or 32nd, but just the enormity

of the damage they could do to us. i offered an amendment ascetical of cataloging this population of comments and offer to be coordinated with the department of defense and space agencies. other countries are invited, but also told we have to have a world because as charlie said it's a world problem. they were interested in attending, but not in contributing anything. none of them showed up for the hearing. as witnesses stated from 1998 until 2011, 90% one corner or greater have been located so they would know more. we have more work to do, especially those that could still have a devastating impact if they hit. so dr. shelton, with capabilities do we need that we

don't currently possess to detect asteroids that might pose a threat to the earth? >> server, if you're talking about department of defense -- >> wisher we do? >> department of defense capabilities, we are focused on things in earth orbit. we've got a variety of salmon are not focused beyond the earth. >> once an object has been identified, what are means of tracking it and how much time would we have to prepare if there were a threat to earthquakes >> maybe i can take that, congressman hall. how much notice we have depends on the size of the object. the bigger it is, the further away the conceit of the more time we have. some objects they know are coming years in advance. other objects are still big enough to cause damage that we

only know weeks in advance for days in advance. obviously we need to improve capability to give us enough notice to mount a deflection mission if we see one on a collision course. some of the capabilities we been talking about come the large synoptic scope, the orbiting telescope that the b-6 12 foundation is working with nasa to develop, on this capabilities will increase the warning time with respect to asteroids big enough to do serious damage. again, the deflection options that within the open to us would depend on the size of the object and the amount of notice. >> excuse me, the one that hit russia, there's no question about that and that's all we know about it. why did we know that was coming?

>> it came out of the sun. it came from a direction of our telescopes could not look. >> when you make that determination, we had to do something no matter where comes from peer >> that is one of the reasons that orbiting telescope -- >> you know a heck a lot of the more that we know. >> i would say the most important single thing we could do to improve capacity to see any asteroid of potentially damaging size coming would be an orbiting infrared telescope of the sort of the b-6 12 foundation is working on. >> if we saw one coming towards omaha, what could they do about it? they said they could use a laser. i went and asked a second question. could the laser hit it right in

the middle because i didn't want to cause any more trouble than i had with mr. rohrabacher to have hit los angeles on the other half hit to your comment suggests that of it to the pacific ocean and the other half the atlantic ocean. they didn't really have an answer to that. >> first of all, it would not be practical to have a laser powerful enough to split it in half. which you can do to have a powerful laser is to cause material heated by the laser to fly off the asteroid and that is essentially the equivalent of a jet engine pushing the asteroid off course. there's other approaches to deflect an asteroid. those include hitting it with a very heavy compactor. they include approaching it as the party approached with her body produce a number of

asteroid. >> a regular letter former. thank you and i yield back my time. >> thank you, mr. hall. those were interesting answers. appreciate that. the jumbo woman from oregon, ms. bo nietzsche. >> thank you, mr. chairman. is spent where established in this that the probability of an occurrence of a sizable neo collided with the earth is quite small. he said extremely remote in your testimony. it's also clear consequences could be enormous. for example, depending on the size of an asteroid could burn icon of dust rivaling the most powerful volcanic explosion were depending where it has could cause and enormous tsunami and the coastal region. you are all striving as we are to find the appropriate balance for us but without being unnecessarily alarmist.

in the district back to where it hit, the significant threat of the tsunami from earthquakes is a very real response preparedness is a priority issue for my constituents. in fact, when it's in the legislature we passed a bill that requires the state to plan for 9.0 magnitude earthquake and resulting tsunami, which scientists determined will occur at some point in the future. it's not playing for a spirit is fighting for when. the state released its resilience been partially funded three fema grant in february. the importance of preparing infrastructure for a catastrophic event also places the significant focus on the ability to respond once the event has occurred. of course the challenge has implications in the context of today's conversation. homage to plan for detection?

comest replant our response? he should help us detect the impact but we also need to consider how we will respond if it's not possible to stop these neos from colliding. her 2010 report indicates on the projected damage and location, seema caddell provides federal assistance and coordinate local emergency services. personnel to integrated disaster response task forces. could you talk about how fema is approaching this role, how they will take into account different demographic and geographic characteristics in any given era. >> that is a really challenging question. as we know, fema has a wide range from responding to a wide variety of emergencies and disasters. we are in the process of conduct

being exercises of various kind in which fema is a participant in thinking about and trying to work out details of response strategy depending on the nature of the impact. those impacts could be different if it were just restricts the ocean is the point now, the impacts largely come through this and on the phenomenon, which of course is fema must also reckons since tsunamis can be caused in other ways. if a strike occurred over a region with sufficient force, the damage would resemble in some ways the massive earthquake, which is another event with which fema is familiar and prepared to respond. these are big challenges. i would not not minimize d. i would not minimize difficulty of responding adequately a

substantial asteroid strike should occur in the size range we need to be particularly worried about. >> what efforts are made to engage the existing response infrastructure? >> we go through simulated event and those exercises are the best way we have when combined with analytical tools to figure out how to bring our capabilities to bear. >> any comments about finding the balance between her parents for detection and preparing for your response. >> i would just echo what she said. you hit the right word and that's balance. we could come out in decide they

want to pour money into sub for detection and i would not be the right thing to do because there has to be a balance. my recommendation would be the president budget from 2013 was pretty good. we have a plan that dr. holger and top about, that it depends on the passage of the budget. we'll come back again and try to give you what we see as a funding model to support the plan that dr. holdren addresses. that's why we have to cooperate congress and administration in striking the proper balance. >> thank you very much. my time has expired. i yield back. >> the gentleman from alabama, mr. brooks has recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. reading from dr. holdren's testimony, depending on velocity he could have been impacted her

she to 550 megatons would be capable of causing destruction and their 52500 megatons another dose here suggest a hiroshima atomic was roughly 13 kilotons, so much smaller. could you please describe in greater detail what you mean by a large region, and quote? >> decides you're talking about, 140 meters and you've got the numbers exactly right, could devastate the better part of a continent. >> were talking about a very large region. >> the only fortunate thing is the estimated frequency with which objects have that size

strike the earth is one in 20,000 years were probability of one in 20,000 each year. nonetheless, this whole strictly in the category we were talking about, low probability, high consequence, therefore we need to take the risk seriously and make the investments that enable us to deflect an asteroid of that size or want to be discovered on a collision course. ..

