being here today. we look forward to working with all of you as we pursue sound energy policy. we look forward to working with you as you show us the north dakota model for the rest of the country. thank you very much for being here. we appreciate it. [applause] >> new jersey governor chris christie said the families that are still displaced from their home after hurricane sandy hit the east coast. he asked for a full clean sandy aid bill from congress. the house is scheduled to debate next week. governor christie's remarks are nest on c-span. -- are next on c-span. after that, buzz aldrin on the future of space. >> wednesday on "washington journal" adam green on his

organization oh z work and why they are hoping the 113th will shift to the left. an upcoming budget battles between president obama and the 113th congress. after that, looking at the tenure of house speaker john boehner and what his legacy will be. plus your e-mails, phone calls, on c-span. [applause] >> chris christie delivered his state of address today and discussed hurricane sandy recovery efforts. the house is expected to vote on an additional $51 million in the package. this comes courtesy from the

statehouse in trenton. this is 45 minutes. [applause]

[applause] >> thank you. thank you very much. thank you very much. thank you. thank you. thank you all very much. thank you. thank you all very much.

lieutenant governor guadagno, madam speaker, mr. president, members of the legislature, fellow new jerseyans, since george washington delivered the first state of the union in new york on this day in 1790, it has been the tradition of executive leaders to report on the condition of the nation and state at the beginning of the legislative year. so it is my honor and pleasure to give you this report on the state of our state. one year ago, we were scheduled to gather on this second tuesday in january when our friend and colleague alex decroce passed suddenly the night before, causing us to delay this report. i miss the hard work and kind spirit of alex.

i think of him often, but i am so pleased to see his wife betty lou here in this chamber as a duly elected member of the assembly today. she continues his work and does honor to his memory. thank you, betty lou. [applause] just three months ago, we were proceeding normally with our lives, getting ready for a national election and the holidays to follow. then sandy hit. sandy was the worst storm to strike new jersey in 100 years. 346,000 homes were damaged or destroyed. nearly 7 million people and 1,000 schools had their power knocked out. 116,000 new jerseyans were evacuated or displaced from their homes.

41,000 families are still displaced from their homes. sandy may have damaged our homes and our infrastructure, but it did not destroy our spirit. the people of new jersey have come together as never before -- across party lines, across ideological lines, across ages, races and backgrounds, from all parts of our state, even from out of state. everyone has come together. so today, let me start this address with a set of thank-yous from me on behalf of the great people of this state. first, i want to thank the brave first responders, national guard, and emergency management experts who prepared us for this storm and kept us safe in its aftermath. [applause]

i want to thank the members of this legislature for their cooperation in answering sandy's challenges and for being by my side as i toured so many of the devastated areas of our state. i want to thank the community food bank of new jersey, the southern baptists, the salvation army and the american red cross, who helped us deliver over one million pounds of food and over five million meals and snacks to families who needed them. they are part of a network of organizations, a family really, who make life better in new jersey every day and who really came through when the times were toughest.

thank you tot he them. [applause] i want to thank the new jersey business and industry association, the state chamber of commerce, the commerce and industry association of new jersey and the national federation of independent businesses for keeping us in touch with the needs of small businesses in the wake of the storm, so new jersey can help get these businesses back on their feet. thank you. [applause] i want to thank the 17,000 out- of-state utility workers who came to new jersey from all over america and joined with 10,000 of our own to get power restored as quickly as possible so that within nine days of this

horrific storm, electric power had been restored to 90% of customers. i want to thank the members ofu tility works who made sure new jersey got back to normal. [applause] i want to thank the members of my cabinet and senior staff, who for days before the storm and weeks after it, put their own personal losses aside, worked 18 hours a day and slept very little. they led their departments and their dedicated colleagues in

putting the safety and well- being of others ahead of their own. to everyone who opened their homes, assisted senior citizens, fed their neighbors, counseled the grief-stricken, or pitched in to clear debris, remove sand, or get a school back opened, i say thank you. you have helped define new jersey as a community, one which, when faced with adversity, rolls up its sleeves, gets back to work, and in word and deed shows that it will never, ever give up. and make no mistake, we will be back, stronger than ever. the spirit of our new jersey community was shown in the days immediately after the storm.

in sea bright, mary pat was by the side of one small businessman at the moment when he was allowed to return to his business and see what sandy had done to his restaurant, a pizzeria. as the plywood was removed, allowing him to see for the very first time the destruction of his means of earning a living, he turned and said without hesitation, "don't worry. we will build this back better than it was." his words were forceful. they were optimistic. and they were emblematic, capturing the indomitable spirit of this state. and he was just one example of how new jersey and its citizens were showing our whole country how to bravely and resolutely deal with a crisis. citizens like frank smith, jr.,

the volunteer chief of the moonachie first aid squad. his home was destroyed during the storm. his headquarters were destroyed during the storm. after securing the safety of his three young children, he did not take himself to higher ground. no, he led his team through fires and flood waters, through buildings and trailer parks, and saved over 2,000 lives. moonachie's citizens were saved because he put them first. [applause] frank, thanks for your bravery.

[applause] in toms river, marsha hedgepeth, an emergency room technician, had the day off when sandy hit her hometown. she could have gotten herself to safety and forgotten about her colleagues at the community medical center and most importantly her patients. instead, facing several feet of water on her flooded street, she swam to higher ground, then hitchhiked with a utility worker from michigan and got to the hospital for a 12-hour shift treating her fellow citizens. swimming through flood waters to

save lives. thank you, marsha, for setting such a great example. [applause] in brick, tracey keelen and jay gehweiler watched as the flood waters consumed their town. concerned about jay's father, they tried to reach him and could not. not content to wait, they put on their wet suits, got in their row boat and rescued jay's dad. in the process, they saw dozens

of others stranded in their homes. they turned back around and, one by one, saved over 50 of jay's father's neighbors along with their pets. then, for those they rescued who had no place to go, they housed them as well. they admitted they did not know these neighbors that well before the storm, but they didn't care. they put extending a helping hand in a crisis ahead of social comfort. thank you to tracey and jay for saving lives and making a difference. [applause]

new jerseyans are among the toughest, grittiest, and most generous people in america. these citizens are a small example of that simple truth. our pride in our state in our moment of loss and challenge is reflected in the eyes of these extraordinary people. you see, some things are above politics. sandy was and is one of those things. [applause]

these folks stand for the truth of that statement. we now look forward to what we hope will be quick congressional action on a full, clean sandy aid bill -- now, next week -- and to enactment by the president. [applause] we have waited 72 days, seven times longer than victims of hurricane katrina waited. one thing i hope everyone now clearly understands -- new

jersey, both republicans and democrats, will never stand silent when our citizens are being short changed. [applause] the people of new jersey are in need, not from their own actions but from an act of god that delivered a natural, human, and financial disaster --- and we are thankful to the people of america for honoring the tradition of providing relief. we have stood with the citizens

of florida, alabama, mississippi, louisiana, iowa, vermont, california and missouri in their times of need. now i trust that they will stand with us. [applause] so make no mistake. new jersey's spirit has never been stronger. our resolve never more firm. our unity never more obvious. let there also be no mistake -- much work still lies ahead. damage that comes only once in a century will take in some cases years to repair. here is some of what we have

done already -- we have created a cabinet-level position to coordinate the state's efforts across every agency, and marc ferzan is here today, ready to work with you on this restoration effort. we've requested the federal government to pay 100% of the costs of the significant debris removal that we require -- and have already received $18 million for that task. we have secured $20 million from the federal highway administration for emergency repair of our roads, bridges and tunnels -- a down payment on a major infrastructure task ahead. we have directed our department of environmental protection to streamline approvals for restoring critical infrastructure. we have overseen the removal of over 2.5 million cubic yards of debris to date and counting. 17 towns have already completed debris removal.

over 1,000 trucks are working daily to continue dry land debris removal with 26 more towns moving towards completion. we are now removing debris from our waterways. new jerseyans need to know nearly 1,400 vessels were either sunken or abandoned in our waterways during sandy. in mantoloking alone, 58 buildings and eight cars were washed into barnegat bay. we will remove this debris and dredge the bay to reduce the risk of flooding and to improve the health of the bay, beginning the very same week that this administration furthers its commitment to the health of the bay by implementing the toughest fertilizer law in america. [applause]

we have helped get temporary rental assistance for 41,000 new jersey families, and where necessary, secured transitional shelters in hotels or motels or even in fort monmouth. we have worked with the small business administration to secure nearly $189 million in loans for thousands of home and small businesses, and through our new jersey eda, we have provided lines of credit for businesses awaiting insurance reimbursement, grants for job training, and benefits for displaced workers. our new jersey dot has been one of the busiest agencies, removing over 4,400 truckloads of debris from state and local roads and cleaning another 4,300 truckloads of sand to restore and replenish our beaches. our department of education has

worked night and day to get schools reopened right away, and where that wasn't possible, to get them restored by the next school year, all while maintaining our commitment to a full 180-day school year of education for our kids. executive order 107 makes sure that when insurance payments do come, they are not compromised by excessive deductibles and ensures that our citizens maximize their reimbursement. while there are dozens of other examples of the never quit attitude of this administration and our citizens, there is none better than the miracle of route 35 in mantoloking. at the mantoloking bridge, route 35 had been completely washed away by sandy. i stood at the spot where the atlantic ocean flowed into the bay where route 35 once carried thousands of cars a day to vacations down the shore.

within days, commissioner jim simpson, the department of transportation and our private sector partners had a temporary road built to allow emergency vehicles onto the island. now, merely 10 weeks after our state's worst storm, you see a permanent route 35 already being rebuilt. that's what an effective government can do. that's what a determined people can do. that is how and where we will lead new jersey in the months and years ahead. [applause] [applause] there is no question that sandy hit us hard, but there is also no question that we're fighting back with everything we've got. sandy took a toll on new jersey's economy.

