these issues because these issues so much reflector own history and who we are as a people. the world is always going to be a complicated, messy place, but it is also a place that's capable of change. when with going back to the years with marx, where if you look at where latin america was in the '70s they were almost all military governments. today there are very few military governments. if you look at the nations of eastern europe and the soviet union in the '80s, was there the sense that it would never change. it did change. you look at south africa. you look at what happened in northern ireland. we are now, this panel and these years they're dealing with the places that have been the most intractable, countries in the middle east and countries in asia where you have not had a tradition of civil society and you haven't had the noings of free press and where women have been held down for decades or centuries and we're now in the

process in the early stage of trying to figure out how those things change. change is a messy business and it's not a linear process. we can't force it to happen, but we can help empower people who are the agents of change. that's, to me, the message of this day and it's the message of what drl is about. we can't do it alone and we are not always going to be the most popular people within the state department, but it's getting better and there's a lot around the building including bill burns and including the secretary who have made it clear that these are priorities to them, but these are issues that all of us have to keep working on and we won't succeed if the others in this room don't help keep pushing us to do the right thing. >> lorne, you had something you wanted to say? >> what mike said is really important. it's come a long way, and frankly, as i said before, 30 years ago you wouldn't have heard about these issues. the standards have gone up, but it's also important to remember, i tell my staff, number one, it's their country, not ours,

and it's their fight, not ours. sometimes you have to have an un-american virtue called patience when you do this work. we are down to very difficult country, the irans, the belaruses, the chinas that one day we hope will turn out better and it will take a while. as difficult as it is to see the images on tv -- >> or not. or not see them 37. >> or not see them. >> and this is why it's called democracy, human rights and labor. while you're working to help thosen side who want to change the structure and make it a democracy, you are helping those that are penalized for making a democrat see and that's why this bureau is so important. i often say nobody cared whoes of or mike posner or whatever, we have the united states government if we can use it skillfully to bring to bear and

for all of our problems in whatever decade, that means a lot to a lot of people around the world. >> thank you. >> paul, did you want to say something? tim, did you want to say something? >> i think you did, didn't you? i am told -- deputy burns i think is really close, isn't he? he's on his way. he's -- he's close, right? he's very, very close. i have a lot to ask, and i'm going to go back and give mike trouble again. it's a lot of fun. he asked me -- this is what you get for asking me to do this, by the way. also, i want to go back to tomorrow, because i don't -- what's unclear to me is with regard to the arab spring which is so at the forefront of today's news is how -- i don't know that you address the cultural issue as much and your role at saban center, it seems

to me that because you're not at the state department, you might have a more vigorous approach to cultural issues, vis-a-vis the arab countries, couldn't you? >> i think it's important to distinguish there are a lot of things that over the years have been called cultural issues that aren't human rights issues. >> right. >> and global norms have shifted and we've been talking about that. so i think expectations in these countries have shifted and we have more data in the human rights and development outcomes and we have more data about the relationship between democracy and political participation and development outcomes. and so making the argument that on the basis of cultural specificity or on the basis of religious tradition that certain rights are less important or don't apply, i think have very,

very shaky ground to stand on. increasingly shaky ground and going back to the comment made earlier about arab exceptionalism and it was the latest in a long string of exceptionalisms. we used to have debates in the academy and policy world about whether the catholic countries of latin america were culturally resistant to democracy. we used to have the same arguments about asia as herald noted. so i think that we really need to set aside the notion that this is about culture and embrace the fact that these human rights norms are universal norm, and i think one of the things that we worked hard to do in the administration is that i would give mike and secretary clinton a lot of credit for, standing on the universality of these principles and not making

it about us or american tradition, but it's about the fact that these are norms. >> i am told that i'm going to have you introduce him. deputy burns has now arrived. thank heaven, and thank you. >> thanks. thank you. [ applause ] >> well, first of all, i want to thank the panelists for the whole day. it's been fantastic and to bring us home we have deputy secretary bill burns who is a fantastic leader and he's a consummate diplomat and one who is both principled and practical and huge supporter of the work we've been doing and i'm delighted to introduce bill burns. [ applause ] >> thank you very much, mike. it really is a pleasure for me to join all of you. i want to thank mike and drl for