>> i said a substantial part of the contract could be a continent destroyer and a bigger one to be a civilization destroyer. the one that hit 65 million years ago near the yucatán peninsula is thought to have led to the extinction of the dinosaurs and most lived on earth at the time. >> that was roughly 10 kilometers, right? >> yes. >> looking at the notes, it suggests that we have identified thousands of objects in space

most of the objects are three to 500 meters. roughly 1200 that are 500 meters 3000 meters in diameter. and roughly 900 that are éclat mature or more. so how much of these kilometer or larger sized objects, what kind of devastation does this mean for what you have described? >> over time, as we develop our capability to deal with this kind of threat, the leadtimes would be smaller. >> let me focus in on that. how many years would we need?

let's say we found out an object of this size that is going to hit the earth. if we were to do whatever is necessary to try to put ourselves in position to save the plan, we will do it. >> i think i will refer the question to general bolton. >> 2025 is the time that we think that we will be able to send a human. it means that that is honorable. >> let's assume that we no one will hit the planet. and which we will accelerate things as quickly as we can. what is the fastest we can protect ourselves upon discovery of a 1 kilometer or larger object? >> now you're talking about an intense effort. that significantly shortens the

time. we have the systems and the technology available now to do that. you are talking about pouring unlimited funds into it and conceivably, you could do it in four or five years. but don't quote me on a number yet. but i will work with the general and his captain and we will get you an answer. >> thank you, mr. chairman. whatever time that is, i would like to help you shorten it. the gentleman is recognized for his questions. >> thank you mr. chairman. thank you am a ranking member. i represent livermore, california. we have two labs. i imagine that when you talk about systems and technology --

some of the technology to deflect weapons will have to be or have been designed at one of those laboratories. >> so that is a question, yes, if that were the decision, i would go back to what the doctor said earlier. i would not consider a weapon. to save earth against this type of threat. i would consider the development of appropriate technologies that could enable us -- we are talking about deflecting, i want to say a tiny amount, if you catch it far enough out. >> let us assume it is a late stage detection through that our choices are limited. yes, sir. but that is not my daily work anymore. those two laboratories in my district. i imagine they would play a critical role with one of these

objects. >> nuclear energy is probably what we are talking about. >> is there a way to guarantee that one of the near earth objects is not a hit on a friday? because right now, in my district, all of the furloughs are on friday. some of the nasa employees that are trying to detect these things, they are going to be for load on fridays as well. >> no, sir. >> no way? in seriousness, i have to go back again to say several things. the plan the president has put forward, i think it will adequately address the technical

capability to be able to deflect an asteroid in due time. you know, if we find, we are tracking literally thousands of asteroids today. if we can discover this, there's something wrong with our system. >> yes, we have our nuclear laboratories and you're not concerned at all that this sequestration affects readiness? spirit that was not the question we are talking about keeping our facilities safe. just the mental strain on our employees, not knowing whether

they will be able to come to work tomorrow. they know that the congress could take some action and all of a sudden the administration doesn't know what he's talking about because i have to lay people off. my intention is not to do that. if your question is is there a bad sequestration, yes, there is. >> how about for general schultz? >> well, i will tell you that just about my every waking moment these days is based on this topic. i have just pulled the trigger on reductions in just my major command alone from now to the end of the fiscal year. 20% cut of page my civilians. the resources are that we won't be able to operate at full capability. there are things that we use that we won't be able to operate at full capability.

that is not what we do, that is nasa's responsibility. we contribute serendipitously at times. that we are focused on things. >> if you had to focus on something, what make you more or less prepared, having tabbies across-the-board cuts? >> we are clearly less capable under sequestration. >> thank you, sir, i yield back my time. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank all three of you for your detailed written testimony. you use a lot of facts that i have frequently referred to. it is a matter of if civilization will be threatened by an impact.

until the recent russian impact. quite a few people thought those of us who are even aware of this were on the kooky side. one good thing is it's maybe a little bit of a wake-up call for some people. doctor, your testimony referred to the first ever exercise. some wondering if you could share a little bit with us about how that went. >> well, i am not -- well, the first ever deflection exercise was a kinetic impact on an asteroid of medium-size the

president's proposal to have astronauts win by 2025, will exercise a number of the capabilities that would be necessary to have in our toolbox. should an asteroid of threatening sites be detected. i would disagree with congresswoman edwards, who said this is a lackadaisical program. i think it is a crucial program. and i think -- i think it is going to lead to major advances in capabilities, those that are

not just interesting to demonstrate on a small scale, but enough to deal with the real threat. >> i took the comment to mean she thought the approach could've been lackadaisical. >> for the record, i did not say that would. >> okay. now, ranking member asked about a protocol of who is in charge. and we got about three or four minutes of chatter, but we never got an answer. i would just like to recommend that the next time, give us a protocol and say who is in charge here and it is just a very clear protocol who is in charge in various instances. now, i know that you will corroborate if we have an impact. and a good segment of the

population, you know, notwithstanding we don't have a shuttle anymore, it is impossible. but we only know about 10% of the threats. and the recent impact in russia, what would we do? if we detected even a small one like in russia, headed for new york city. what would we do? >> bend over and what? [applause] >> congressman, again, have to go back to what i said before. these are very rare events. from the information that we had

on asteroid that we have discovered on all sides of asteroids, we don't know one that will threaten the population of the united states in three weeks. as i said that with the president's budget, we have advanced technology and three weeks will not be something that causes us to panic. we are where we are today, between the administration and the congress, the funding to do that. the bottom line, as always, the fund did not work out. we are all sitting here today as the congress and the administration try to figure out sequestration. but we are fixing it today.

the answer is if we find that out right now. >> i love what the pope is doing right now. i will tell you. things happen. you have to pray. >> the upside, i guess, is that there is more public awareness now of the importance of space to the survival of our species. if not at some unknown point that we can imagine. >> sir, you said something that is so important. it would be very easy for this congress and for the administration to say, because we get that question all the time, why are we worried? can't we put that off for five or 10 years? the reason that i cannot do

anything in the next three weeks is because for decades we have put it off for the next five or 10 years. we don't have contractors who go away from doing their job. and then we call and say, okay, we want to build a rocket. we don't do that anymore. all of those guys went over and they are not selling pizza. i am not being facetious when i say that. i apologize it causes me to lose my temper sometimes good that this is really important. the president has a plan. that plan is incremental. we cannot like him, we cannot agree with him, we cannot do a lot of things. but it is the best plan that we have. we want to save the planet, then we have to get together and decide how we will execute that plan as expeditiously as possible. that's all i can tell you. >> thank you.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. this used of the term, let's remind us about the size of the asteroid, how big would it be? >> a one clobber asteroid would be carrying energy in the range of tens of millions of megatons. an asteroid of that size, ergometer or bigger, it could plausibly end civilization. nobody has the detailed models to tell you exactly what the

threshold is great when you're talking about tens of millions of megatons of explosive energy, you are putting the civilization at risk. >> i am hearing that we are relatively optimistic that we will be able to detect asteroids of this size, with a sufficient amount of we time. >> yes, that will be detected in the range of 93 or 94%. and that size range that could come close to the earth. in that size range, we can be assured. being able to detect them with a lot of notice. let's scale it down to city destroying asteroids. what size would those be? >> they could be in the range of

15-meter diameter, carrying five to 10 megatons. what sort of assistance will we need to detect that? >> you talk about this, including those in the issue. >> we would want the infrared telescope. again, we are working on it. as the administrator worked on, we actually had an experiment that was built for a different purpose, very good.

>> that detects misnomers, for example. >> i think that these are very different capabilities. as general shelton mention going into detail about our detecting capabilities, they would require a different forum. but they are quite different. quite different in nature from the capabilities that we need to detect and track asteroids. >> chairman raised the question that i thought was rather interesting. did none of our current missile detecting capabilities, they failed to be able to detect the most recent asteroids.