just when we were coming back from the national recession, sandy disrupted our economic life -- cars weren't bought, homes weren't sold, and factories couldn't produce. from those things we can catch up, and we are catching up. but make no mistake, as common sense would tell you, sandy hurt new jersey's economy. some losses we will never get back -- electric power that wasn't produced, visitors who didn't come to our casinos or our downtown centers. in all, sandy cost us over 8,000 jobs in november, mostly in our leisure and hospitality industries. but we were relatively fortunate. louisiana lost 127,000 jobs after hurricane katrina. sandy may have stalled new jersey's economy, but there is plenty of evidence that new jerseyans have not let it stop our turnaround. the direction is now clear. here is the latest economic report -- unemployment is coming down. 2011 was our best private sector job growth year in 11 years, and 2012 is also positive. personal income set a record high in new jersey for the

seventh quarter in a row. gross income tax receipts are exceeding the administration's projections for this fiscal year prior to sandy. sales of new homes are up. consumer spending is up. industrial production is up. since i took this office, participation in new jersey's labor force is higher than the nation as a whole and the number of people employed has grown. that means that more people have the confidence to be out looking for jobs, and more people actually have jobs. in total, we have added nearly 75,000 private sector jobs in new jersey since we took office in january 2010. i mention the words "private sector" advisedly, because we have not grown government. quite the contrary. we have gotten our house in order by keeping our promise to reduce the size of government. in the last three years, we have cut more than 20,000 government jobs. in 2012, we had fewer state

government employees than at any time since governor whitman left office in january 2001. we promised to reduce the size of government, and we have delivered. we have also held the line on taxes. we have held the line on spending. we have made new jersey a more attractive place in which to grow a business, to grow jobs, to raise a family. this legislature knows the history. in fiscal year 2010, we faced a $2 billion budget deficit with only 5 1/2 months left in the fiscal year when we took office. we cut over 200 programs and balanced the budget with no new taxes. in fiscal year 2011, the picture was even worse -- a projected $11 billion deficit on a budget of $29 billion -- in percentage terms, the worst in the nation. in total, we cut 832 programs. each department of government was reduced. an 8% cut in spending, in real dollars spent -- not against

some phony baseline. but with this legislature's help, again we balanced the budget without raising taxes. because we had made the tough choices, last year's budget was a bit easier. we were able not only to balance the budget, but to actually begin to reduce taxes by enacting the first year of tax relief for job-creating small businesses in new jersey. meanwhile, we devoted a record amount in aid to schools in new jersey. and in the budget which governs the current year, even with growth in the national economy slowing again, we have been able to achieve balance with not only no new taxes, but with a second year of small business tax relief. and let me make this point clearly and unequivocally. despite the challenges that sandy presents for our economy, i will not let new jersey go back to our old ways of wasteful spending and rising taxes.

we will deal with our problems but we will continue to do so by protecting the hard-earned money of all new jerseyans first and foremost. we will not turn back. [applause] our handling of the budget is but one example of the change that i told new jersey had arrived with our inauguration. i've come to this chamber in the years since that day urging us to do the big things to transform our state, to make the tough decisions we had avoided for far too long. we asked this in the context of a state where only 27% of our

citizens felt that government was moving our state in the right direction in january 2010. we asked this while the citizens of our country watched a dysfunctional, dispirited, and distrustful government in washington bicker and battle not against our problems but against each other. against that backdrop, few would have bet on us, few would have bet on new jersey leading the way to restore people's belief that government could accomplish things for them. but here we are, three years later, and look at all of those things some called impossible in this town that we have made a reality -- a real 2% property tax cap, interest arbitration reform, pension and health benefit reform, teacher tenure reform, higher education restructuring resulting in rutgers now being in the top 25 in research dollars and the newest member of the big 10,

$1.3 billion in new capital investment in all our universities for the first time in 25 years, a ground-breaking teacher contract in newark that finally acknowledges merit pay, three years ago, a national reputation for corruption and division and waste, today, a national model for reform and bipartisanship and leadership. that is today's new jersey. [applause] let's review this new reality specifically, to remind our constituents and ourselves how

far we have come and to resolve to never return to the old, dark days of our past in trenton. four years, four balanced budgets, no new taxes, new tax relief to create 75,000 new private sector jobs -- a far different picture from the prior eight years, which saw 115 increases in taxes and fees. it hasn't been easy, but we have done it together. and the people of new jersey are better off for it. the story is the same on property taxes, maybe even better. they had increased 70% in the prior 10 years -- the most in the nation. together, we enacted a 2% per year cap on growth and the interest arbitration reform that was needed to make that cap work. many said it wouldn't work, but the record tells a different story. last year, property taxes in new

jersey grew by only 1.7% -- the lowest rise in two decades. and our pension system, which was on a path to insolvency, is now on much more sound footing. with your help, we tackled the problem head on, modestly raising the retirement age, reducing incentives for early retirement, suspending cola's until the plan is 80% funded, and, yes, asking for something slightly closer to market in terms of employee contributions. in total, the pension and health benefits reform package that you passed will save taxpayers over $120 billion over the next 30 years. [applause] just as importantly, it will help make sure the pension is actually there when our public employees and school teachers retire.

other states have noticed -- this reform is becoming a model for america. when we combine this needed discipline on spending and taxes, with responsibility in addressing our long-term liabilities, with pro-growth actions on the regulatory side, we have made new jersey a better place to do business. the combination of policies that are not hostile to business and an environment which actually welcomes new businesses and new jobs is working. it is clear. in a competitive world, policies matter. companies have choices. job-creators have choices. that is why our work is far from done. that is why a top priority must be to continue new jersey's record of excellence in education and to fix problems where we are failing. in higher education, the task force led with skill by former governor tom kean has helped us develop strategies for making new jersey's institutions more competitive.

we need to turn new jersey's universities -- including rutgers -- from good to great, because that will help us keep more talented new jersey students in new jersey and will strengthen the link between higher education and high quality jobs. at the heart of these reforms we need, of course, is the plan to make sure that new jersey's critically important medical and health sciences institutions remain world class. by merging rutgers and umdnj in the north and rowan and umdnj's stratford campus in the south, we will enhance three established hubs of educational excellence in north, south, and central new jersey. and we will bring rutgers, and new jersey medical education, into the 21st century. i thank you for passing this plan, and i was proud to sign it into law this summer.

in k-12 education, we have made great strides, but there is much more to be done. who would have thought, just three years ago, in the face of entrenched resistance, that i could stand here and congratulate us today for the following -- ensuring accountability by passing the first major reform of tenure in 100 years, establishing performance-based pay in newark through hard-nosed collective bargaining so that we can reward and retain the very best teachers where we need them most, implementing inter-district school choice, which has tripled its enrollment in the last 3 years and will grow to 6,000 students next year, growing the number of charter schools to a record 86 in new jersey, signing the urban hope act to turn failing schools into renaissance schools in newark, trenton, and camden, and finally, investing the largest amount of state aid to education in new jersey history $8.9 billion in this year's budget, over $1 billion higher

than in fiscal year 2011. in new jersey, we have combined more funding with needed reform. both money and reform of our schools are essential, but neither alone is sufficient. in new jersey, we are leading the way for the nation by providing both. as we assess the state of our state this afternoon, we should be proud of our record. the state is stronger today than it has been in years. we are recovering and growing, not declining and descending. we are working together, not just as a people in digging out from sandy and rebuilding our economy. here in trenton, in this chamber, we have had our fights. we have stuck to our principles. but we have established a governing model for the nation that shows that, even with heartfelt beliefs, bipartisan compromise is possible.

achievement is the result, and progress is the payoff. so i want to thank president sweeney and speaker oliver, leaders kean and bramnick for your hard work, for your frankness when we disagree, and for your willingness to come together on the truly important issues, on the big things. newave served the poeeople of jersey well. [applause] maybe the folks in washington, in both parties, could learn something from our record here. [applause]

our citizens certainly have -- now 61% of them believe our state is moving in the right direction -- more than double the amount that believed it on that cold day in january three years ago. make no mistake, our work is far from finished. rebuilding the homes and infrastructure damaged and destroyed by sandy is the next big challenge, and it will take years. we will need to spend our funds wisely and efficiently. we will need to cooperate. we will need to learn the lessons from past disasters and listen to each other. the good news is that strong leadership and bipartisan cooperation makes all these things possible. our work over the last three years proves that beyond

argument. having worked hard to tackle our most urgent legacy problems, having faced up to and corrected some poor decisions from the past, we now have more freedom to chart a course of excellence in the future. as we begin this new legislative year, we can now look ahead from sandy, ahead from the national recession, to a brighter day for new jersey. the author bern williams once said, "man never made any material as resilient as the human spirit." for all i have seen and experienced as your governor in this extraordinary year, one experience will be indelibly etched in my memory. her name is ginjer. as i walked around the parking lot of the fire department in port monmouth in one of the days soon after sandy had laid waste to so much of our state, i saw so many of the scenes that i had come to expect in the aftermath of the storm --

neighbors helping neighbors, food being prepared for the hungry, first responders helping the homeless. then i met 9-year-old ginjer. having a 9-year-old girl myself, her height and manner of speaking was immediately familiar and evocative. having confronted so many crying adults at that point i felt ready to deal with anything. then ginjer looked at me, began to cry and told me she was scared. she told me she had lost everything -- she had lost her home and her belongings. she asked me to help her. as my eyes filled with tears, i took a deep breath and thought about what i would say to my bridget if she said the same thing to me,

if she had the same look on her face, if she had the same tears in her eyes. i asked her where her mom was and she pointed right behind her. i asked her if her dad was ok. she told me he was. so i told ginjer, you haven't lost your home, you've just lost a house, a house we can replace. your home is with your mom and dad. i hugged her and told her not to cry, that the adults are in charge now and there was nothing to be afraid of anymore. ginjer is here today -- we've kept in touch -- and i want to thank her for giving voice to new jersey's children during

sandy and helping to create a memory of humanity in a sea of despair. you are a special girl. thank you for coming today. [applause] in this year ahead, let us prove the truth of the words i spoke to ginjer that day. let's put aside destructive politics in an election year. let's put aside accusations and

false charges for purely political advantage. let's work together to honor the memories of those lost in sandy. let's put the needs of our most victimized citizens ahead of the partisan politics of the day. let's demonstrate once again the resilience of new jersey's spirit. and let us continue what we have started -- rebuilding from sandy with pride and determination; restoring our economy to growth and prosperity after a decade of decline and high taxes, and reclaiming the promise of new jersey for future generations, presenting to our children renewed excellence in our schools, a sound and balanced budget, and a vibrant economy with jobs for those willing to work hard. that is our mission -- to hurdle barriers no matter how high, to fight the elements of doubt or

disaster, and to leave this place better than we found it. let us prove, once and for all, that what i said to ginjer is undeniably true -- the adults are in charge. let's accomplish the mission of rebuilding our battered state and restoring the hope and the faith and the trust of our people that government can work in a bipartisan way to restore our great way of life to all new jerseyans. in the year ahead, i look forward to working with all of you on that most important mission of all. thank you, god bless you, and god bless the great state of new jersey. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute]

