location ten times a second. again, my understanding of the ultimate roll out of dsrc would be completely anonymous and that's my understanding anyway. presumably it should be, you could argue it would be superior to cellular in terms of preservation of privacy. but that would only be in the context of cellular would have presumably an opt in or opt out proposition. but for safety, i suspect it would be the same protocol as dsrc. i will have to check the slide again. shouldn't show a difference i don't think. >> thank you all for a great conversation. and thank you guys for joining us.

[ applause ] thursday morning we visit salem oregon for the next stop on the 50 capitals tour. governor kate brown our guest on the bus during washington journal starting 9:30 a.m. eastern. now a hearing on space and national security. members of the house armed services subcommittee heard testimony from general john raymond, commander of the air force base command and other defense department officials. this is about 40 minutes.

>> good afternoon, this is -- welcome, everybody. this hearing of the subcommittee on strategic forces. and our hearing on the 2019 budget request for national security space programs. unfortunately, as everybody in the room now knows, we were interrupted by votes and we're an hour behind starting off. so for the sake of not keeping you all here all night, i'm going to submit my opening ranking member told me that he's going to submit his opening statement for the record, too, so we'll go straight to your opening statements and ask each of you have five minutes. your entire statement will be accepted into the record. if you summarize it, we'll get to questions and answers and finish this session and go to the classified section immediately after that. with that, thank you for being here, i know it takes a lot of time and energy to prepare for these things but it really helps us, we need to hear your

thoughts at this time of year. with that, i'll recognize general raymond, well, first let me recognize, we have general raymond with us today, betty sapp from nro, and colonel rapuano. how do you pronounce that? >> rapuano. >> we'll start with general raymond for your opening statement. you're recognized. >> thank you. general rogers, ranking member cooper, distinguished members of the subcommittee, i'm honored to appear before this committee. this time it's my first time being able to testify in front of you in my dual hat as the air force space commander, joint forces commander, component of u.s. strategic command. i have the absolute distinct privilege of leading and representing both the air force and joint space personnel who underpin successful global operations for our joint force in our nation. as i have stated previously, i am increasingly convinced that we are at a strategic inflection point and we must accelerate our preparations to protect and

defend against a conflict that begins in or extends to space. and that's exactly what we're doing. today's space capabilities are the foundation of power projection and fuel or joint force lethality. a high-end conflict may begin in our domain which will require us to fight for space superiority. as a component of united states strategic command, i would be remiss if i didn't echo the words of my boss, general hayden, to say our force is fully prepared to deter, and if necessary, respond and win if deterrence were to fail. as our national security strategy states, the united states considers unfettered access to and freedom to operate in space to be a vital interest. our national defense strategy clearly articulates that the central challenge to the united states' prosperity and security is the reemergence of long-term strategic competition. space is a war-fighting domain, just like air, land, and sea.

this budget is aligned with the national defense strategy to meet our war-fighting imperatives necessary to compete, deter, and win. this budget marks a bold shift toward an increased focus on space superiority in a contested environment. specifically, we are enhancing our space situational awareness and our ability to command and control. we are shifting toward more defendable architectures. we are investing in tests and training infrastructure to further enhance our readiness and finally, we are enhancing our partnerships with intelligence community, our ally partners, and the commercial space industry. i thank you for your support and i look forward to working with congress as we continue to focus on our national security space posture. i am privileged, absolutely privileged to be here with my distinguished colleagues on the panel this afternoon and i look forward to your questions. thank you. >> thank you, general. chair now recognizes betty sapp, director of national reconnaissance office.

>> thank you, ranking member cooper and distinguished members of the committee. sure. it's a great pleasure to host you and your committee. your members out at the nro. it's a great honor for me to be here today. the nro has a very clear and very critical mission for the nation. we provide the space-based isr capabilities necessary. the nro is structured for success, small and streamlined with end-to-end mission responsibility. we enjoyed success in all aspects. our research and development team developed and matured the next generation technology necessary to stay ahead of changing targets and threats. fulfill commission gaps and develop new relationships. our acquisition teams deliver capabilities users need on time and within budget. in 2017, for the ninth consecutive year, we achieved a clean independent audit opinion. demonstrating our ability to properly manage and account for the resources entrusted to us.