>> yes, i can answer that. we did detect it. as i said, it was at the time. it was detection at the time. >> okay, so the capacities that we have now are really in real-time as opposed to remediating the problem? >> yes, sir. focused on two things. the infrared signature, we see that. and since it breaks the clouds, we will be able to tell you the type of missile it is, where the missile is going, where it is going to impact. a very solid capability. infrared sensors can be used to other things, but not for predicted things. >> i am out of time. >> mr. swygert is recognized

not. >> just because i want to get my head around to try to understand some of the base level, i was going to ask you first, and forgive me if i am equating the statements you. >> a dangerous interaction for earth and an object. is this a 1000 year been? >> well, the one in 1000 year event is the one of the magnitude that hit over the tunguska asteroid in 2008. that was a 15-megaton class event.

when you start getting into something with that detail, we had three of these things in the last 10 years. such a degree of confidence this becomes, you know, it is off the charts. it is one of the thousand with 20% lack of confidence. that sort of work for this? >> well, i would say that certainly there is a lack of confidence of that size or greater. but the real catch is that on average, one only expect this to happen once in a thousand years and it doesn't mean that we won't have this.

>> you can have this in then go 1500 years without it. >> okay. in the discovery of objects out there. how much was coming from the amateur astronomy community? i mean, you were telling me that it was an amateur? >> i am not sure that it was. we just know it wasn't as and its dominant. >> how is that network of governmental, you know, porting

thingscome out of that make it work? >> is actually quite organized. let me take this opportunity to recommend a book that is not mine. a book by nasa's head of the asteroid identification program. it just came out this year in 2013. it is called finding them before they find us come coming near earth objects. he talked about the roles of amateurs. >> okay, you're talking about what i was trying to go. is there a way to take the network and incentivizes? i have a great interest in information. you know, lots of smart people all over the world.

and should we be incentivizing i? >> that is a great question. we are greatly in favor of crowd sourcing, greatly in favor of putting challenges out there. in fact, you and i are about really good friends. [laughter] these challenges we already know. we have used them across a domain of problems. i think there is no doubt that we will have a challenge around asteroid detection. >> part of that is, okay, we see something. how far do we have to see something to determine this assessment and then react to it? >> well, the analysis and threat

is important. you can train on it, the optical telescopes and others, and use the commendation of information available. to characterize this trajectory and determine it. it is going a capability that you discover is on a collision course. that is where we can confirm in the range of years. i think administrators suggested that he would get back to the committee on that. but i think that his estimate, his initial estimate is certainly reasonable. you would be talking four or five years even with a lot of resources. >> sir, thank you for your patience. >> the gentlewoman from connecticut is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i share some of the information

for this crowd sourcing. following up at a later time to think about what opportunities there are in other areas. and how could i collaborate on this worldwide problem. i think that is very important. so general, if you could talk a little bit about what nasa's procedure is, what you need to know, what triggers a notification warning. and how does that actually work? >> congresswoman, we notified the state department. they notify international partners, and this is not just for asteroids. this would be for our satellite system as well. we have had to exercise that over the last two years.

the first person i would notify would be doctor holden. i go to the doctor because he pulls the team together. but i understand the thrust of the question. we would notify other federal agencies, fema, the state department. and go from there. >> is scenario dependent. it depends on the characterization of the asteroid. sometimes it is just a matter of saying that we now have something else that has been added to the inventory. it is not an earth threatening orbit, and we do that. >> could you talk about whether there is an organized international network or should there be? it is scenario dependent?

>> well, it was mentioned at the recent meeting that actually the chair was a nasa scientist. it came that we would get you more information on what they proposed. >> the minor planet center, which i mentioned before, there is a former international entity to which everyone automatically feeds discoveries of objects. there is a network that functions to assemble all of

these different telescopes around the world, and even be amateurs nowhere to go with their findings. the plant at center of them goes to the national operation of jpl, which is responsible for working out the trajectory in coordination with these other groups. but the thing is the international asteroid warning network, which emerged from the meeting in vienna, it will ramp up this entire effort and will add capabilities as countries come together to say, given these aspects, what do we need and how do we get it. >> everybody is under budget constraints so that we can more effectively deploy resources.

if other countries see this as threatening, it is going to be vitally important. we all got the benefit for worldwide resources. so as the conference goes forward, i hope you are help us with new opportunities that will be lifesaving and that will allow greater collaboration. thank you. >> the gentleman from texas, mr. weber, is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. sir, you said that the asteroid that hit siberia was 15 megatons. what was the name of that event?

>> [inaudible] >> we all agree that there were 13,000 options. >> 13 to 20,000, 140 meters. so the number would be somewhat larger for asteroids. >> how close is the nearest one? >> is not a question of how close it is now, but how close will be orbit take it to the earth and the near future. none of these asteroid that we have found is on a collision course. [inaudible] >> that is correct.

when i asked the question of how did this happen, it came from this. >> when something comes right out of the sun, directly address, at some point we are able to identify this. how much time do we have. is that 10 minutes? two hours? when does it become a part of the earth's atmosphere? >> i do have to re-emphasize we talk about these three weeks and that is still unlikely and even the occurrence in russia, that was not, you know, a threatening thing. if you are in russia, that was a significant event. but that is not the city running, the region and threatening. >> okay, can you give me a time frame when one actually is here? >> it is my belief that we can identify those that are the big

threats. but we need to do better. >> okay. we had a hell hubble telescope up for a longtime. >> it is still a. >> okay. >> we are a little ways away. 2018 wants this james webb space telescope. but those are not -- they are not in the asteroid, well, they are looking at different things. >> okay, could we make that change to where we could add onto that telescope and get it in space? >> no, sir. >> okay. >> we would not want to do that. we have a plan right now. collaboration with private industries, private organizations -- i don't want anyone to think that this is

going to save the planet, but they are doing what we need to do in terms of providing means. >> this goes around the earth every 91 minutes? >> yes. >> we don't utilize it at all, but as i talked about when i was in with you, we are learning that although we thought it was not a platform that you would want to do, it is turning out to be a great platform. we are learning more about it. we have the capability to work with this. >> five or six hours? six days? six weeks? >> i would i like to fool anyone that this is something that could answer this question. the types of things that were mentioned earlier by the way we need to go. >> okay.

who monitor what is all of these objects? willa dean your iphone when there is a threat coming? someone has to be watching an instrument to say, we picked one up. who does that? >> well, it happens at the minor planet center where all the information from all of these sensing instruments around the world go. >> and the final question, so you explode. you explode in asteroid. how do we know that we don't have one big object coming at us as 20 legal objects. >> you do not know that. that is one of the reasons that blowing one up close to the earth is not a great option. reflecting it so that it doesn't hit us at all is a much better option. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i yelled back. >> thank you, mr. weber. the gentleman from texas is recognized. >> thank you.