[applause]

>> governor christie saying in his state of the state address that new jersey has waited longer for aid the victims of hurricane katrina. the house approved $9.7 billion in flood insurance. republican leaders have said that there'll be an additional $51 billion next week on january 15. you can see live house coverage here on c-span. >> on july 20, 1969, buzz aldrin

became the second astronaut to walk on the surface of the moon. he spoke at an event on the future of space exploration. that is next on c-span. than a hearing on nasa budget and mission. ♪ famous movieost??// stars leave the film capital to help the government sell more -- they are all part of a contingent of celebrities giving their time and talents to lead the war effort. >> how popular culture presented the war. how was the work presented in movies from the 1940s? how was it presented in comic books in the 1940s? how was it presented in tin pan

alley in music in the 1940s? >> this weekend on "american history" popular history on world war ii. saturday night at 10 p.m. and 10 p.m. eastern on c-span numeral read. >-- c-span 3. >> never marks from buzz alterman on space exploration and travel. -- now remarks from buzz aldrin on space exploration and travel. >> please welcome buzz aldrin. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. >> i come out punching. >> that is right.

thank you for coming out here. the crowd is happy to be here. a living legend, really. what was your first recollection as a little kid that made you say, i want to go up there? get to thate question. how many veterans are there in the crowd? [applause] i do not know how many of you know this, but i gave a hand salute to the pledge of allegiance, which is now authorized and not mandated by the congress to help veterans identify each other in a crowd for the star-spangled banner and the pledge of allegiance.

it troubles me that so very few avail themselves of this privilege. it was a privilege and an honor to serve my country. that is what has guided me through the rest of my life. my answers are usually damn long, so maybe you can help. what was the first question? [laughter] >> we are going to midnight here y. >> ok. >> what was your first recollection when you decided to go up to space? >> the first time i read flash gordon. i knew that was something where they went about the earth somehow. that goes the long answer. >> did you ever realize that

could happen? at that time it was just sci-fi and then it did happen. >> i thought that i was a person looking off into the future, but will be it was the quarterback of notre dame that inspired me. as a young kid -- i had my first airplane ride at the age of 2. symbolically, it was a plane piloted by mike father -- my father. single engine and painted to look like an eagle. the eagle is a symbol of our nation. eagle was the name of our spacecraft that we landed on the moon. that did not motivate me to think about going into space.

i got sick, as i recall during that flight to miami. my sister had ever had a flight, so on my second flight i took my sister. and and fabian was christened with a picture in our basement of a million ehrhardt -- an amphibian was questioned with a picture in our basement of ame earhart.rd >> what did your father do? >> he was a military person. he --i tended clark university.

his physics professor was robert. i did not think to double up much of that. robert needed funding later on. my father knew guggenheim had a lot of money. but he knew that guggenheim did not know eddie. so eddie went to talk to charles lindbergh and guggenheim did know who trials limburg was. -- who charles was. so father got some of the funding to do that. later, my father, because of his degree, was the head of air core engineering school. that later became brightfield,

airspace. engineering school became the school of technology. they financed my droctor's deg ree. good dna. good bloodline. military career -- any segue to nasa. talk about how you morphed into getting into nasa. we will of course get two apollo 11. -- to apollo 11. >> was a west point friend of mine. he was one year behind me. ed white, he was quite instrumental in my getting into the space program.

we were in the same squadron in germany. be rotated back a lot earlier. life magazine came out and showed ensures of these capsules that were part of the mercury program. it said that the astronauts who were going to be selected are all going to be graduates of islet schools. -- pilot schools. that would have been a good thing. that was my career to look over airplanes and judge airplanes that are current and will be flown by our people. i had my eyes a good bit beyond that. before i went there, i was always looking ahead into the future. i went to mit. i communicated with ed white

after i made the smartest decision of my life, which was to take what i knew how to do, which is intercept airplanes in the air and decide that this is -- 1960 -- that one of these days, nobody had put anyone in orbit yet, but one of these days, we are going to need to join up with somebody who is in orbit in space and we will have to close and rendezvous with them. pursuing that has had a tremendous influence on my life up to now. it was an extremely wise decision to become an enhanced type of rendezvous person with a background at mit, which is usually pretty nerdy.

we had computers than, but we also had and eight machines -- candy amcmachines. >> was anyone brave enough to call dyou a nerd back then? >> they would have called me that, probably. ed white went to michigan. from there we row. i'm not much of a writer. i have a few books out there. ed said, i have been to test pilot school. i have tested aircraft. nasa in 1960 two came out and said they need to get more astronauts.

says, i will apply for the action program. i came in touch with him and said, you will apply and i will apply. i did. he was selected and i was not. i had not had test pilot training. next year, guess what? >> you made the cut? >> a changed the requirement. -- they changed the requirement. more flying and less academic. being at the right place at the right time is clearly key to everything i have done in life. i have been fortunate to be able to -- most of the time -- take advantage of it. >> we advance the story to 1969, july. there were reports of how you were rushed it did -- rest

rated -- frustrated. >> that can be a long answer, but -- it may have been because he was closer to the door then i was. [laughter] [applause] however, he was clearly the commander and probably in my estimation the best test pilot that nasa ever put into the astronaut program. it does not stop there. he was an outstanding pilot and we sorely ness his -- miss his

observations. it is not easy to get observations out all the time, but when they did come out they were very well thought out. >> for just a second you did not think of pushing him aside and jumping at first -- that was not part of the plan? >> no, but remember, he said land a man on the moon and bring him back safely. it did not say anything about going out and walking around. that becomes outside the spacecraft. we did realize that we needed to learn how to be outside the spacecraft. leonov was the first person to go out. he had trouble getting back in -- he had to deflate his suit, his space suit, a little bit, so he could go back in again.

then ed white was the first american to do that. he had a maneuvering the gun and he was pretty tall, and he had trouble closing the hatch. he did not want to get back in again. >> what is it like in that space craft? >> my point is that ed white was not the commander. the russians do it differently. every spacewalk we made in the gemini program was always made by the inferior person. when we went to apollo, the first space walk, they tested the lander in earth orbit. one of the things that may go wrong is when you have the spacecraft and go through the tunnel after you have been on the moon, it may be jammed. if it is jammed you have to depressurized, open the hatch in

the lunar module, open the hatch in the command module, and go out and go into the command module. the command module pilot, not the commander, is standing in the hatch. the lunar module pilot is the one who walks. the commander stayed in there. there was good reason for that -- the amount of training that is taken by crewmembers, and if you think about it, the commander is in charge for liftoff -- every and maneuver he has made except transposition and docking the command module -- someone else did that because that was his strength. everything that is done is really done by the commander with the assistance of the lunar module pilot.

for the most part, experiments are then done by the junior -- the co-pilot, but nasa does not like the word co-pilot. he become a commander or a pilot. there was every reason to think that early on in apollo we might land and put one person out to walk around and see if they can come back in again. >> what was it like? >> carrying on the tradition, it probably would have been the commander stayed in and the junior man went out. i think you are missing my point -- i hope these old people are not. [laughter] so now we come to the first landing. by that point it was clear we had the confidence and we would send to people out. there are two schools of thought -- who should it be? there was a school of thought it

said the lunar module pilot ought to go out first -- others say, of course this is a momentous occasion and the commander clearly should go out first. that decision was made, and neil did that. until they made a decision it was delaying our training. once on the surface of the moon, the activities being done out there could have been controlled by the junior person to even out the training. neil is not someone who will let someone else do what he wants to do. he was a leader and i was a follower. controversy about this, these things, has to take into account that we are trying to develop a precedent of what is to be done

in the future. clearly for me to have stood -- for neil to of stood in the window, looking out the window while i went down the ladder first, would have been absolutely absurd. nasa and all other people -- what in the world were they doing? that was impossible. but there is the principle of spreading out the training. that needs to be done and recognized. everything we do is a compromise of different interests, especially when you have not done these things before and you are pioneering something. >> we are going to go to some audience questions. thank you for that. our first is from a judge -- he

has been on our show many times. from what it seems, nasa has been overtaken by politics but private companies are successful. what is your view of the role private companies will play in future space travel? >> when the airplane was introduced, the barnstormers were occasionally crashing airplanes and the government came along and said, you guys a giving airplane writing a bad name. we would like to give you a job to prove that the airplane is useful. we would like to to carry the mail. one state to another. so through rain, sleet, snow, what ever, the government began flying the mail from one place to another. shortly after, somebody said, if they can take mail, certainly they can take passengers from one place to another. that was the beginning of

commercial airlines. the government did not get into the airline business except when they are transporting crude from one place to another -- crews from one place to another. i think that the cost of building a spacecraft and a rocket can probably be done much cheaper by processes of profit- making and the commercial interest that bring to gather things that have been pioneered maybe by the government but now they are picking the best and they are doing things competitively. the worst thing you want to do is have the government compete with the private sector. unfortunately that is what we're doing right now. we have a spacecraft build and devolvingcecraft bi their capabilities, two with

capsules and one that i favor that will land on the runway. unfortunately, that does not get as much money peaky speaking of money, to touch on something he said -- he mentions the issue of nasa and funding has been somewhat politicized. $17 billion a year for nasa -- >> that is 0.5%. >> are these warranted, or no matter what the recession is, do we continue to forge forward and put money into nasa and go out there? why do we do this? >> a lot of people that i now, looking back on the last 40 years, will say that ever since the -- apollo, the space program has been a jobs program. how many jobs can we get in your state? the space shuttle passed by one vote.