we have four successful launches last year including our first on a spacex falcon 9. finally, most importantly, we continue to deliver critical operational capabilities with the better than 99.7% reliability. our fiscal year 2019 budget requests will build on this successful history of delivering innovative overhead intelligence systems for national security, with the resilience required for the threat environment we face. we're specifically focused on investments that will deliver and assure the space-based capabilities we'll needs in a -- need in a future fight. more resilience, more capability and capacity, and more speed. greater resilience continues to be a top priority. processes to protect our current orbit systems are being refined and tested and our people are being trained to use them to full advantage. new systems will have resiliency features built in as an inherent part of the design. in a future conflict, resilience

must backstop and work in concert with resilient air assets. our developments focus on achieving the capacity and capabilities required by the icd and dod. we are increasing persistence in the look rate from space, reducing the gaps currently exploited by our adversaries. finally, we require more capacities and capabilities in space, they must be combined to deliver the critical information directly to war fighters, at the tactical edge and in the fight and must be delivered when they need it. enabled by advances in artificial intelligence, automatic target recognition, machine learning and emerging technology, the nro plans to do exactly that. everyone at the nro is focused on our mission, delivering innovative overhead intelligence systems for national security. the current and projected threat environment doesn't change our mission. it just makes it more challenging. the men and women of the nro are more than up to that challenge. thank you for your support and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you very much. chair now recognizes kenneth

rapawano, assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense and global security. thank you. >> thank you, chairman rogers, ranking member cooper, distinguished members of the subcommittee. it's an honor to appear before you today. along with general jay raymond, commander of air force space command and the u.s. strategic command joint force component commander, miss betty sapp, director of national reconnaissance office. space is a war fighting domain, just as in land, air, cyber space, the department of defense must be prepared to address any and all threats to our national security. space systems provide our joint force an unmatched ability to project power globally, respond to crises rapidly, strike swiftly and precisely, and command forces in multiple theaters of operations simultaneously. our national security strategy and the national defense strategy prominently recognize the criticality of space anding

a acknowledge the potential for conflict to extend into space. new national defense strategy charts the course for how dod will contribute to each of the national security strategies for national interests. under the new nds, long term strategic competition with china and russia are the priorities for the department. addressing the challenges posed to our preeminence in space power is fundamental to that effort. today's potential adversaries and competitors have studied how the u.s. joint force operates across all domains. cascading impact on sea, air, denial of u.s. space advantage is making critical investments in capabilities necessary to protect and defend the space domain to ensure the mission to

compete, deter, and win in the address the space threat and improves on the performance of our space systems. our aim remains to deliver the space effects to enable the combat edge our nation and our war fighters must have. we also recognize the important need for the department to be organized and structured most effectively to deliver on the duty to protect our nation and its vital interests. the department must accelerate and is accelerating its response to the changing dynamics of space. the deputy secretary of defense has heard congress' concerns and consistent with the ndaa for fy 2018 has already taken action through interim implementation

guidance and looks forward to completing the directed studies and changes that may be required. the department's partnership with congress is and will remain absolutely critical to our success. to that end, i remain grateful for this subcommittee's strong support and interest in this vital area and its advocacy to dissuade aggression and establish a lethal force with the unmatched ability to prevail in, from and through the ultimate high ground of space. i look forward to your questions. thank you. >> i thank you. and now recognize myself for questions. general raymond, the space launch industry is innovating in some pretty incredible ways that could increase capability and reduce costs like moving toward reusable launch vehicles. given all of this, how does the air force plan to integrate reusability into the launch program? and does lsa contemplate

reuseability? >> thank you. congressman rogers. i have gone on record in the past saying i fully support reusability. in my opinion, we would be stupid not to go down that path. it saves us money and it will make sure we do it smartly and that we'll be able to launch effectively but we fully intend to capitalize on the advantages that the u.s. industry has with reusability. >> great. mr. rapuano, given president trump's recent endorsement of the establishment of the independent space force, how do you think the department should implement that direction? because it is consistent with what this committee in the house of representatives has called for in the buildup to this last nda. >> congressman, the president is very focused on outcomes. he has prioritized space. he has recognized the threats that have evolved and the pace at which they've evolved. and he recognizes as a war-fighting domain. he also is very interested in ensuring that the deportment department is best organized and equipped to achieve vital missions in space and he's very