organizing this very important look back at these three transformational periods in u.s. foreign policy. at a moment when values and interests are so deeply entwined i want to thank mark posner for your irreplaceable contribution to u.s. national security and under mike's leadership, drl has defined and redefined the human rights agenda for the 21st century. i also want to thank the panelists for their unique perspectives on the evolution of human rights policy. over the past 30 years i've had the privilege of working with virtually every panelist over the course of today, tom pickering, elliott abraham, tammy wittis and many other remarkable friends and colleagues. i know it is much easier -- >> we're going to cut away from the last few minutes of this event to go live now to capitol

hill for a hearing on a recent report about weather satellite programs run by the national oceanic and atmospheric administration or noaa. it's held by two house subcommittees on science, space and technology. this is covered on c-span3. >> it will come to order, and this subcommittee the energy environment. good afternoon. first, i apologize for running late. i was on the floor, and please forgive me, my colleagues as well as all our witnesses for running late and i appreciate you all's patience. welcome to today's joint hearing entitled continuing oversight of the satellite programs and an update on jpss. in front of you are packets containing the written testimony, biographies and truth and testimony disclosures for today's witnesses. before you get started, since

this is a joint hearing involving two subcommittee, i want to explain how we'll operate procedurally so the members will understand how the question and answer period will be handled. as always, we will alternate between the majority and minority, oui before recognizing the member for a second round of questions, we'll recognize those members who were present here at the gavel in order of seniority on the full committee and those coming in after the gavel will be recognized in the order of arrival. i now recognize myself for five minutes for an opening statement. this is the ninth hearing this community has held on either the national environmental satellite system impose program or its successor, the jpss program since 2003 that does not even include hearings related to geostationary environmental

satellite and weather satellites in general. this level of oversight continued by both republican and democratic administrations as well as congress' is indicative of how important weather satellites are to our society and to members of congress. without both polar and geostationary satellites our weather forecasting ability would be severely compromised. because of the importance of these programs it is frustrating to watch them struggle. the original satellite polo program impose side supposed to cost the taxpayer $6.5 million. that was supposed to give the taxpayer six satellites operating in three separate orbits carrying 13 instruments which were launched around 2010. instead, we now have a program that will only purchase three satellites and who will operate in either one orbit and cost twice as much. to make matters worse, one of those satellites is a research

satellite that was never intended to serve operation alley. noaa is not depended upon european partners for data from the mid-morning orbit and it's anyone's guess what data the department of defense was supplied from the early morning orbit. even more frustrating is the program still does not have a baseline cost or schedule. i understand noaa is working to developing this, but as they point out, the ground segment is past the critical design review. all of the contracts aside. jpss one are 60 to 95% complete and the program will be a clone of the mpp bus, all indications of a mature program. to quote, the gao report not having a baseline, quote, makes it more difficult for program officials to make informed decisions for program overseers to understand if the program is

on track to successfully deliver expectant functionality on cost and schedule, end quote. i understand they developed the life cycle cost cap of $12.9 million, but with an impeding gap in coverage that limits schedule flexibility. the only option they have to manage program risk is to diminish capability and i'm also concerned that this $12.9 billion cap is 1.7 billion more than the independent cost estimate conducted just last year. i look forward, and i know it decides to cover the shortfall in future challenges and since i'm here last fall, the program has grown to $1 billion as a result of extending the program by four years. the addition of free flyers, contract transitions and a work slowdown because of the 2011 budget. also, the schedule has slipped

approximately three months. one of the most concerning findings from the georeport on jpss pertains not to cost increases or skchedule gap, but to the effect of the entire orbiting constellation. they point out that because of uncertainties in dod's early-morning orbit as well as the european's orbit, and not just noaa's. after the 2010 decision to split up the program, noaa was only given responsibility for the afternoon orbit, but it is clear that the parties need to coordinate to identify synergies and to mitigate risks in the entire constellation. those, on the other hand, seem to be making progress to delivering the spacecraft and cost and schedule. this wasn't always the case as the program was significantly

descoped in 200 and in order to prevent cost growth and schedule slips. still, there are some findings in the gao report that require monitoring such as the rate at which the program is burning through reserves and the fidelity of the schedules. most concerned, however, is the gao finding that there is only a 48% chance that the program will meet its 2015 launch date and that there say 37% chance that there will be a gap in the availability of two operational series satellites. a gap in one program is bad enough. a gap in both programs would and could be -- would and would be catastrophic. i would be remiss if i did not at least mention the senate appropriations proposal to transfer the weather satellite programs from noaa to nasa. i hope noaa and nasa can provide their thoughts on this proposal specifically how it would impact the current programs as well as