all around the country, we had people working different places. i can tell you some pretty brutal stories about the politics that it involved with an hour space program. -- in our space program. it is bring home the bacon, and the bacon is jobs, because jobs get votes, and votes keep a congressman or senator with an office. >> why explore space? some argue folks here on earth cannot afford their medication or mortgage or meals -- maybe more money should go into the infrastructure here. why explore a vast frontier out there -- what do we gain by this vicarious knowledge? >> well, the one word i would use his leadership. when i grew up, there was no doubt in my young mind,

especially as a teenager during world war ii, which was the number one country in the world? which led the world in benevolence, in the not acquiring of other people's territory, the english-speaking people of the world saved the world during world war i, world war ii, the cold war. unfortunately, we are not quite banded together the way maybe we should be at this point. that is a little bit of an objective for me, to try and bring to gather the british and help their lagging space program so that we, trying to do something as leaders, do not stand out as the only leader, but we have great britain, the u.k., canada, new zealand, australia, and india.

india is extremely important for us to work with. >> the bill under would ask you, i sought -- bill underwood, saw your picture with the article "they promised us the moon and we got facebook." it talks about technology and the big problems of the world. can you talk about our priorities? >> i started on twitter and then turned over to my helpers to do it for may. -- for me. if i were on facebook, guess how many people would occupy my time asking questions all day long? i would not give very much work done. -- get very much work done. are we putting too much into these?

modern communication is with us, whether we like you are not. the world used to be run by business and politics. to help the masses. along came something 100 years ago that took over that position of business and politics -- is the communications industry, which learned how to succeed in business. and in politics. it is by telling the masses what is wrong with business, what is wrong with politics. and to infer demand. that is what kind of controls our country these days, communication. it is good. it brings us all closer together. but it also has a way of slanting our look at the world

of business and politics. >> and next question -- he asks you, what is your opinion of x and the emergence of the private sector -- spacex and the emergence of the private sector? >> i think elon musk is a very talented south african person who made a lot of money in paypal and has turned that into forming an organization, carefully selecting people from other companies, and selecting designs that are quite basic. i went to visit him recently, because over the last deadly stand or 20 years i have fancied myself a pretty good aware

person of the ways to get into mars and why we probably should not spend the money to put government people back on the moon. now we are second to the chinese. once the government sparked a program, you know how hard it is to ever turn it loose. establishing a colony on the moon when you can always bring them back does not give us leadership. we did things like that 50 years ago. we should pioneer out words in the solar system, and mars is the most likely, the most livable place, much more so than the moon. moonies good because we are close to it and it is relatively easy to get their and get back.

you can rotate people. you do not talk about a settlement, really, on the moon. more and more people that i know are aware of the economics, aware of history and aware of what this country needs will agree with me that if you go to mars, you go there for permanence. if you just go once and come back or go twice and come back -- i can tell you the senate will find at some other way to spend that money and we will have wasted everything we did. this is a congress that works on short term objectives that help them keep their constituents satisfied by bringing home the bacon. to get elected. excuse me, congressman royce.

>> president kennedy played a crucial role in developing nasa and the space program. where were you when you heard the news of his death, and what were your impressions of his leadership? >> i was at mit. i thought that was a very positive statement after a new what the mercury program had been set as objectives, in april of 1961, yuri gagarin flew in orbit. what did we do? may 5, allen sheppard wind up and back. just like what richard branson

has done. 20 days later, the president said, we should go to the moon in this decade. a lot of people thought that was impossible. how could we do that? nobody had been in or get -- orbit yet from the united states. what kind of rockets can be billed to do it? what is the main principle? he had a great principle -- he was going to build a great spacecraft, but we did not have the rockets to go with it. we needed a rocket that would do everything -- pick people up, land, liftoff, comeback, then back into the ocean again. it was a monster. so he made a rocket that would

not be ready until 1970. we had to pick to saturn-5's, one to carry the spacecraft. someone said, wait a minute, if we look at what we want to do is get a man on the moon and bring him back -- let's look at segments of this instead of just one spacecraft to do everything. >> 100 years from now, 200 years from now, are we going to look back at today's space program and say, how primitive? in 200 years willy fly to the moon or mars the way we get to new york or london -- how advanced is this going to get? >> time will tell. the marketplace and the leadership and the politics -- do we want to leave the world? -- lead the world or do we want

to follow? it is my hope we want to lead. i do not think we will do that by sending nasa astronauts back to the moon again. by the time they get there, it will be 50 years since we did that. is that the kind of progress we should be making, or should we be reaching out? i developed in the last several years a very strong leadership position that the u.s. should take at the noon. we should build the infrastructure. we should assemble the elements. of other countries, on the surface, from a satellite we are planning now to go to on the far side of the unknown that can do the robotic science, can do the mining for the ice crystals and convert that into hydrogen and

oxygen, which is fuel. a conference recently in hawaii, i was following a workshop that has been setting up international lunar bases by practicing on the big island of hawaii. you will assemble a large number of large objects. you put the first one down or you expected to land, another one down some distance away -- how you put them together? do that through a satellite -- motion control. you prove that you can do something like that here in the united states. then we do it at the moon. why my so enthusiastic about that? that is exactly what we want to do at mars. we want to put people on the noon of mars who can then assemble a base that we will

then send people. we should assure ourselves that we protect crew members from radiation as much as possible before they ever go somewhere. that is the moon, too. >> a two-part question -- do you believe in extraterrestrial life? >> i hope so. >> are we presumptuous enough to think we are the only ones here? >> no. but intelligence -- in a science-fiction story or a movie to come out, tv episodes -- it is pretty historic. but there probably is not a big plan that -- planet at alpha centauri. we would have found that by now.

somebody has to be first. somebody has to be leading the pack. et.e came on this plan tha relatively progressive fashion. the oceans, onto the lands. these characteristics will exist in other places. they're going to be much harsher conditions on a 99.5% of the places that could have life, but thethere are so many billions in our galaxy, so many billions of galaxies. if we find some live somewhere, chances are it is going to be so far away that we may detect their presence long after they have done anything, because

information flows of the speed of light. >> fascinating. >> he also asks if you can describe your feelings when you first walked on the moon. >> magnificent desolation. neil's words were wonderful -- he talked about a human being given the great honor to do this and how he was a small human step but, consider the magnitude of human beings devolving on earth, going through all the trauma and looking at the moon for centuries and centuries. and we get a chance to walk on that. that is a giant leap. think how giant to the leak will be when human beings from the planet earth set up permanent

settlements on another planet in the solar system. the leader of the nation that commits to do that will be remembered tens, hundreds of thousands of years in the future. in the history of our solar system. the pioneers to go there will be written about. people will jump at a chance to be among those pioneers. >> that is a good segue for this question -- he writes, we have not been back to the moon since 1972. it is cheaper and less risky to consider exploring a robotic lee. is this a place for manned exploration? >> not too long ago there were two robots on opposite sides of the moon of mars. spirit and opportunity. they were supposed to last 90 days.

they have lasted five years until one of them gave up. the other one was still going. the program manager, managerdquires, -- steve squires, has said, put it in writing, what they have done in the past five years could have been done in one week if we had had human intelligence in a time delay to control the robots. that is that proposiwhat i'm pr- so we go to the moon of march so we can control the robots, not just from the surface of the earth but from a stable point on the far side of the moon so that we can look at the south pole where there are craters that hold a lot of shells.

it is cold there, there are ice crystals -- that is where the u.s. wants to establish a main base on the moon. if we forget about the moon and do not go there -- do you think that will happen? no. china will decide where the main bases going to be. we know more about the noon than any other country. we have been there. why should we turn over leadership? that is going to take a strong leader to assert that we will build the infrastructure to help other people. we should put the first habitation, not for our people to go there, but so we can learn how to cover it with lunar soil for radiation protection. then put some other inflatables that they are building in las vegas. he wants to put those as

commercial activity. we really need to bring together commercial activities and government activities, much better than we have done in the past. >> jerry harrington asks you, how soon if ever will a man be sent to mars? will it take eight months to get their? >> back in 1985, i was trying to come up with a better way to go to the moon with something that would swing by the earth, swing by the moon, and then come back to earth and keep going back and not stop, but just keep visiting the noon and the earth. it does not turn out that that -- the purpose is to land a somebody, but if your perth -- purpose is to take a tourist flying by the noon, it still is a good idea, but it did not fall into favor with nasa in 1985.

a former administrator of nasa said, why don't you look at mars? some people have been doing some ratio-type orbits. it took 56 different spacecraft in order to give you something that was beginning to look practical. i looked at that, and i came up with one or bet that cycles from earth, five months later swings by mars, comes back to earth, keeps doing the same thing. there are called aldrin orbits. it is not the best, by it begins to pioneer a way that has now evolved into every other opportunity we have -- the speeds of approach by earth and mars are very low. there are lots of advantages to having to rather than one -- two

rather than one. purdue university and buizz aldrin have publicized these things. it establishes a transportation system on into the future. not just once -- and you have to build another series of spacecraft. all you do is join up with us and get off when you get there. since 1985 -- not yet. >> a recent graduate and discouraged job-seekers -- the question is, you have had so many successes. what is an important phase you are set back that has impacted you, and what is your future success? you had no failure? >> i had to mistakes that i made -- two mistakes that i may. the worst one was before i left nasa.