interested in exploring -- to exploring any options that can provide that enhanced capabilities. the deputy secretary, as you know, is leading the organizational and management review for the department, consistent with the ndaa. assessment of the space corps is one of those options that is getting close attention among others. he is going to be recommending that set of options that best ensures lasting u.s. leadership and success in space by 1st august, per the requirement. >> i agree the president cares about outcomes but i ask you to look at his exact words, we have -- we should have a space force, we will have a space force. you're right, though, deputy secretary shanahan is in charge of trying to design that. i was hoping you could show us a little bit of what it might look like before he does it but apparently that's not going to

happen. with that, general raymond, yesterday in the full committee, we had testimony about how if the air force really wanted to, while we are between where we are now, establishment of the space force, space corps, whatever it's going to be, which will not be in the immediate future, the air force has a lot of challenges and did it with national security space and some of the threats that we face. it was proposed yesterday in the hearing if air force really wanted to demonstrate they get it and they're going to get after this, they would raise the profile of space in the department, and put a significantly larger amount of money against that challenge. i don't expect you to have the number today, but i would ask you at your earliest convenience after you think about this for a while, kind of get back to me and let me you what you think that number might be to enable you to have all the resources

you need to get after the challenge fast. >> i'll be happy to do that. i will tell you, i think the profile of space is pretty high in the air force, it's very high in the air force. this budget this year represents an 18% increase, about $7 billion increase but i'll happy to put some thought on that. i'll be happy to put some thought on that and come back to you. >> thank you. i recognize mr. cooper for questions you may have. >> i welcome the stronger air force budget. i will defer questions for the late session, given the excellent attendance by my democratic colleagues. thanks. >> the chair recognizes chairman from colorado for any questions he may have. >> thank you. i will have questions for the closed hearing. i got a couple for right now and appreciate the conversations we've had recently.

the $350 million in unfunded priorities. as you told me earlier, there's a $7 billion increase. however, we have to draw the line somewhere when we're doing budgets, but if you could have that extra $350 million, what would we be able to get for that? and what are we losing by not having that? >> congressman, thanks for the question. the way the air force did the unfunded priority list was obviously -- it's in its name, priority, so we have prioritized those activities that we couldn't fit into the budget, although $7 billion is a significant increase for space and as i mentioned in my opening comments a bold shift toward war fighting. being able to protect and defend assets in the domain. i'll be happy to come back to you and talk specifically about the items that are in the unfunded priority list but give congress options and priority order to help accelerate some of the things we already have in the program. >> okay.

we can continue that discussion. i would also like to ask you about the increased need for space war fighting training. now that everyone's recognized that space is contested and it is a war-fighting domain, we need to have the personnel who have the training necessary to excel in that domain. what are your thoughts on that? >> it's a key, key focus area for us. i've been focused on that since the day i took command of the professional development and training. we've made some pretty significant strides toward that end. we've implemented the space mission force which has allowed us to enhance the advanced training of our crews. we have implemented what we call space flags and just red flags to increase the focus of that as well. and what i would suggest to you is not just about space

training, it's about multi-domain training. really what i'm focusing on is making sure we have space operators that are very smart in joint war fighting and we have joint war fighters that are also very smart in space because if that multi-domain strength, collaboration and strength, that's going to carry us to where we need to be in the future. we also in this budget spent about approximately $175 million, additional trainers, exercises, and war games. thank you. >> that's really good to see. lastly, for any one of you, can we do a better job of partnering with the commercial sector, with private industry, to accomplish our goals? and if so, how? >> i don't want to monopolize this, i'll deflect, but i am passionate about this as well. we are working very closely with our commercial customers, and i think this will provide us significant advantage going forward. one of the things we've done in

this budget, the enterprise space battle management command and control program is focused on voting open standards and consortium approach. to energize, harness all of energy focused on these issues. it's a key priority for us going forward and you'll see that reflected in our budget. >> that's great. either one of you? >> you know, the nro has always spent about 95% of its budget in industry, on contract, so we've always been a close partner with industry today and as new commercial providers are coming in, we're looking at every way to team with them and leverage their capabilities. >> i would just add that this is a real intense focus of the deputy secretary of defense leading the reform efforts in the department, obviously a big component focused on acquisition. he's all about leveraging the commercial sector more effectively. i think we're going to be seeing