>> earlier you we talked about an asteroid hitting an ocean and causing a tsunami. i guess it is dependent on the correct answer to this question. but how far inland could this asteroid make the water coming? that was really interesting to me. >> there is a very interesting discussion of exactly that question. in the book, and the answer is we really don't know. because the dynamics of tsunamis caused by asteroid impacts our number one, very complicated. they are not adequately investigated. it depends upon many factors, including the slope of the ocean bottom close to the continent that is going to be most effective. it depends on so many other characteristics as well. so i think that there is no -- there is no simple answer to the

question we can give at this time. >> what about asteroids hitting other planet systems? the research you have on our? >> well, there are a lot of creators out there. you see them very clearly. >> in the recent craters on the moon? >> i would have to get back you on now. i'm not sure what the most recent impact on the moon is. but i think that none very reason. in geologic time, it could be quite interesting. there lots of evidence of asteroids bashing into each other. some asteroids are pitted with major craters that come from the bumping into each other. >> thank you.

>> thank you, sir. the gentleman from utah is recognized. >> thank you, gentlemen for your time. i have great respect. we spent some time at your place talking everyday. i know that you are a former marine pilot. i am a former air force pilot. my question is for general shelton. that air force pilots are the best pilots in the world. >> i am going to have to say yes on that. >> thank you, sir. i am glad that i was able to talk about it with you. i am a pilot. >> you are a bigger man than i

am because i have never landed on the carrier. i have a couple of simple questions and maybe some more detailed ones. >> if we were to determine that there was a threat and determined that it was potentially devastating, do we have a policy as to whether we would share that information? >> is probably most appropriate for your. >> okay. >> my expectation would be that we would notify. if information came in indicating that an asteroid had been detected to do serious damage, it would be exactly what happened after the fukushima earthquake and tsunami affected

japan. namely, there would be a gathering in the situation room within minutes. we would have the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, the secretary of state, we would have the head of fema, you have the secretary of homeland security, the head of nasa, we had general shelton. and there would be an intense discussion of the whole range of actions with the government that they would take in order to deal with the threat, whatever it wants. there would be a discussion who to notify and how fast and not form. >> yes, now, is that part of the nature?

>> i wish you would, i would be curious to know that. maybe i am just not that good about getting it. but we have discovered 94% of the asteroids over one commoner. but if we don't know what's out there, how do we know that we have discovered 94% of them? >> that is a very good question, and it turns out that there are statistical techniques that rely on sampling of populations and what you have seen before in order to determine what fraction of the overall population is actually seen. that is described again in wonderfully clear detail. >> okay,. >> you are fairly comfortable with that? >> just. >> you know, we talked about

detection being the first line of defense. he mentioned some of the others as well. but i mean, if the united states the lead on this? clearly, we are, but are other nations contributing to this detection effort in a meaningful way? or is it almost entirely meaningful? >> yes, many are contributing. there are data centers in italy. there is another one in czechoslovakia. there are some in chile, there are some in australia. again, this is part of international cooperation, compared to many others. >> as it should be, of course. >> are they funded by the eu -- the others --

>> for example, this is substantially funded by nsf. of course, it will be a facility in a sense. they are primarily u.s. efforts. >> i would have to get back to you on international distribution. i could not give you a percentage. again, if you would, i would appreciate it. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> thank you. mr. grayson is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we could spend a million

dollars. we could spend a billion dollars or $8 billion. i would like to hear from all of you what we should spend. i would like a number or a formula. >> let's start with you, doctor. >> okay. the national academy of sciences, just a couple of years ago, came out with a report to address this question. they looked at what you could do for $500 million a year, what you could do for 50. on the basis of that, if we are just looking primarily at the detection and characterization that i think we would want to be spending upwards of a hundred million dollars a year.

you would have to include the cost of visiting an asteroid by 2025. >> there is a rain spread over the period of time between now and 20.5. >> thank you, sir. >> we are talking about this and that part of space that we are responsible for. probably two or $300 million a year is what we are talking about. those are more sensitive to this population that is growing. sensors that allow us to take

and catalog it is threats continue to grow in space. we need to be able to characterize that much better than we have to capability to do it today. the 2 million range is what we are talking about. >> the doctor answered it. i would like to reemphasize. because we have identified 95% of the objects. we have seen none that are on a collision trajectory. this is not an issue that we should worry about in the near term. however, the president has laid out a plan. we have a lot of work to do, but the funding that is presently laid out is sufficient to get us there incrementally.

>> okay, so it could be a worst-case worse case scenario or a not so bad scenario. but start with you, doctor holden. >> this is a tough question because there are different ways to present these things. if you take the expected value of the damage, integrated over a very long period of time, it comes out that the estimated loss of life is only about 100 per year. that compares with a million per year for malaria, 5 million per year for tobacco. it doesn't look like a very big threat. but that is not a really meaningful way to present a risk

of this character where you are talking about a low probability of a very big disaster, and in those sorts of situations, we tend to invest in insurance to reduce the likelihood of a disaster we would regard as intolerable. if you ask how big is the disaster, if you're talking about a 10 commoner asteroid of this sort that exterminated the dinosaurs, what is the value of all of the civilization? it is a very big number. that is a meaningful as a number that we should then divide by 65 million-dollar year return time? >> i think that we can't get at it that way. >> we had a worst-case scenario. again, from a dod perspective, we would not be able to characterize traffic on orbit

and we wouldn't be able to avoid collisions on orbit. we were not able to detect adversary activity on orbit. by the way, not only for our life, but it is very high. we would sacrifice that. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. this has been an interesting hearing. no doubt this will be a part of your expertise as well. we stand adjourned. [inaudible conversations] >> a code of conduct or activities in outer space. and state laws on abortion.

>> ronald kessler talks about the history and the role and the mission of the agency. the current political debate in washington over guns. "washington journal" is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. [cheers] [cheers] spirit mr. secretary, we are going to put them down as undecided. [applause] >> mr. chairman, as i listened to the comments, it struck me what a wonderful things free speech is. >> that was the hearing where

donald rumsfeld was making the justifications for attacking iraq. what you didn't hear is that we have a chance to ask him, which is how much money, how how many u.s. soldiers will be killed? how many civilians will die from this. i would like this questions answered. >> more with medea benjamin on sunday night at 8:00 p.m. on c-span "q&a." >> now, frank rose, the deputy assistant secretary of state for defense policy. he discusses the need for an international code of conduct for outerspace. he said president obama's administration is engaging the international community for such a measure. this is about 45 minutes. >> thank you all for joining us this morning.

thank you for joining us. i am the senior fellow and we are very pleased to welcome frank rose for space and defense policy. now, for those of you who don't know us well, we are a global think tank. we have our mothership in london, and also in other places. the dialogues of the middle east and other dialogues of the asia pacific have been recorded. we also publish survival, international affairs, the 2013 addition of which was once your last week.

and some of which are on display. this is a critical part of our network. >> we are here today to hear from mr. frank. frank is responsible for defense and military space policy. prior to joining the department in 2009, he held very strict positions in the u.s. house of representatives, including the committee on intelligence and secretary of defense.

he received his m.a. in war studies. prior to joining the institute, i can tell you one thing about him. he takes diplomatic engagement very seriously. i think that frank must have a record for the most miles flown and he has so many friends around the world. i wanted to use the opportunity today for his rare presence in washington to let frank give something of an extended report on a space related engagement over the past two years. with akamai will turn it over to frank for about 20 minutes. then we will open it up for questions and answers. >> i should also remind everyone that we are on the record. >> okay, it is great to be back. as a student in london in the late 1990s, i spent many hours

in the library at the old headquarters. so i'm dating myself. i am pleased to be here today to talk about president obama second term. i would like to focus on three issues. first, i would like to outline the challenges of the space environment, including this space degree and anti-settling ideas. we are working on implementing the president's vision. now, the benefits space.