i went down to look at the next program after apollo. they had progressed quite a ways on that. it was two-stage and fully reusable. it would fly back and land -- it would go into orbit and come back and land on the runway. two stages, fully reusable. we would love to have that today. i'm talking 1970. you know why we did not get it? one nasa center wanted to put a crew in the booster to come back and land. there were seven teams bidding on this. i looked at the models -- i saw the windows in the booster. i said, what is this for? we have a crew in there to fight back. that is an automatic maneuver that you do, and if something goes wrong during the launch, you separate were the people are and to blow up the booster.

you cannot do that if you have a crew in there. you know how long that lasted? another half a year or so. a lot of money and a lot of time went into that. we helped to piece together a space shuttle, crew and cargo to gather, that was going to fly 50 missions a year. you know how many we flu? 9, usually six missions. we retired and now. they have flown maybe 35 missions. they were designed for 100 missions. but they are big and they are unsafe and they killed two crews. >> did neil no he was going to see the famous one small step for man, or was a spur of the moment thing? >> somewhere between the two. [laughter] if he knew, he did not tell me.

he said something to the effect of, if we land successfully, i will think of something. but that is neil. he comes up with the right thing to say. except he did not put that a in there. [indiscernible] if it wa>> roberts asks, is it true you receive decor that when you got back from the moon, and do you still have it? >> there is an all navy crew on apollo 11. all three of them had gold corvettes. there was a race car driver who ran a chevrolet cadillac car place in florida. he was a friend of the astronauts. there is something in -- general motors calls it a brass hat deal

with a are able to let people drive a car for publicity. what better publicity than letting a asked not drive a corvette? >> he wants to put it on ebay -- that is why he is asking. >> i have got a mercedes. [laughter] >> how many miles on it? i'm just kidding. >> built in the 1980's -- 70,000 miles. >> a brand new car. have you worked at all on the space telescope? what do you think about its mission? >> it is a pioneering information gathering of the cosmos out there. like the hubble telescope was. it will give us many new pieces of information that will give us

a better understanding of the origin of life here, the origin of the galaxy, of the entire universe. it is not close to earth. it is going to be at a considerable distance away. going to it, to service it, will not be easy. it has overrun its budget and is taking a lot of money away from many other programs, but once you begin to make an investment in something you cancel it out? sometimes you have to. i can think of one that deserves canceling right now. it is called the senate launch system. [applause] mandated by the senate in law,

and the law says it will be made out of heritage components. you know what that means? old stuff. things they have been working on so you do not have to build a new program and new jobs, and maybe lose an election. >> we have time for a couple last quick questions -- this is a very interesting question. can you talk about the relationship between you, neil, and michael collins? it seems to me he is the forgotten one as the third member of apollo 11. what was it like between you folks? >> there is a rotation of crews based on kind of when you get into your first flight. at an upcoming flight, you have a crew and a backup. as they are getting ready to

fly, you have two markers. so the backup on this flight becomes the prime. that is the starting with ews.ting the cruis how you get into debt and get started is quite a variable. he may lose a crew -- we lost a crew in st. louis and had to bring in a new backup crew. we lost apollo 1. that shuffle things around. ing get to the moon before the end of the decade -- we had to take some hurried steps. sending the crew on a second spacecraft, the apollo, the first time we launched the crew on the saturn 5, we send them to

the moon on apollo 8. we thought maybe the soviets were going to take one cosmonaut and fly around the moon and land. they had done this unmanned. that is why the advanced apollo 8. as it turned out, because of changes in the lunar module not being ready, neil and i were on the back of a crew of apollo 8. we help the crew. frank, phil andrews, and gen. jim. we worked together as a team. mike collins had an operation -- he was capsule communicator. he was not on apollo 8, but we have him join us because there was a shifting around. after apollo 8 came back, during

christmas of 1968, when they came back -- mid january, our crew was announced as a potential first landing. if the next two missions did what they needed to do. . we had to check it out on it9. -- apollo 9. then in the dress rehearsal, but not a landing. that winter ok. -- went ok. as soon as they announced the crew, guess what the questions from the press are? who is going to land on the moon? who is going to be adverse? this did not help crew morale. what is he going to say?

who is going to coach him? there was not the loss of privacy that there is going to be in the future. when you have got cameras all over the place, looking over to see what the crew is doing every minute of their mission. i hate to see that they come. i kind of like my privacy. other people, they like to be able to say what they want and do what they want. >> finally, why did you retire from nasa? >> when we finished our world tour, we were invited to the white house. we had a dinner there. president nixon asked the three

of us what we wanted to do. he said, mike, i know what you want to do because you have been helping secretary rogers and the state department. mike wanted to work with the state department in some of its contact with other nations. he also designed, did not build, but supervise the air and space museum in washington. very well done. neil wanted to stay with aeronautics. i wanted to go back to the service i had come from -- the air force. as it turned out, i was the first astronauts to ever go back to active duty. i felt my experience being at the air force academy for the first year when it opened up, when the first class came

in, that the faculty would be a good job as common dent of to mmandant of cadets. that is not what happened. for those of you who might be familiar with names of people, i had a classmate whose name was brandenberg. he got the job because his father had been chief of staff of the air force. he went to the air force academy. where are we going to send aldrin? we have an opening at the test pilot school. but we know he was never a test pilot, but that is okay. after 11 years away from the military, we will send him back to command the test pilot school. and i did the best job i could. i felt good with how i dealt with those students.

but it was not what i was looking for. it was a disappointment when it became clear that due to certain circumstances, i chanced to retire. >> in closing, is there any final thought you want to leave this audience with, whether it is your career, a nasa, being on "dancing with the stars." what is it you want to leave us on? >> i tried to accept invitations that come along to do things. that is why i am here. to try to explain to you through questions be burning issues that ic in our space program. -- i see in a space program.

it is leadership an exception was in, and not doing what we have done -- exceptionalism, and not doing what we have done earlier just because we can find things and get a pay back quicker. i'm interested in leadership, but not going back to the noon and spending a lot of money but we did already when robots can do that just as well. we can help foreign countries to do that. then we can lead the world. we can. we really can not. wil. will we do that? i will work on it as long as i feel there is a chance. after a while, we cannot keep working on something that just is not going to happen. because of short-term people. mostly politicians.

[applause] thank you very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> new jersey governor chris christie gave his state of the state speech today in trenton. christie once lawmakers not to shortchange his state on hurricane sandy relief. >> dawe as a state have waited 2 days, seven times longer than the victims of hurricane katrina waited. one thing i hope everyone in america now clearly understands -- new jersey, both republicans and democrats, will never stand

silent when our citizens are being shortchanged. [applause] the people of new jersey are in need. not from their own actions, but from an act of god that delivered a natural, it's human, and financial disaster. let me say, on behalf of all new jerseyans, we're thankful to the people of the united states, because i know they will honor the pit -- tradition of providing relief. we have stood with the citizens of florida and alabama, mississippi and louisiana, iowa

and vermont, california and missouri in their times of need. now i trust they will stand with us. president obama on sunday signed an initial $9 billion aid bill for hurricane sandy flood relief. next tuesday, the house is expected to vote on another bill with an additional $17 billion of aid. and an amendment offering another $33.7 billion that would fund longer-term projects. you can see governor christie's speech at c-span.org and, as always, the house is live on c- span. >> tomorrow, the national governors' association will deliver its address. we would hear from the chair, governor jack markell of delaware, and governor mary sablan of oklahoma, vice chair of the organization. live coverage at 10:00 a.m. eastern. on c-span 2, a conversation on the future of afghanistan. we'll hear from a former u.s.

ambassador to afghanistan. live coverage begins at 10:00 a.m. eastern from the atlantic council. now, a hearing on nasa's budget and a mission looking at strategic plans, the public- private partnership. this house science and technology committee is to a half hours. >> i recommend myself for five minutes or so for an opening statement. i want to recognize some of our colleagues, and our colleague and friend robert walker, the former chairman of this committee for many years, for agreeing to testify here today. i thank you and the other witnesses for being here. it takes a lot of effort and time.

and your knowledge and experience is very useful to the committee. as we consider legislation, we also think you for taking time to appear here today. there are a number of significant issues confronting nasa and its space mission. and aeronautics budget that can no longer support full-scale demonstration flights, no clearly articulated vision for human exploration program beyond international space station. the international space station is number one. we've got to get there first and have some security there. with regard to human space flight, during the national

debate, we merged guiding principles, resulting in the nasa authorization acts of 2005 and 2008. there was a consensus on the overall strategic direction. that consensus was short-lived when the administration abruptly canceled submission of a fy- 2011 budget. no one got everything they wanted. for lack of a clear consensus, resulted in no effective way to prioritize the many competing demands. it has been clear over the last few budget cycles that there are fundamental disagreements.

congress insisted and the presidential compromise included a heavy lift rocket development. the space launch systems compete for the same diminishing resources. since the commercial core program supports the i.s., perhaps should be funded by the

space operations budget. we're in a challenging budget environment. fiscal realities demand that nasa become more efficient. consensus has to be established among agency stakeholders, and also to clarify nasa's strategic vision, goals, and mission. the good work that nasa has done and that nasa can do in the future is so very important to me, and to everyone here in this room. i want to preserve our international space station. it is not likely with this electorate than we can expect to go to mars until people can go to the grocery store.

it is about the economy. the economy has to improve. i want to work together to insure the american people can get the kind of results that nasa is capable of producing. we have a distinguished panel of witnesses today. this should spark much-needed national dialogue about nasa's future. the group is uniquely qualified to start this important discussion by sharing their own perspective about the strategic direction of america's space program. that concludes my remarks. i now recognize mrs. johnson for her opening statement. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, and good morning to all.