the rest of their agencies. i know these oversight hearings can sometimes be tough, but considering noaa's current position, the house may be one of the agency's few friends and the last friend -- i hope not. the administration has proposed moving noaa into the department of the interior and they've proposed gutting the satellite from noaa effectively removing $5 million of the $5 billion budget. it is typically forthcoming with information. unfortunately, this is not the case with questions the committee posed to noaa last fall after the last hearing. although we sent questions on october 17th, we did not receive a response until june 7th, eight months later. i certainly hope noaa will be more responsive to the questions that we'll have after this hearing. now i recognize my good friend from new york for his opening statement.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to our witnesses. this committee has been holding hearings to ask critical questions of these satellite programs sense at least 2003. we have seen cycles of disaster as when we witnessed the jpss and its prior-imposed skies doubling costs before the entire enterprise was redesigned and rebaselined. we have witnessed herculean efforts to restructure acquisition plans to get problems under control and frankly, despite these efforts we have not had much to chair about with jpss and even gozar has been a source of concern. however, my senses is both of these programs are on sustainable paths. that said, it appears that an auditor at gao can build a good 20-year career out of simply tracking the weather satellite program and that is a sorry state of affairs. the group that sits before us

today is not responsible for the mess. rather, we are counting on them to get us out of a mess they inherited. it is our job to probe the answers they offer, assess whether the programs appear robust and offer whatever advice and support we can to get these satellites launched and operating. believe me, if we could have halted these acquisitions, we could have. -- would have, but these satellites and instruments are too important to our nation to abandon this program. i want to come away from this hearing with an understanding that there is solid planning going on to fill any data gaps. i want a firmer grasp of where remaining risks lie in each of these programs and i want to know there are reasonable strategies for dealing with those risks. in short, i want to leave with

confidence that the management teams running the jpss and the satellite programs are indeed up to the challenges. in closing, mr. chair, i want to express my hope that we not leap to conclusions either good or bad about either of these programs. we should be cautious about these programs, but it appears that nothing staff learned in preparing for this hearing and nothing in gao's testimony lead us to condemn either program or to conclude that things are off the tracks again. i thank our witnesses for being here today and sharing information and providing the sort of in-depth discussion that is absolutely required and i look forward to their testimony today. thank you, mr. chair. thank you. a yield back. >> thank you. i appreciate. i don't know if we're off track and it's one of the most bipartisan communities in this very bipartisan with the overall

full committee and appreciate that, and i just want to get some information and both sides to do just the same. just as we've got to do with the question and answer period we'll recognize not only the chairs and ranking members of both subcommittees before we go to the rest of the members of the committees and as i mentioned earlier, we will now recognize doctor andy harris from maryland for his statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good afternoon. i'd like to thank the witnesses for joining us to discuss noaa's environmental satellite issues. the second hearing that we've had on this congress alone and i understand this committee has had many more over the last several congresses. and with this much oversight we hope to see some improve ams and however, with every step forward it seems we're taking two steps back. the launch of the mpp satellite

was certainly an achievement and noaa and nasa are to be applauded for the launch and the satellite was five years late and some of the instruments are not work as well as they should be. the joint contracts for jpss have finally been transferred from the predecessor program and nasa and noaa are making progress, but the threat of a data gap remains and the cost of the program is increased by $1 billion, squeezing funds available for important ground and air-based weather systems. the geostationary operational satellite moves along, but noaa is burning through the funding reserves quicker than anticipated and risk has still not been reduced. today there say possibility of the gap around the same time as well as the possibility of an jpss gap. as we heard several months ago, the data by the national weather service comes in satellite data. the prospects of a jpss coverage

gap is troubling enough for itself, but the possibility of a concurrent gap in coverage represents a truly scary scenario that significantly threatens u.s. lives and property. given these difficulties, perhaps it's time to seek a new paradigm for weather forecasting. the current procurement process may simply not be working and time is rung out, but today there's little interest in pursuing alternative solutions. while there are no easy answers to this dilemma and the choices we make may require significant evaluation and we must accept the status quo cannot continue. i look forward to an informative discussion and i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you, dr. harris. the chair recognizes my good friend from north carolina, mr. miller for five minutes. >> thank you. i want to thank both chairs of the subcommittees for holding the hearing today on two satellite programs, jpss and