for example, information derived helped us warn of natural disasters, facilitate navigation and transportation globally, provide global access to financial operations. and scores of other activities worldwide. however, back then we had to powers, the united states and the soviet union operating space systems. today, over 60 nations and government operates based systems, as well as numerous commercial and academic operators creating an environment that is increasingly congested. for example, the u.s. department of defense currently attracts over 22,000 objects larger than 10 centimeters of which 1100 are active satellites.

there are also hundreds of thousands of additional objects, still capable of damaging this in the international space station. we have seen a dramatic increase. the first was china's anti-satellite test against one of its own satellites. the second was a kosmos satellite and a commercially operated satellite. these two events are responsible for 36% of all the debris. the space environment will increase as we develop and deploy system. therefore, it is clear that space travel is becoming

contested. space systems and their infrastructure based a range of threats that made disrupt things. as a director james clapper recently testified, it enables a wide range of services for space travel. we seek to counter destroying or denying our services. this will increase as disrupted and space capabilities are developed. space systems will have implications beyond environment, disrupting worldwide services upon which civil and national security sectors depend. in particular, we continue to be

concerned. especially about china's faceted satellite program. given the increasing threat to either irresponsible or unintentional acts, stability, safety, security -- we must work with the community of space nations to preserve this environment for all nations in future generations. ..

b-schools include expanding international cooperation and mutually beneficial spacek duties to broaden and extend benefits of space and further the peaceful use of space and strengthen stability in space through domestic and international measures to promote improved information collection and sharing our space collision avoidance and strengthening measures to mitigate orbital debris. in pursuit of the national space policy school, the policy directs department agencies in consultation with the secretary of state to strike in u.s.

leadership space related activities such as the u.n. committee and peaceful use of otters days, identify areas of potential national cooperation, develop and pursue bilateral and multilateral transparent comp is building measures to encourage actions that peaceful use of space to preserve the space environment for development and adoption of international industry standards and policies to minimize debris such as the united nations debris mitigation guidelines. let me discuss the specific initiatives working at the state department to implement the president's guidance. in january 17, 2012, former secretary of state hillary clinton announced the united states had decided to work with the european union and other nations to develop a national code of conduct. she stated the long-term

sustainability of the space environment with irresponsible act as unless the international community addresses challenges, the environment from airplane that will become recently happy, which will create consequences for all of us. if they do it would establish guidelines for responsible behavior to reduce the hazard of debris generated event to an increase trees. the evaporation and space to avoid the dangers of collision. the united states believes the european union's latest draft is a useful nation in concert is starting point for developing a consensus international code of conduct. we look forward to participating in the consultative bidding the e.u. will be convening with our host, the ukrainian government in ukraine in this upcoming

that. these will provide an opportunity to address all elements of the draft code along with our partners in the e.u., the united states to find agreement that is acceptable of allstate exasperates effective security benefit relatively short-term. i'd also like to discuss the work of the group of government experts of trade by on measures established by the u.s. general assembly. the purpose is to ask in options for establishing bilateral and multilateral tcb emphasis supports long-term inability of security environment. representatives including the united states serve on this gge and i served as u.s. are presented the group. the group held its first meeting on july 2013 at u.n.

headquarters in new york city. the key object is is to develop a consensus report that outlines a list apart attic space that nations can sign-up on a voluntary basis. legally binding control outside the scope. the tram titleholder its next meeting to consider the first draft of the report with the goal of finalizing the report by july of this year. another area we are discussing space sustainability and security is within the group of eight or gh which can update its enormity at camp david. the united states introduce discussions on the long-term sustainability and security of the space environment group.

the g8 address sustainability great detail. in particular the statement first noted outerspace activities play a significant role in the social, economic, site of the development as dallas security. too, expressed concern about the growth of orbital debris and spacek entities and welcome current efforts aimed at establishing a strong international can consist of an international code of conduct for outerspace activities. we expects a security to remain on the group's agenda this year but the ascent of the uk's president the. at the multilateral level, we have expanded engagement within the united nations committee on peaceful uses on the development and adoption of international standards to minimize the read.

the united states is taking an active role of the working group of the scientific and technical groups of long-term sustainability. this group will be a key for a for development of international best is guidelines for spacek entities. in fact, the united states is serving as cochair and space operations and space situational awareness, demonstrating commit to making progress to enhance safety and preserving the use of space for the long term. local love you and copious is to finalize the report by the end of 2014. let me also briefly discuss some ongoing bilateral dialogues on space security with key nations. over the past three years have established a number of bilateral space security dialogs with key space.

nations to discuss security issues. these include discussions with traditional allies, france, u.k., canada and japan as well as discussions new partners such as south africa, brazil and india. we have a very robust discussion with the russian federation on space security. were also trying to engage china on space security. we think it is extremely at the united states and china began a discussion for two key reasons. first, both the united states and china have an interest in maine teeny the long-term sustainability of the space environment, especially the creation of long-lived space debris. it is important that we discussed these issues bilaterally in order to prevent misperceptions and miscalculations. the united states plans to

continue to improve efforts with china. one may conclude a famous former secretary of state clinton said in her january 2012 statement, the long-term sustainability and security environment is at risk and unless we take action to reverse these trends, it could have damaging is for all of us. the united states working in conjunction with friends, allies and partners is pursuing a comprehensive approach to responding to challenges to the space environment. this response includes top-down political elements like a verse to develop an international code of conduct and bottom-up technical and events like long-term sustainability working group of u.n. copious. the ultimate object is of all these various efforts is the same. to reverse the trend is damaging our space environment and preserve the limited list benefit and promise of space for

all nations and future generations. thank you cannot forward to your questions. >> i guess i'll start out with one before opening it up. you discuss how the various -- whether the copious work is more in a technical level or code of conduct with top down. byrd is the gge fit in and how much do you gge and code of conduct negotiations overlap or mutually read worse on another? >> a couple points out not. i would say gge is focused on the political side of the house by the u.n. general ascent only number one and will eventually present a report to the secretary general and arafat

says he will will likely send not to the u.n. general assembly for their approval. second point, a review essay noted in my closing that we see these all as mutually reinforcing. it will reinforce the work of the code of conduct and the work we are doing copious. how are we going to ensure that happens? another good thing is you have the same group of people working these issues across the foreign. for example, in the u.s. representative, but i'm also the u.s. are presented for discussions with the e.u. on the code of conduct. my staff is working closely with the state euro devotions environment which is the lead to ensure everything we do is fully

consistent. kind of a long answer, but we believe as i said, different matter it's with one objective in the long-term sustainability security and space environment. the mac give your name and affiliation before u.s. your question. right here. i've got a microphone coming to you. [inaudible] >> that's an excellent question. a couple of points. the national space policy directs the u.s. government to look at issues associated with that debris removal. that is removing large pieces of debris in space.