i want to welcome my witnesses and a former chair. i look forward to all the testimony. at this time, the democratic caucus is having an organizational meeting that was supposed to start at 9:00, but because of the lateness of the ranking member meeting, it started a little bit late. today's hearing is an important one for the committee. nasa is a critical part of the nation's research and development enterprise, as well as being a source of inspiration for young people and a worldwide symbol of american technological power, leadership, and good will. we want nasa to succeed in its

endeavors. its success benefits our nation in many ways. in establishing nasa to the space act of 1958, congress directed the agency to contribute materially to the role of the united states as a leader in the aeronautical and space science and technology, and the application thereof, to the conduct of peaceful activities within and outside the atmosphere. successive nasa authorization acts over the years have stressed the need for a balanced program of science, aeronautics, technological research, and human spaceflight and exploration. results have been the this balanced program has given advances that have enhanced knowledge, promoted innovation, and economic vitality. it is inspired our youth and deepen our understanding of the

youth and environment. in recent years, nasa's ability to carry out its mission has been eroded. in that regard, it is estimated that nasa's purchasing power has decreased by 18% from fiscal year 1992 to 2012. last year's budget was about $1 billion less than fiscal year 2010. the cumulative impact of this budgetary instability has been felt by all of nasa's programs and its institutional infrastructure. this problem is highlighted by nasa's inspector general in a recent report. we will hear similar concerns raised by the national research council with us today as he discusses a recently released

report. the issues considered by the panel are not new to this committee. we have heard them raised in one form or another. we hope the findings of the n.r.c. will encourage the congress and administration to put nasa on a firmer footing and recognized nasa for the national asset that is. we should recognize that those programs are long-term undertakings. that is a challenge. we will face it in the coming months and years as we work to put the nation's financial

house in order. investments such as nasa are just that, investments. it will only be in retrospect that we learn the true cost of walking away from investments such as nasa. i firmly believe that those costs will be high and long lasting effect go down such a destructive path. i hope we do not do so, because other nations increasingly recognize the benefit a strong and active space program can deliver.

as a result, we see them being willing to make the necessary investments to build the capability. mr. chairman, our leadership in space and aeronautics are at stake. our children's future jobs and long-term global competitiveness are at stake. resting on our laurels from prior accomplishments is not an option. whether in science, aeronautics, or human exploration. that is not to say that we should not do all we can eliminate waste wherever we find it. but all of those efficiencies will be not if we do not also recognize sustained investment in research, technology, and development must also be made if nasa is to succeed. mr. chairman, before i conclude

my remarks, allow me to take a moment to them for their service to our nation. each of them will be departing the house of representatives at the completion of the 112th congress. i want to wish them well. they have been thoughtful, they have been thoughtful, hard working members of our committee caucus, and i shall miss them. i yield back the balance of my time. >> are there other members who wish to add opening statements? it will be added to the record. i like to say a few words about several members of our committee and think of for their dedication to congress and

to the senate space and technology committee. on the republican side, roscoe bartlett. roscoe, i always enjoyed telling him he is too old to be here. [laughter] he is a great member, and i am surprised and disappointed that he was defeated. i pray for whoever is going to take his place. an outstanding member. todd akins, missouri. he is a good man. he served well for us. people kept telling me to put him off this committee and i said i can put anyone off this committee, but we could not do it without [inaudible] sandy adams of florida, still young enough to continue her fight for nasa. dan made the mistake of opening up questions, and the way the

russians ask questions, they make a 15 minute speech, but after the speech they said, if you love us so much, why do you still have all those guns pointed towards us? dan and i were way back away from them. there was a rail between us. they couldn't hear what i said to him. i said, tell the s.o.b. i don't trust him. he said they would run both of us out there. his son is a very fine young man, did a wonderful job as vice chairman of this committee. we will miss the young man. how do you lose a guy like jeff cravaack? very knowledgeable, fought for everything that was right. he served with me on -- i believe we served together on the transportation committee. is lynn here yet? she is not here. brad miller of north carolina. i have learned something from him, several things. he goes back to one of the

better law practices in north carolina. all my folks from cannon mills, kannapolis. you are young enough to come back. i wish you well. and hansen clarke. he was a great guy. it was an honor to serve on this committee with all of you.

no matter what they go to next, there will always be friends and colleagues. miss johnson, i think you again for yielding back. at this time, i would like to introduce our panel of witnesses. robert s. walker is a former chairman of this committee. bob led this committee from 1995 to 1997. welcome, bob. retired major-general ronald sega. he currently serves as vice president enterprise executive for energy in the environment

for colorado state university and ohio state university. led a distinguished career in the u.s. air force. d.o.d. executive force base, and prior to that, director of defense research and technology. he flew two space shuttles. we certainly welcome you. >> we welcome, honorable marion blakey, president and ceo representing more than 150 leading aerospace manufacturers.

ms. blakey served a five-year term as administrator of the f.a.a. we do certainly welcome you. associate professor for space science and engineering at the university of michigan, specialist in robotic exploration and space and team leader for the development for the fast imaging plasma spectrometer on messenger spacecraft. we certainly welcome you. dr. scott pace, director of the space policy institute. from 2005 to 2008, associate administrator for program analysis at nasa. we welcome you as well. as our witnesses should know, testimony is limited to 5 minutes, after which members of

the committee will have five minutes each to ask questions. you are not just help to 5 minutes. your time is value. you took your time to prepare to come here. it took you years to be prepared to be asked to come here, and you are here.

your time is very, very important. we will not hold you to the five minutes. just do your best. our committee protocol dictates we recommend bob walker as the first witness. he refers to many of the details in the report with his suggestion. the committee and now recognizes you for five minutes to present your testimony.

>> mr. chairman, ranking member johnson, members of the committee, colleagues, i am vice chair of the national research council's committee on nasa strategic direction. it is my pleasure to come before you today to speak to you about the work of our committee. our committee was charged with considering the strategic direction of the agency as set forth most recently in the 2011 nasa strategic plan, and other relevant statements on space policy as issued by the president of united states. with assessing the relevance of nasa's goal, were charged with recommending how nasa could establish and effectively communicate a unifying vision for nasa's strategic direction. our committee was not charged with a developing strategic goals for nasa. we met five times throughout 2012. the committee received input from nearly 800 members of the public, through a web based questionnaire.

small groups of committee members visited each of the nine nasa centers and jet propulsion laboratory. the resulting report entitled, "nasa's strategic direction and the need for national consensus," is a report by the committee. despite a turbulent policy environment, the agency has made many astonishing accomplishments. without consensus, the agency cannot be expected to work toward long-term priorities. there is a mismatch between the portfolio of programs assigned to the agency and the budget allocated by congress. what we have found during the is

rather obvious. although nasa develops a strategic plan on a new regular basis, the agency itself does not establish its strategic goals. those are the fault by the national leadership and key stakeholders within the national leadership do not always agree on the goals of the agency should pursue. this process should apply within the administration and between the administration and congress, and should be reached only after meaningful technical consultations with the private sector and potential international partners. the strategic goals and objectives should be ambitious,

get technically rational, and should focus on the long term. following the establishment of a new consensus on the agency's future, nasa should establish a new strategic plan that provides a framework for decisions on how the agency will pursue its strategic goals and objectives. allows for flexible and realistic implementation, clearly establishes agency wide priorities, died the allocation of resources within the budget and present a comprehensive picture that integrates aeronautic activities. to reduce the mismatch between the agency's activities and the resources allocated to it, the white house, congress and nasa could imply any or all of the following four not mutually exclusive options. the committee does not recommend any one option or combination of options, but presents these to illustrate the scope of decisions and trades that could be made. option one, institute an aggressive restructuring program to reduce infrastructure and personal costs to improve

efficiency. option two, engage in and commit for the long-term to more cost sharing partnerships with other government agencies, private sector industries, and international partners. call option 3, increase the size of the nasa budget. option four, reduce considerably the size and scope of elements in the current portfolio. this would require reducing or eliminating one or more of nasa's current portfolio elements, human exploration,

earth and space science, aeronautics, and space technology in favor of the remaining elements. each of these simple options with the possible of option two would require legislative action. my recommendation states first, congress should adopt regulatory and legislative reforms that would enable nasa to improve the flexibility of the management of its centers. nasa should transform its network of field centers into an integrated system that supports its strategic plan and

communicates in strategy and advances its strategic goals and objectives. with regard to partnerships, the committee recommends nasa should work with other government agencies with responsibilities in aeronautics and space to more effectively and efficiently coordinate the nation's aeronautics and space activities, and the united states should explore opportunities to lead a more international approach. both in the human space program, and in the science program. finally, the committee was impressed with the quality of personnel and level of commitment of nasa also civil service and contractor staffs and with the agency in general.

however, the committee also heard about the frustration of many staff with the agency's current path and limitations imposed on it by the inability of the national leadership to agree upon a long-term direction for the agency. only with a national consensus on the agency's future direction, along the lines described in this report, can nasa continued to deliver the wonder, knowledge, the national security and economic benefits and the technology that typified its history.

thank you for the opportunity to testify. i would be pleased to respond to any questions. >> thank you, general. it gives me pleasure now to recognize robert walker. i have listened to bob as a democrat and republican and i have respected him always as both. we recognize you for five minutes. or as long as you might take, bob.