gozar that have been part of the responsibility for years. i say fortunately because the attention of oversight does not gravitate to programs that are running smoothly. it gravitates to programs that are a problem and these programs have been a problem. although -- but they need to work. though seldom a headline grabber, it's important to reinstate the importance of the satellite programs for the lives of americans, the daily life. satellite-based weather, they tell us whether to carry an umbrella on any given day. we're going fly planes, what crops to plant, how to plan military missions and when to take cover from deadly storms. when they work and when we get timely and accurate information we are safer and more prosperous, but when satellite programs falter, we find that lives, property infrastructure

on economic health are at risk. during my tenure as chairman of the investigation and oversight subcommittee, we except a very close eye on the programs, particularly the joint polar satellite system or jpss recognizing that poor management and wasteful spending put more than federal jobs and money at stake. until recently, we have been profoundly disappointed and even now the data gate -- gap, that threatens our forecasting capabilities is just inexcusable, but today i'm cautiously optimistic that we are finally on the right path that the administration has put into the work that the administration's put into reorganizing and rescoping jpss has put that program on the path to mission success. time will tell, but until then, until time does tell us, we will focus on the real and viable options we need to use in order to get us through a difficult

period. at the same time we need to keep a watchful eye on noaa's progress on the geostationary operation allal environmental system, and it tracks weather across the western hemisphere. while the program has not suffered from the same mismanagement and mistakes that have plagued the polar satellite program, we have seen the preliminary cost of the satellite has doubled and as a result, noaa has found it necessary to cut in half the number of satellites that they've ordered. even so, we remain cautious and to ensure that this program remains within the budget and on schedule. i don't claim to know how much a weather satellite should cost. i don't -- in my normal life buy satellites. as with jpss, we need to take a

hard look at the necessary funding levels and reserves required to keep overall costs down in the project online, and i look forward to hearing our witnesses from jao again, noaa, and nasa to discuss how these relevant agencies can keep these programs on track and in the process, fulfill the promise of keeping the economy more efficient and productive. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> thank you very much, mr. miller. i thought you bought satellites a week or so ago? >> that was just bread and milk. >> i was confused, i guess. at this time i would like to introduce the first panel of witnesses. the first witnesses, honorable kath ren sullivan, ph.d. the assistant secretary of commerce for environmental prediction and the deputy administration at noaa.

the second witness is mr. marcus watkins, the director of the joint agency satellite division at nasa and our final witness is mr. david a. pounder, the director of information technology management issues for the gao. i thank you all for being here. as our witnesses should know, spoken testimony is limited to five minutes each after which members of the committee have five minutes each to ask questions. your written testimony will be included of the record of the hearing and the complexities of the issues today i would allow you to go after five minutes if you need to, if you can continue to make it within five minutes please do so. i'm very proud of the colleagues for keeping them in five minutes. the practice of the subcommittee on investigations and oversight to receive testimony under oath. when we use the practice today as well.

do any of you have any objection to take an oath? >> let the record reflect that the witness withes were all willing to take the oath in shaking their head from side to side. do any of you have counsel here today? >> all three, again indicated shaking their head saying no, so let the record reflect the witnesses do not have counsel. if you would please stand and raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing, but the truth so help you god? you may be seated. let the record reflect that all of the witnesses have taken the oath. i now recognize our first witness, dr. katherine sullivan of national oceanic and atmospheric administration. dr. sullivan, you have five minutes. thank you, ma'am.

>> thank you. good afternoon, chairman brown and chairman harris and members of the subcommittees. you have my written statement that gives you much more detail. i would like this afternoon to highlight a few key points. first, significant progress has been made and both are in the jpss programs. it goes on remain on schedule for launching in fiscal year 2016 and nasa is working extremely well together and effectively and this has led to the completion of key program milestones and substantial demonstrable progress toward the launch date. for jpss, substantial progress has been made before i launched this committee and most notably, the successful launch of the p.p. satellite. while there's more work that needs to be done for the gozar program, jpss has come a long way. success, noaa's priority is to maintain the life and property saving weather forecasts and watches and warnings that our nation depends upon.

to do this we must maintain schedule on costs so that each satellite can remain ready for launch. meeting this priority requires established and stable requirements, strong effective management with rigorous, independent checks and stable funding. we've achieved the stable requirements and we're committed to strong, effective management and we have independent checks in place and we're working hand in hand with this committee to ensure that funding remains as stable as possible in this challenging, fiscal environment. nobody cares about the products and the satellites provide and the services they support more than noaa. they're essential to our own mission performance and important to a very long list of government, private sector and academic customers. as every successful business owner know, it's essential to understand the customer in order to ensure that you're meeting their needs. noaa is the critical link between the observations and users and continuity of the service is the most important