a number of reforms in that area. >> these are excellent thanks. thank you for the work you're doing. >> chair, i pause for housekeeping i overlooked at the beginning of the hearing. we have two members of our full committee with us today. not members of the subcommittee. mr. moulton of massachusetts sit in on this hearing and be able to participate. without objection, so ordered. chair recognizes mr. norcross from new jersey. >> thank you, chairman. general raymond, '19 budget significantly alters -- let me back up one page here. you've had comments that starts from this, we're trying to get caught up and take advantage, whether it's private industry and others. the air force publicly says they want to move fast, they get effective capabilities deployed which is why section 1610 of the final ndaa for '18

organize best of breed commercial space situational capabilities, but not later than may 30th, 2018. by the required deadline. this is on-going. >> it has been. we leveraged them heavily today if you look at c 2 system we have today, commercial capabilities are leveraged significantly we also have c catalyst campus, that commercial companies can test them there and roll them into the op center to facilitate integration into our operations. finally as i mentioned earlier in enterprise space battle management and control, what we are trying to do is not have one

company be a winner and have a bunch of losers. we are trying to open standards and consortium based approach where everybody can play. that's what we are doing. we'll have a prototype done by 2021 and i'm eager to get all of commercial industry wrapped around those standards. >> let me follow up with that. then general buck talked about this and said our capabilities were at a 3. why are we not doing this quickly, not waiting for everybody to come on board, but take advantage of what we have now and buildup to that? >> i must not have been clear. we are taking advantage now and will continue to take advantage now. this is a future system going forward that we are building the entire system off of that commercial open standards.

but we are leveraging those today and we'll continue to leverage commercial industry hard as we look to fill some of the gaps that we have. >> i'll wait for the closed session when we can get into it in a little more detail. i yield back. >> recognize mr. highs. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm not sure exactly who this question goes to, and i do have some others for our closed session, but just a couple right now. does the dod need to be more assertive by blocking companies by china in the space industry here? >> congressman, that is a key issue. thank you for raising it. this is an issue that the secretary and both the secretary, deputy secretary have raised looking at the supply chain and foreign ownership and investment and capabilities that are critical or essential to national security.

i believe you are familiar with the process in which these types of transactions are assessed by an interagency committee accessing intelligence and other sources of information to make assessments on the relative risk associated with these transactions. so i think we are definitely focused within the department on the ways in which adversaries can all too easily acquire capabilities or knowledge that they can use against us. and we are actively involved in that process. >> i'm really glad to hear that. so are you saying then that the dod is responsible or authorized to block these kinds of acquisitions? >> the dod is involved in the interagency process that makes conclusions on transactions that rise -- that are concerning, and then rise to the program.

>> so they have significant influence in the decision? >> we are pretty significant voter in the process. >> right. one other quick question, then i'll defer my other questions. during red flag event or some other kind of training event, are there services taken into account the possibility of partial loss of our satellite communications? >> absolutely. we embed our space operators into those exercises. space flag exercise that we also stood up compliments that, but we exercise that routinely. >> okay. great. so any of your officers, or all of your offices involved in crafting those type training exercises? >> sir, that falls under my responsibility as organized training for space command. we work that routinely. >> very good. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> gentleman yields back.

now recognize washington state five minutes. >> thank you p i'll yield my time to mr. molten from massachusetts. >> recognize for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general raymond, china has successfully conducted test launches of anti-satellite missiles able to destroy u.s. satellites. this development fundamentally alters the strategic balance between great powers and it's continued to evolve in favor of china which has accelerated development of space weapons. >> public reports say china will be able to destroy u.s. satellites therefore by gps, targeting communications, and more. i'll be following up on this in the classified setting. but can you just give us an overview of what our strategy is to counter those capabilities?