>> thank you very much. thank you for the warm welcome. i want to first congratulate you for the leadership of given to this committee. you have led it with grace and

good humor. you've given chairman smith a strong base upon which to build the science, technology, and space leadership for the future. thank you for all of you have contributed here. if you believe as i do that humankind's destiny lies in the stars, if you believe as i do that nasa should be an instrument in the fulfilment of that destiny, the work of preparing nasa for the daunting challenges of strategy, budget and relevance in the 21st

century is truly the work of shaping the future. the recently released report by the national research council does a detailed job of documenting the challenges that nasa faces. lack of adequate resources, lack of a agreed upon direction, aging infrastructure, emergence of other space capable nations, collapse of some

international partnerships, increasing the relevance of the aeronautical research program. n.r.c. provided four options for addressing an uncertain future. i choose option two. engage in and commit for the long term to more cost sharing partnerships with other u.s. government agencies, private sector industries, an international partners. within that option, i will emphasize the public-private partnerships. i believe them to be the best

way to obtain the resources so vitally needed to make nasa's mission is achievable. i see that mindful of the fact one of the most important cost saving measures would be to use the totality of u.s. assets for u.s. purposes. it makes no sense for coup nasa spend billions on technological development. some available technology may have to be modified. the bulk of the costs can be shared. nasa's basic role must be to do

projects that pushed the envelope of what we know. high risk leads to new technologies. that combination of risk and reward will underpin the next generation of space knowledge and products. space and technology leadership requires a much broader view of the space community that has been traditional. if nasa is to have the resources it needs to maintain a preeminent role, it must expand its funding base in the reaching beyond the appropriation process on capitol hill. i say that letter point with all due respect.

no federal budget in the foreseeable future is going to provide nasa with the money it needs to do everything we wanted to do. nasa must see entrepreneurship and enablement as key components of its science technology and exploration program. there are positive signs that nasa sees merit in this approach. the commercial cargo and crew programs are encouraging. congress needs to expand the authority to move even more

aggressively in this new direction. too often, the steps taken thus far have been grudging because they do represent a significant cultural shift. that shift has been endorsed by several recent commissions a look at nasa's future and are concerned. 2009 when commission called for broadening the space related community and restructuring nasa to interact with that committee. it was believed that nasa could benefit from expanded community as it attracted outside investment in its activities and uses people and facilities to enable progress. the larger network of people and industries has to be a part

of its strategic plan. it begins with buying available services from non-traditional sources. we already know there is interest. new companies have agreed to provide services to nasa and pursue business beyond nasa. those companies should not be seen as rivals are detriments. the are the outgrowth of past nasa successors. moreover, thinking in non- traditional entrepreneurial ways potentially can access tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars of private investment and nasa activities.

if programs and centers were restructured to take advantage of private capital, there is no end to potential collaborations. would anything be harmed if names were attached to particular projects? formula one racing, the sponsorships their pay for operations costing $200 million to $300 million. that is enough for a whole space flight. congress will have to be willing to make some adjustments necessary to access that kind of future. when the go-daddy rover is traversing martian terrain, we will be on our way to fulfilling our destiny in the stars. thank you very much. >> and that is just the way it is. thank you, mr. walker. i now recognize honorable marion blakey. >> thank you, chairman hall. thank you for the opportunity to be here again. i am marion blakey, president and chief executive officer of the aerospace industry association, the nation's premier trade association for aerospace. we are very proud of the fact that we are documented space systems and how they're woven into the everyday lives of americans. nasa programs are hallmarks of the character of our nation and leadership. as americans, we're always

looking for to the next great frontier. we need to think carefully about changing from current programs. it not only takes the consensus, it takes resources and capabilities. some the we are already building today. had we not committed to the f-1 rocket engine program in the 1950's well before president kennedy's apollo announcement, we would never have gotten to the moon by 1969. this engine enabled a wide variety of human spaceflight missions. how do we keep nasa moving in the right direction? nasa needs stable, long-term investment and steady policy goals. more funding would be better. stability is essential to both space mission success and the health of the united states space industrial base. an examination of nasa strategic direction must consider the impact to this space, which is also essential to the national security space capabilities as well. but it take this opportunity, mr. chairman, to recognize you as the longest serving member of the committee, by giving nasa solid guidance with the 2010 authorization act, you've demonstrated the leadership

essential to ensure future industry investments and recruit new airspace pilots. three goals, first, we must fully utilize the international space station, which is a unique national lab. the quickest way for a nation to access the international space station. it was terrific to see the success of the first commercial cargo supply mission. nasa's commercial initiatives promise to bring down costs, and they will free resources for other programs. second, nasa's capabilities are a realistic approach that is within the fiscal limit that we can then build a space systems needed to explore new destinations. to date, significant progress has been made on this program, including the delivery of the first orion capsule to florida to launch. third, we must maintain global leadership in space science. let's get the web telescope

operating, fall upon our mars exploration success, and replenish our indispensable earth observation system capabilities. the specter of sequestration concerns me greatly. not only would it lead to program delays that would prove more costly in the long term, but it would also have the immediate impact of putting more than 20,000 nasa contractor jobs at risk. that is the conclusion, and this is very new, of george mason university economist in a study we are releasing today. i will make certain that all

members have a copy of this study. the report highlights the impact of nasa procurement spending reductions in 11 key states. texas would lose nearly 6000 nasa-related, highly skilled jobs as a result of sequestration. that is a $320 million impact to the state of texas. in conclusion, by focusing on investments and support of the 2010 act, the congress can insure the health of our space industrial base and a short our space program will remain second to none. i thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of the space industry. i look forward to your questions. >> thank you for your testimony. and for your accolades. i yield you another hour for

your kind words. good testimony, and we thank you. doctor zurbuchen, i recognize you. >> mr. chairman and members of the committee, this for the opportunity to testify. i am from the mountains in switzerland. i am a professor of space science and aerospace engineering at the university of michigan. i am also the associate dean for entrepreneurial programs. this is a period of limited resources. we need to focus to position ourselves for better times. the way to do this is to ensure that a talented workforce will be available, and disruptions will not interrupt our pursuits. we need to pursue a strategy in

which universities as well as nasa centers are fully engaged. today i want to focus on two key aspects of this strategy, focus on people and the focus on disruption. the number one priority of the space program, and especially its science program, should be talented people. every mission in space is carried out by people, not paper work. we need people and their know- how. we have to ensure that nasa space missions have access to the best talent. we must recognize that top talent does not just hang around and wait for better times. builders want to build. innovators will innovate.

nasa leadership must focus on the aspirations and dreams of the innovators of the future. second, some of this talent will be at nasa centers, but most of the talent will be in academia and industry, particularly in small companies. encouraging competition and emerging space centers will keep top talent focused on efforts that ultimately will aid this nation in achieving its most ambitious goals, both technical innovation and reduced cost. the next priority is innovative disruption.

these programs focus on smaller spacecraft, rapid turnaround missions. consider for example the program at the university of michigan. the first one failed a few weeks into orbit. the second one has now made measurements for over a year. research published in our premier journal. this mission has provided hands on experience for 50 of our best students. some of them work at nasa centers. they got their experience, as

most do, in the u.s. i do believe that a program like this requires small and responsive missions and project from sub orbital to large, strategic missions. it is a big priority. discovery, new frontiers, the interclass missions, depending on the respective communities. these missions have provided the best value for the money investment. consider, for example, the university of michigan mission that was recently focused to eliminate one of the biggest concerns and prediction of big storms, such as hurricanes. the uncertainty that relates to the strength of the storms. the science payout is approximately 100 times smaller

in mass, in price, and in power than conventional satellite went measuring instruments, which enables an entire constellation to be flown at lower accounts. this reduces the revisit time. from days to hours. these short-term priorities must be aligned with thinking worthy of nasa. we must remember that the work we do is not purely scientific. technological, economic, or

military based. thank you so much. >> thank you, dr. zurbuchen. at this time, i recognize the doctor for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it has been noted that the nasa strategic plan does not drive nasa budget requests or activities within those requests. it is not surprising there are numerous disconnect between

stated policies and their actual funding. such disconnects are not inevitable and can be resolved by the white house and congress. nasa budgets are a more accurate reflection of the facto national policy than the nasa strategic plan. the obama administration's stimulus program was greater than nasa's budget. the united states sent humans to the moon, built and operated

a space shuttle, explore the solar system, and contributed a share of the international space station for less than the cost of the american recovery and reinvestment act. into a's environment, but seeming discretionary expenditure for civil space exploration will be challenging unless there is a clear rationale linking such efforts to broader national interest can be supported in a bipartisan manner over many years. but hope to convey is that while nasa faces challenges, a way forward exists to put the agency on a more stable and sustainable foundation. united states can best advance its national interests three more integrated, strategic approach with national security and civil space interests. international space-based corporations, space commerce, and the international space

security discussions could be used to reinforce each other. many of today's most important geopolitical challenges and opportunities lie in asia. asian space agencies have shown a common interest in lunar missions as a logical next step. a multinational program would be a practical means of creating a broader international framework. the geopolitical benefits could support more ambitious space explorations. europeans were interested in being part of a return to the moon. russia publicly supported this position. there are many commercial and educational objectives that can be achieved at the moon. the case for human a mission to astroid should be visionary the focus on practical applications. this is a reflect did -- reflection of the values we hold. it is not just our dna. it is our values.

be our nation not defined by blood or religion but a conscious choice. in shaping the international environment for space activity, the u.s. should build a more prosperous world in which our values are taken beyond. we should also exercise some humility in facing the unknown. in their time these projects were controversial and criticized. who today would have said they should not have been done? we have seen these efforts to define us as a nation who pioneers the next frontier. we are all in this together, white house, congress,

international partners and many u.s. companies that operate the capabilities. in think this committee for holding this hearing today. i will be happy to answer any questions you might have. >> thank you. i think all of you for your testimony. the committee limits questioning to five minutes for each of us. i will open a round of question. i do not ever like to say this is my last day. i do not anything last. i do not even like them to call an airport a terminal.

i am thinking of the wonderful testimony you have given in the time it took you to get that ensued deliver it to us. it is great and generous. i glean from each of you that there is this need for more funds. they recommended $3 billion additional for nasa. this would not have even brought us up to 1% of the overall budget. three presidents turn their backs on us. things could be different today. you suggested several modifications. i have a question or so what reaction has your committee

received with regard to the recommendations you lay out? you said a means to signing a consensus for nasa's future. can you answer that? >> the report was brief to a nasa administrator. it was well received. we had not breached any other elements besides nasa. >> i stand corrected. what was their reaction? >> they speak for the president

sometimes. >> they have not gone through this in detail. we have to wait for their reaction. >> your testimony point out potential international partners confused by space goals and priorities to return to the moon without a viable alternative.