but i always like to point out that there are serious political, technical, financial and legal issues associated with that. for example, one person's removal system could be another person's anti-satellite weapon. we become a review led by the national security council in the office of science and technology policy to implement the direction we received from the president to examine the fact of debris removal issue. we are early in that process, but we've had some limited engagements. there's a lot of issues pretty closely. this was for example i propose

the same like a vacuum cleaner. i'm not a real expert on the specific technologies. i'm much more focused on the policy, but there's also a number of other companies in the united states, but i think it's an portend given these kind of political, financial, technical and legal issues to make sure we understand the full applications. the u.s. government has not made a decision or does not have an official position, but we are studying it. >> bruce mcdonald, adjunct professor at johns hopkins sites. firstly, not take ologies. the agency finally two years ago has a program on the website to

discuss technologies they are lucky not very. my question for frank as i was in beijing in late january grasping for breath in and discussion system counterparts. i sense that with the chinese would be too much to say that they are favorably inclined, but they are less unfavorably inclined about the code of conduct and say a few years ago. have you found that in can you go to any more detail about what you see on the code of conduct vis-à-vis china over the next couple of years? >> let me make a couple points. let me go back to my statement. the united states wants to have dialogue with china for two reasons. one because we both have an interest in maine dating the long-term sustainability of the space environment.

many of you have heard the story, but some of you haven't. many of you know that our joint space operations center, which is located at vanderburgh airspace in california provides conjunction notifications to numerous government and satellite operators around the world, including china. so two satellites come close to each other for a piece of debris, we will notify the operator so they can move to prevent collisions. about three years ago when i first took this job, one of these conjunction notifications was rocked to me to sign off the embassy beijing. a piece of debris from china's 2007 was coming to their own operational satellites. my first inclination is why

reward bad behavior? then i caught myself thinking to the conclusion that that piece of debris hit china satellite could create our debris and endanger our satellite. i am sincere that the united states wants to have a knack for dialogue with china on this. bruce, i have seen over the last six or seven, and much more active approach with china on china's behalf in engaging the united states on the security issues. i've had some good top-level discussions with senior officials. china is coming to the view as well that is important to engage on issues. the proof will be in the pudding. as i said before, the united states believes it is really vital we have this dialogue not just to maintain what turned

sustainability, but also to prevent misperceptions and miscalculations. throughout the cold war, the united states and the soviet union did not agree a any issues, but there was an active dialogue on these types of issues, which helped manage misperceptions and miscalculations. again, this is an important area where ready to have discussion with china. >> chinese expressed -- sincere gratitude and it wasn't the usual propaganda. they generally seem grateful of those notifications. be back listed to and and respond to them. [inaudible] how much buy-in is there from

countries like brazil and india and the others you mentioned you have a lateral discussion with? thank you. >> i wanted to raise the subject that the u.s. is going to deploy 14 more centers and alaska. good mention nevers to engage the chinese given the inherent capabilities of strategic missile intercept bears and the fact they are right on pitcher jack reoffending chinese second-strike attack on the united states. it's this going to complicate efforts to constructively engage china? >> thank you for both of those questions. let me start with yours and i'll get to greg's question. here's what we hear around the world and i've been to every

continent with the exception of antarctica over the past two years. generally when you look at the code of conduct, it's generally except the bull. i mean, most major nations say it looks pretty good. there's some additional changes we would like to see of colleagues from russia, but even colleagues from russia say this is basically the u.n. general assembly resolution anyways the russia proposed. so on the substance, there is a general agreement. the real challenge with the process has been a lack of outrage and the need to get the process together. i think that's the result of a couple things. the european external action service has just stood up, but the good news is this, they have just appointed a new special representative for not

alliteration and disarmament. the former direct your security policy as well as the former head of the nato wmd center has a lot of expertise in multilateral diplomacy. he and i have had consultations in the inside consultations with numerous nations around the world. he understands the challenge here is that the process and he is determined to get the process right. so that's the real key challenge with the code. with regards to your question, secretary hagel said the decision was driven by the increasing threat from north korea. we have a strategic dialogue that my boss acting undersecretary got a more runs with counterpart. missile defense is bases on the

agenda. a couple clients. it clearly states we do not seek to undermine strategic stability with russia or china. they are not directed against china. we will continue to engage on strategic issues. it won't just be space, but it is going to be nuclear issues. we want to brabant this possibility of misperceptions and miscalculations. i know the chinese have some concerns. we don't think those concerns are warranted, but will continue to discuss and engage with them on the issue. >> two in the back ratepayer.

>> frank, i really appreciate to travel the average office status and how do you envision budgetary furloughs affect your offices were? >> wal-mart from right behind her. >> steve kornberg from osd. man is a little bit longer, so pardon me for a second. i like to ask you about the vacation and what you see as the top one or two, for example, strengthening a legally, technically are trying to get more people to sign up to them or strengthening the u.s. mitigation practices or simply making more of an effort domestically to adhere to those

practices or perhaps something else. what are your best hopes for increasing mitigation top one or two? >> first question about the budget will have to see. until they say there's no money. with regards to mitigation, let me start by saying the u.s. domestically has one of the best records with regard to debris mitigation. this is one of the issues at the international level that we're looking not in the u.n. committee on peaceful uses of outer space. we actually have a working group on debris mitigation. reineke from my staff is pleading not. i'm not play the technical expert here. i know they are looking at-bat in in detail at when they finalized the report in 2014,

there will be a couple recommendations. at this point, i don't know what list of technologies will be there, but were looking pretty actively internationally in the u.s. is a good track record here domestically. >> any other questions in the back? about the code particularly, can you talk about what to expect from the may meeting. it's an open-ended session and her are you hoping for a particular outcome if not in may as scheduled multilateral meetings to get their? could you talk about why -- seemingly an assumption it's not

amenable to a legally binding arms control and could you just give us a little explanation as to why smart. international engagement consistent with non-legally binding is supposed to treaties? >> two very good questions. i seaway rose higher. as i mentioned in response to jennifer's question, that it's been a weak point of the process and the european union understand that. what they are going to do is they've set up a series of open-ended consultations. the first meeting will be this may. what i understand the semi-discussion with officials of the objective is to discuss key issues and concepts within the code.

i understand it will probably produce another draft based on those discussions and that will be a series of additional open-ended consultations. i don't know exactly how many. i think it will depend how long it takes to get critical mass with key nations. with regards to your question on legally binding, the president's national space policy does talk about legally binding arms control. the previous administration's policy says the united states is not due back. this policy goes back to the long-standing principle with regard to space arms control from the united states that says the united states will consider arms control proposal and concepts that are affect newly

verifiable, equitable in the interest of the united states and its allies. the challenge with arms control is how do you verify these capabilities, which is very, very difficult to do. the other issue has been the issue of how you define a weapon in outer space. that is an issue people have been going back and forth for over 40 years. my general view of there's a wonderful book called politics is the security. one of the things he argues in this book is that wine there had been major agreements and successes with regards to space security, it has occurred when there is an intersection between

security and preserving the space environment. for example in the late 50s and 60s the united states and the soviet union tested nuclear weapons in outer space. they did it and damaged their own satellites. we had the limited test ban treaty in 1963. the limited test ban treaty is an environmental treaty, but also a security treaty. the on debris mitigation guidelines is another example. so what were trying to do in the obama administration approaches to focus on the intersection between the purity and sustainability. the >> sorry, right here.