and echoing some of the other questions we've heard from the committee, are we committing enough resources to this development that could truly fundamentally alter the strategic balance? i'd add that, you know, miss sapp talked about the development of ai as one of the things we are investing in. china has committed to be world leader in ai 2030. you never heard such a commitment from us. i'm just concerned we are falling behind. and this is a place because of the strategic implications we clearly have to lead. >> space is a war fighting domain just like air land and sea and contested everything from low end jamming to the high end direct that was demonstrated in 2007 which you highlighted in your question. one of the things that we have a strategy, and really a strategy is that we share between the nro and the department of defense, we have a vision, we took that vision and we wrapped an

operational concept around it called the space war fighting con ops. we have trained and exercised for that. and there are several lines of effort we are doing. again, if you are responsible for war fighting domain, you have to have awareness, ssa, so we are doing that. you have to have ability to command and control. we are investing significantly in command and control capabilities. you have to have defendable architecture. and in this budget we made a significant shift towards having those architectures that we are able to defend. you have to have partnerships, just like we have in all other aspects of joint warfare. >> i may interrupt. that sounds wonderful. but the question is are they significant enough? are they significant enough to compete with our great power adversaries that have stuck their flag in the sand and said this is where

we'll be in 2020 and 2030. >> so, my view is we still have the best space capabilities in the world operated by the best air men. competitors moving very quick, and we need to pick up the pace to stay ahead of that threat. i am comfortable that the $7 billion that we've invested across this fight is going to shift and provide us the capabilities that we need to stay ahead of that threat as we continue down the path. >> director sapp and secretary rapuano, would you like to add to that? >> i'll just agree with general raymond that i think we have not only plans but programs in place to defend against the weapons you are talking about. and i this i we can give you some more detail in the classified follow up. i would also mention we've been working automated intelligence for quite some time. and have made real progress. in fact, it's in operations today.

>> i think it's well covered by general raymond and director sapp and just to reiterate the emphasis is that we are going to be able to prevail in all of those domains critical in our national security achieving our objectives. >> thank you very much. >> gentleman yields back. chair now recognizes gentleman from colorado mr. kaufman for five minutes. >> mr. chairman, i'll follow up with these questions in a classified setting as well. general raymond it's my understanding that traditional evolved expendable launch vehicle, eelv, providers are contracted under federal acquisition regulations, the far, 15. while new entrants are concentrated under far 12. it is also my understanding far 12 is more commercial way of doing business than far 15. could you explain the differences in procuring launch services using far 12 versus far 15? and does the dod have the same

insight on cost as well as over oversight on mission assurance when using both of these contracting methods? or is one more stringent than the other? >> congressman, first of all, good to see you. i'll take that for the record. i'm not an acquisition background guy and i just don't know the answer to your question. so i'll be happy to take it back and talk to our acquisition professionals and get you an answer. >> okay. yeah, at the hearing yesterday general raymond about space war fighting readiness, panelists made it quite clear that our nation space war fighting construct must adapt to the threats we face today. and in the future. it is evident that the air force recognizes this. however, the new start program, the next generation overhead persistent infrared, is not clear. as the panelists put, it's not

clear how the alternative is substantially a different approach, quote. unquote it is not more resilient, and quote disaggregating does not improve missions.quote, disag debagregating does not influence missions, unquote. would you comment on that. >> i would be happy to comment on that. it is more resilient. the nda required startcom and stp to do that, and i would be happy to talk more in the closed session about it. >> okay. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> chairman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california for five minutes. >> i will pass and hopefully get to the classified asap. >> we have no further republicans. who do we have next?

say who? the chair recognizes the gene-- gentleladies from guam. >> thank you very much, and thank you for being here today to our witnesses. general raymond, there's an urgent need to rapidly reconstitute and replenish critical space capabilities to preserve continuity of operations capability. can you speak to some of the investments and low-cost responsive launch optionings that you would recommend the department -- options that you would recommend the department do to fulfill this need? >> thank you, and it's great to see you again. we have invested in this budget pretty significantly in small launch options. i think it's important, as you said, for replenishment. we've gone through a period of this before. we did this in the early '90s when we first launched uridium where there's a launch constellation of smaller satellites. there were companies doing replenishment launches.

as you looked to new space and constellations of significant size, i think it's going to be important. we've invested that in this budget. >> all right. this next question is important to me, and i guess any of you could answer. today nearly all u.s. national security satellites are launched from fixed coastal u.s. launch sites that could easily be disrupted. these fixed sites also provide predictable locations from which adversaries could get clues to discern u.s. capabilities. is the department of defense developing more launch sites using new commercial capabilities to address these weaknesses and support a rapid, responsive, and resilient launch capability? i'm a representative from guam. and i will say here that there has been inquiries about space capabilities in our territory from commercial investors. very recent were these visits, and they are very ambitious to begin operations. so could any of you comment on

this? >> yes. there are commercial launch sites that are available today. we've got them on our fixed bases. we have commercial sites. we also have different space ports in new mexico and alaska, in florida, in virginia, so there are -- there are multiple space -- >> is guam on tlist, general? >> we'd be happy to put guam on the list. i think resiliency is important. one of the big things that's happened over the last year which is significant, and it doesn't get a lot of press, and that's the move to autonomous flight termination systems in the autonomous ranges. so every time, today, every time spacex does a launch, they do it autonomously. you have to be able to protect nations and protect if a radar goes astray. we have antennas and a bunch of contractors working that. today with spacex, when they

launch, it's done autonomously. that helps reduce the range infrastructure and make these, in my opinion, a more resilient capability going forward. >> are there any other comments from the other witnesses? are you aware of the inquiries that have been made to guam? and they have been to guam to look at our, of course, our anderson air force base and the guam international airport. so does anyone aware of that or -- this is -- >> the commercial launch providers are going to do their own assessment as to what makes sense for their business. and we're going to use those commercial launch providers. so we're going to go where they -- >> yeah. they were very interested in anderson air force base, so -- >> great. >> i thought maybe -- so i have no further questions and yield back, mr. chairman. >> the gentlelady yeeltields ba. no further questions -- he showed up. slipped out on me and came back.

the chair recognizes the gentleman from the great state of alabama, mr. burnes, for any questions he may have. >> mr. chairman, i did show up. i'm glad that you noticed. general, i hate to keep you a few more minutes, but my question is really -- questions pertain to personnel. in talking about space, we talk about technological stuff, but it's the people, as you and i know, that matter. do you think you have the proper number of service members to do this? do you believe you're sufficiently manned from a peace com tempo to a war-fighting one, and are we effectively using skills from these service members to capitalize on their talents? >> thank you for the question. it gives me a chance to brag on the airmen that i'm privileged to lead. we've got the finest airmen, and they're doing spectacular work for our nation and our joint force. the air force has more mission than it does resources. and so as part of the larger issue, looking forward to a contested environment, i do think there's room for growth.

in fact, the secretary of the air force and chief of staff of the air force asked me to conduct a study which we're doing as we speak to look at the structure, the size, the scope, the scale, professional development aspects of those airmen, and i will report back to them this summer. >> okay. and do you think that you can shift -- with your present number -- from a peacetime scenario to a wartime scenario? >> we operate 24/7, 365. a global operation all the time. i'm very comfortable that i've got the capabilities that i need today. >> okay. and you know, this -- you would be unusual if you weren't like everything else in the private sector or in the public sector and that is the rapidly changing need for skills development because technology's moving so fast. do you feel like you've got the resources you need continually provide the skills training these folks need? >> i do. as i mentioned, one of my big priorities for the command is professional development. and developing operators to be able to operate in this

contested environment. wee completely transformed how we train operators. in this budget, we have invested in i think you might have been out of -- $175 million in training and infrastructure to be able to get after the challenges that we are currently facing. >> well, i'm a strong supporter of what you're doing. i ran the work force training system in alabama, and you know what we're doing in huntsville. maxwell air base. keeping civilian folks coming into that was part of my portfolio. i was surprised how rapidly things were moving. i know that you've got that on steroids. i want to express support for what you're doing, and if you think you need more resources and help from us, please let us know. >> i really appreciate your support. thank you. >> thank you. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. we will go into recess and reconvene in the skiff in about ten minutes.

>> tonight on c-span's "landmark cases," we'll explore the 1896 case of plessy versus ferguson where homer plessy, an african-american man, was arrested in new orleans for taking a seat on a train reserved for whites. a supreme court's 7-1 decision established the separate but equal doctrine that allowed segregation through most of the 20th century. this narrow interpretation of the 14th amendment wasn't overturned until the brown versus board of education decision desegregated schools. examine this case and the high court's ruling with ted shaw, law professor, and director of the center of civil trooiright e center of north carolina and former counsel of the naacp legal defense and educational

funds, and michael klarman, law professor at harvard and author of the 2004 book "from jim crowe to civil rights." watch "landmark cases" live tonight at 9:00 eastern on c-span, c-span.org, or listen with the free c-span radio app. for background on each case, order your copy of the "landmark cases" companion book. it's available for $8.95 plus shipping and handling at c-span.org/landmark cases. there's a link on our website. c-span where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. and today we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c., and