[inaudible] two salient issues with the current policy in one as we are proceeding the block has been canceled, officially 14 more gb eyes. these are ready to shoot is that. i've deployed in their current configuration i'm sure china were to deploy these weapons they would say do another whole lot of doubt about that as far as verifiability. it's not really uncertain at all. meanwhile, the code of conduct language has evolved in one iteration after another of not

only being put in any impediment to the testing and development ideas and anti-satellite weapon, that permissive end of their use under the inherent right of self-defense although no one would say anything a non-binding code of conduct would ever supersede the u.n. charter. specifically in the context of destroying satellites unless it is setting a precedent, providing an affirmative permission to use self-defense and obviously therefore to develop them in process than any would be fully tested without having had any tests. it seems we have abandoned any hope of not having a future in which many nations will follow the united states example,

possess at least anti-satellite weapons if not other web and the navy stationed in space. >> that's a good question. as you rightly note, many systems are dual capable systems and now is one of the real reasons the united states has been so critical of the russian chinese bp 10 bt because you can't verify the system. the focus really needs to be on actions and one of the key elements of the code is section 4.2 or 4.3 that basically says nation to the greatest extent possible will refrain from action that create long-lived debris in outer space. the problem i have and i mentioned this verification. maybe in the future will be able to get around the issue of verification and solve that

problem, the right now we have not seen any arms control treaties are proposals that the criteria laid out by president obama and the national space strategy. [inaudible] >> what i would say is that all nuclear arms control agreement, a key element is visited verifiable? i would argue the street treaty in previous treaties are objectively verifiable. i would argue clearly it's not effectively verifiable. >> we had a bit of a discussion about this before the event started, but i wonder if in a row that used to be somewhat unto itself, although i suppose

missile defense and nuclear weapons certainly eat on space has cybersecurity concerns and her cybertc beyond, how do they plan to issues given satellites are used for a lot of transitions? >> you don't necessarily have to attack a satellite space to disable a satellite. cyberis another way to go after these issues. there is a definitely a entered discussions with department of defense and other key elements of the u.s. government. for example, in addition to the space gge come a separate information security and i'm close contact with my colleague who sits on that as well.

[inaudible] or are they going to be kept separate? >> for the time being, they will be kept separate, but as things evolve in the future, that could change. >> bruce has another question. we still have time for some more. >> bruce donald again. we saw last year on the code of conduct to some voices emerge in the congress that were opposed. not just in congress, but outside as well by giving arguments such as though this is really a treaty. they short-circuit the senate's role, so on and so forth. then of course we got into election mode in all discussions focused on not. and now we are in the new year.

i wanted to ask if you could give your son is any readings you taken what you're sent is that the attitudes in the senate, on the hill towards the possibility of a space code of conduct this year and also how you might raise on to those arguments you've heard. >> good question, bruce. let me start by saying we're consulting closely with congress on the code of conduct. i spend a lot of my time within the relevant committees. as you mentioned, there's some concern among some members with regards to the code, but in close coronation we are kind of aligning many concerns some half. with regards to senate by sending consent, it's really important would not create a legally binding obligation on the united states. it's really not in the international agreement.

it's also important to know there are a number of these tapes of politically -- political agreements. the bush administration can looted u.n. debris mitigation guidelines in 2007. in 2002, the code of conduct. the vienna document concluded in may 299 unmilitary transparency in europe. so there's a lot precedent for this. another question we get on the international side of the house is why didn't the e.u. do this within the u.n.? one of the challenges is the code deals with security issues, but also assisting ability issues. there is no one for him within the u.n. that deals with these

issues in a comprehensive manner. for example, conference on disarmament deals for security issues by you and cope u.n. deals with sustainability issues. so the reason you talk to the e.u., that you need to address this issue in a manner because it's very difficult to draw clear distinctions between security and sustainability issues. for ample, conducting the tests in space is a security issue, but also a sustainability issue as well. back to the first part of your question as we consult closely with the congress on this. we are addressing concerns that have been raised and i want to come to the final point that this does not create a legal obligation and i think that is

really the key point and that's usually the threshold between the executive branch and congress on these types of issues. >> if i could follow-up on not. there's a number of legally binding agreements the u.s. centers in two that don't require consent. is that ruled out in the case of the code? >> is a politically binding agreement. >> i guess we have time for a follow-up question. >> what is special about space environment that makes arms-control not verifiable as compared with space -- sea, air or land. what is special about space arms control doesn't work there.

>> let me ask you this question. how can you verify from a technology point of view that what is on top of the satellite you just don't know. the technology is not there. all of the verification experts that i've spoken to his base with the current technology we have. it would be very difficult to tell the senate and where we negotiate an arms control treaty submitted to the advice and consent of the senate. we would have to say this is effectively verifiable and what the experts tell me and i'm not a technical expert, but what they tell me is they cannot effectively say this is effectively verifiable with the current technologies we have. >> on not know, that to thank frank for coming today for sharing the views on the future

and engagement not outer space diplomacy in the second term. thank you all for coming. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

>> a discussion about what dates are doing on the issue of abortion. from "washington journal," this is 45 minutes. >> esmer deprez covers state and local government issues. >> thanks for having me. >> host: north dakota governor signs the u.s. abortion limit. esmer deprez, what did he sign and why is this significant? >> guest: the governor signed a bill called a heart beat and. this is effectively a ban six weeks into a pregnancy as soon as the fetus heart he can be detect it. that is the narrowest win no of any band that we haven't states right now. earlier we saw a 12 week ban on this goes even earlier. is the earliest of any law we

have. >> host: there's two other aspects relating to the fetuses that can't be aborted. what are those why is that significant? >> guest: there's actually for abortion related pieces of legislation that got past, so we have the 60 and. we have privileges on what's abortion doctors and that's maybe even more threatening than some ways to the clinic north dakota's still has in terms of shutting it down. the third one we have is a ban on abortions sought for genetic abnormalities like down's syndrome and a fourth is going to go to the voters. the governor did not need to weigh in on this one. it is what is called a personhood resolution, which would essentially endow a fertilized egg with the rights and privileges of a living human

be in those measures seek to outlaw abortion completely. >> and bloomberg business make you look what happens to a woman in north dakota who want some abortion. what happens to women who want an abortion there? dishy have other options? >> guest: is important to know these laws haven't taken effect yet. they will take effect until august 1st and we definitely think there will be plenty of legal challenges. often what happens is they don't take effect until years or down the line or they get thrown out completely. north dakota women have that one clinic still up in the state to go to if they need an abortion. the one clinic is in fargo, which is all the way east. already we see north dakota women leaving the state in other

parts of it to get abortions, so you have states like wyoming and south dakota and canada that women can drive two. people can go out of state to get the abortion. there's different laws depending on states. south dakota would require you to take two trips, so it comes down to personal economics whether a woman has a car and can afford to take the time off work and get childhood care to state that abortion elsewhere. >> joining us for a local to this day thompson, news dirt at public radio north dakota. >> good morning to you. >> host: how has it been received on the ground in bismarck? >> guest: we have a lot of people who say it's good passiveness, but a lot of people say to stay in north dakota. it split from the call, e-mail us and people have been talking

to. >> host: how did this get to the legislature? >> guest: the governor stayed out until the end. it was through the efforts of the pro-life legislators, the people who are antiabortion who opposed the legislation through and as you see, there's been a number of bills and not good, some that might be a little bit contradictory. however, they were basically saying to everybody who would listen, it's time to challenge roe v. wade, so let's get this passed. there were debates on the house and senate floors. they did pass by that much. if the governor decided to veto, they would not have, but the governor decided to stick the state. prairie public radio in bismarck, north dakota. our other guest joining us from new york, esmer deprez mentions

we may see legal challenges. what are the next dictations? >> caller: we will see legal challenges as soon as everything settles down, bills have been signed. they are now going to become law august 1st. i know of two affairs and somehow either in state court to have a federal court issue a stand-alone law. there's another avenue and that is to refer to laws and that's been talked about quite open my right now if you get get a referral going, once you get the language approved that could be out to refer the bills, you could get enough signatures to stay from going in to effect august 1st. that is also being talked about. >> host: tell us about your governor, a little more details on how this affects them politically in your state.

>> guest: is very interesting. from what my intel is telling me, this may have weakened him a bit. he may have played too far to the right and there are people in the republican caucus in the legislature who are questioning what he has done. if i could just take a moment and say they are telling me they've also passed a constitutional amendment that will go on the ballot in 2014 that is kind of vague amendment that says salé should be protected from birth until death at the moment of conception until death. they were saying the governor could have done that instead we will veto the other bills, to see what happens in 2014 when the amendment of other people. he went further in there are republicans questioning whether or not he was too far to the

right. >> host: dave thompson at public radio north dakota. thank you for talking to us so early this morning. esmer deprez, something mr. thompson mentioned. what is said and what is it due? >> guest: typically, personhood measures seek to endow fertilized eggs with rights and privileges of living human being. it effectively equates abortion with murder and thereby outlaw said in way. we seen this play out in mississippi. voters already weighed in on this issue about two years ago when they rejected a personhood measure in colorado it is, twice and then recheck it. if north dakota voters approve a personhood measure 2014, that would be the first state to have such a thing. it's important to no personhood measures are pushed typically by the mainstream and i abortion

groups. this is something new, something we see that are not necessarily constitutional and not by the mainstream antiabortion movement don't see this as a good way to tackle the heart of roe v. wade and to get abortion no longer possible in this country. >> host: you mention arkansas. what are other states we see more conservative measures passing on to law? >> guest: is seeing a ton of see that today's, record numbers of lives passing on the state level. typically we see the 20 week bands are popular. i can't obviously be an abortion at 20 weeks, a little bit earlier than the standard of 22 to 24 weeks had in roe v. wade.

we have the bell like north dakota. other states that require doctors to have privileges, which depending where you live can be hard to obtain. hospitals don't want to get into the political side of whether abortion is obtainable in the state. mississippi passed last year and it's really challenging, getting challenged in court in mississippi is another one for there is one abortion clinic laughed. they may have to shut down. another pop the other while we've seen is to require abortion in ambulatory surgery centers and those are certain hallway requiring a certain requirement that sinks in closets and stuff like that. michigan passed a law last year

and that is going to be very expensive for providers to conform to and therefore put them out of business that way. >> host: was go to the phone. hi, mark. >> caller: yeah, i just wanted to say that i'm only saying that republicans had the double standard about a bigger government, beget they want to take up women's race to have control of the body and just getting really frustrated cnes change everything that don't need to be changed. it's just really getting frustrating. >> host: esmer deprez, how are they jennet looking at the issue of abortion and the 2012 and what are the platform beliefs of the party?

>> guest: at the federal level it's hard to enact laws. republicans who try to stay away from talking about abortion because at the federal level were not going to see a lot of action. we did see it, then the 2012 campaign with comments that got republicans into trouble. of course those are all related. we've seen yet cavity, the state level. but the caller spoke to was an argument put forward by pro-abortion rights groups that the government really should be in the business of telling a woman what to do and when she's faced with a medical decision. on the other hand you have republicans saying we have an interest in protecting women's and an interest in protecting the fetus and therefore they passed these laws and push these laws based on those beliefs.

>> host: republican lock collar. hi, rick. >> caller: is great. >> host: hi, greg. go ahead. >> caller: thank you for having me speak. but i have to say is i think this is so sad. it is just tearing away the right of the most vulnerable in the most innocent for furthering a political ad and keeping popular with the liberals and democrats in a very self-righteous, selfish way that is totally contrary to the bible. it sat in a see a president that site so strong for the count right in using kid onstage as a ploy when there's thousands upon

thousands of innocent vulnerable children in killed and is totally contrary that in the end, not you, ma'am, and your constituents, but god will prevail. >> host: she is a journalist. is that a message you would give people who support abortion rights? call code that is absolutely a message i would give two of them. >> host: was go to esmer deprez for a response. the political and personal beliefs are caller was talking about. >> guest: this issue divides america like few others. the caller spoke to beliefs that many people have in north dakota most recently when these bills are debated on the floors there were lawmakers decided scripture

and the often save religious beliefs for wanting to protect the unborn child or the fetus and therefore this is a source of heated political disagreement and religion definitely plays into this issue. >> host: let's look at the gallup poll on american opinions about abortion and roe v. wade, the court case. would you like to hear it overturn its 1973 decision concerning abortion are not? 53% do not overturn. 18% have no opinion. the no opinion level is the highest of the certainty reported on the question and trends dating back to 1989. any thoughts on how the public opinion has shifted or stayed the same over the years? >> guest: polls have showed this has always been a divisive

issue and you get into labels they really don't describe the full feelings of a lot of americans. you have the pro-choice label versus pro-life and many people are in between and can see the argument on both sides. i don't think we are going to see a strong majority of opinions, anytime on either side. >> host: abortion should not be allowed after the baby is alive. hi, duane. >> caller: hello, how are you. >> host: good. >> caller: this was the thing that passed in north dakota, good because as has mentioned it could pick it up in the court and possibly challenge. i personal opinion is i believe in the bright, liberty and

pursuit of happiness, particularly those of the young board and i would like to see this get challenged in court and hopefully get out of because life is particularly for the unborn and i do feel that abortion indicates convenience. this is completely selfish. you are talking about the laws regarding and i understand that in those issues need to be done with delicately because it's very emotional on all sides. however, in the case of aborting her convenience, and that is just a little bit selfish and we need to consider the young in those matters. >> host: esmer deprez, are caller talk about wanting to take this issue up.

just go right, that so we see a north dakota. when the governor signed the bill, he was very clear in his intention that we don't know if this was constitutional referring to the sixa karp pete van, that maybe the high court will want to take this out. it is important to know that mainstream abortion groups are pushing the six-week bands. i mean, what roe v. wade told us was that woman has a right to terminate pregnancy until viability, which the previous caller, twitter a reference 222924 weeks. a six-week ban goes far beyond what the court has deemed law of the land. mainstream abortion groups don't see the ideological makeup of the court favorable, which is the reason they don't typically push bands like six-week ban because they don't think it's a lo