why don't you elaborate? this seems to me the space station is number one. if we cannot do that we cannot do anything. we lose our international partners. we need more money.

i think it is too late to ask for the addition that would help us that was suggested by a man that has ever been made. you will know whether or not the consensus is needed. it does nasa believe a consensus is needed? >> would you like to insurance -- answer the international or nasa question? not being with nasa today, i think they do feel frustrated by the disconnect between the white house and congress. they would like to have some clear direction and support. if you ask them as representatives of the administration, i think they

would say we have a direction and policy. we're trying to execute that as best as we know how. the policy is disconnected from technical and political reality. i agree with you that the space station is the most vital immediate thing we need to be focused on we have to be looking at what comes after the space station. this is where our partners feel a bit left out. mars and asturias are very challenging. when they look at themselves and their own agencies, and they do not see a way for meaningful

operations. they are left without a way forward to work with us. international cooperation is essential to any exploration be on the world's orbits. no one thinks the will repeat the apollo program going there by ourselves. what can our international partners do? we have not really provided a hope for our partners in current policy. >> have you feel about putting focus on the space station but keeping in your open to going to mars and not to be asking for great amounts of money that it is going to take to do that until we perfect our reach in our own space station. >> if one does not support the space station well anything else is meaningless. the aftermath of the columbia accident we had very serious

conversation with our international partners as to whether or not they wanted to stop and call it a day. they were very clear that we have to continue with the space station. it was not practical to talk about other international cooperation if we fail to at the station. i think the number one issue, utilization of the space station is the near term issue. insuring access to the station with higher reliability is a top issue. one of the concerns is on the sustainability of the station with the fragile logistic support. new commercial cargo capabilities are extremely critical and necessary.

if there are any faltering and that, we will be looking at the potential for having to maybe reduce the manning on the space station. we will be looking at our utilization going out. >> my time is out. i recognize mrs. johnson for five minutes. >> let me thank each of the witnesses for extraordinary testimony. i am in a state of frustration. i think this committee is

expected to be the visionary committee. i feel very strongly that our future and research development and innovation balm depends on what we do. we are very mindful of the fact that we have very little money. with the help of experts we can at least lay out what we consider the vision for our country's research and innovation. and then allow the administration to determine what we can cannot do.

currently there is so much frustration as soon where nasa is concerned that they do not know what is coming next. just looking at what has happened so far in space, where we are now keen almost exclusively from space exploration and research. i believe that to stop in decide we cannot afford it is saying to our future that we will not be there.

we are just going to take a back seat and watch the rest of the world. we will not need to educate our young people i guess my question is how would you help us. -- how would you help us come to a real of recommendation that speaks to be need or future rather than just the money? we have got to make some real serious decisions. we have got to decide that we're going to invest in our future and eliminate the need for food stamps are whether we will continue to pay for more and more. i am very concerned i know we're very sensitive to the costs. we are not the appropriators. we're looking to see what our nation needs. i need to know if you give me some of your opinions on where you really think we ought to be if we were brave enough to say this is what we need, take it or leave it, mr. president. >> i agree with your premise.

i think the role the government has to play in nasa is to ensure that its commissions are future oriented. i think we have spent an awful lot of money on operational issues. this committee could give us a sense of direction. you have to commit yourself to high-risk technology. you reduce the time it takes to go to mars. you do it. we can develop technologies along those lines.

it will take the committee's decision to give nascent those kinds of instructions to move it forward. there are ways to reach out for some of the other things we are doing. since i left congress i've been involved with the ffrdc. they recommend that at least some of the nasa centers near to that kind of model. you can have both a government funding stream going into the operation as well as outside money coming in to do other things. that allows you to have some other streams of money that is not depend on the appropriations process. seems to me this committee could come up was someone along those lines. that allows you to look forward as well as find the resources necessary. that is what i'm trying to suggest.

think that is possible. i've worked with these companies looking to do exciting things. they would love to have nasa as a partner. you have to find out a way to find the ways for nasa to be able to do that partnership on a very routine basis. >> i know my time has expired. >> our study task stated that any recommendations will be predicated on the assumption that the nasa budget will be restrained. we look at a budget constrained environment. we do believe we concur with what you're saying in terms of

the long term view. objectives are starting points. there is a consensus about those goals and objectives. as we had any witnesses and did it is important. it is important there is clarity in terms of the direction. the plan can identify what the trades are in that portfolio going forward. there is a starting point upon

which some choices can be made. >> i think you will find industry joining. there is the ability to bring together the public and private sector international. it is certainly an excellent step in the right direction. there the upcoming reauthorization process, it is not so far away that you will have to tackle it. there are conflicting views about this. let's keep in mind that building the capabilities to get into deep space, the ability both in terms of heavy launch as well as microcapsules and tackling some of the research. we do not have all the answers are in deep space radiation and bone density. this critical research has to be continued. when they supported the rockets

in the 50's they did not know where they were going to go in and made all the difference. >> this provides hands-on experience. it is the crucial thing to give them a sense of the future. when they say we have been to the moon already have to say my father's generation went to the moon. we have not. that generation is passed. queenie to real be -- rebuild people. there is this opportunity to provide opportunity for real

hardware in flight experience for which there is no substitute. the building of capabilities, none of that is possible without hands-on expertise. i thought my colleague really nailed that one. >> the gentle lady yield back her time. i think that was a very good question that he asked. i am sorry that was not put to the president of the united states before. the funds we need it and were requested were turned down. this time i recognize mr. simpson for five minutes.

>> nasa was created in reaction to the launching of sputnik 1. nasa is focused on putting humans into space on arguably the most exciting facet of the agency. mission oriented space programs have been the prism through which we judge the agency. mission orientation excited a group students to go in to stem education and got as a generation of scientists and engineers. the space shuttle flew its last mission in 2011. we rely on the russian space agency. the bush administration began the program to serve as the shuttle's success are.

president obama -- successor but president obama closed the program. congress has continued to see the importance of the system in mandated the space system in the zero ryan program. -- orion program. i appreciate your comments that the stimulus act appropriated moribund in 1 act in this -- more funds in one act than this country has spent on nasa since its creation. budget in spending are an example of priorities. in terms of having to continue the united states preeminence, not just in the space program but in terms of science and everything else that goes along, it ended up being washed away in stimulus funds. as this hearing has

highlighted, the approach to this lacks clear mission. he is relying on the success of commercial space. i strongly support a public/private partnership for our space policy. it is up to now said to develop the heavy lift rocket because the private sector does the not have enough funds to do it by itself. that rocket means a net to overcome the administration's shortsightedness. they supported a mission to the moon. president obama has taken a been there done that approach. we have not been there for 40 years. the partners would have helped us. they have never been there. this will fill the void be left behind. that will have a trickle down

of that on the number of people that we train as scientists and engineers to keep america's pre- eminence in practically everything else. would you please discuss the problems caused by the cancellation of the program and what is needed from congress in this current fiscal environment to insure the success of the space launch system? >> thank you. that is a tall order. one of the cruel things it was supposed to do was provide a transition for the work force. >> we have lost that. >> we have lost that. the deep integration between lower orbit and farther

destinations that were hoped for is now gone. 2012 is not to thousand eight. we are in a new situation today if -- is not 2008. we are in a new situation today. increasing risk to the international space station. while we hope for and want to see the private sector take over that work, if there are delays or problems we do not have a fallback option. we are down to a few critical paths. the complementary nature eyespots was one of its strengths. the lack of a clear rationale for human exploration be on the international space station is another serious problem.

the approach of being capability driven also has a lot of vulnerabilities. i think a more strictly geopolitical approach such as a post-cold war approach would be a better approach for the united states. there are others that one could take. talking about capabilities is absent a strategic rationale. i think that is a very fraught path. >> thank you. my time is now expired. >> thank you. funding for nasa is very important for many reasons, but it creates jobs. we have got to speed up our nation's economic recovery. i have a couple of bills i

believe provide a very cost- effective way to strengthen our economic competitiveness. that would be to invest in the city that symbolizes bow at the u.s. many urge both the u.s. manufacturing and assets to help -- both u.s. manufacturing in the assets to help our economy grow stronger. it is facing its own fiscal cliff. i will soon be introducing a bill that will allow the city to refinance its considerable debt at a lower interest rate, saving it. furthermore, i am proposing eliminating capital gains taxes

on investment. it is a way to spur investment. saying that, in the city of jewish right we have an -- anoietroit we have extraordinarily high number of people who have lost hope because they are not working. they're out the metropolitan region -- throughout the metropolitan region we have thousands of job better going unfilled because they cannot find people qualified to be hired into those jobs. we have a skills gap in detroit as well as in this country. i know you understand these economic challenges we are facing. how you feel investing in assets innovation would help us close that gap? >> i in the first university

graduate in my family. the only reason i studied science and came to this country because the commitments this committee has made. i believe that power of investments that come from these have a tremendous effect on the youth on the young high school student who is making decisions for her career and the future that she has in front of her. i do believe the inspiration aspect of nasa is an important part. once we get them through the high schools and universities, i believe the defers portfolio explains to our students that

technology and progress talks about ideas. something like 5000 students in entrepreneurial activities, aerospace is the third most common theme. they have mentioned the tremendous power of the ability of putting these companies out there trying to have new approaches of lansing while we -- landing that rover are on

mars. i believe the hands-on experience are a second aspect in a very important solution that you were mentioning. the jobs are coming. some of the surprisingly changes from technology is developed on the auspices. they are investigating sewer systems using robotics technology that was involved in nasa. general motors is having a tremendous economy lesson learned in collaboration with nasa through these public/private partnerships. i believe there are multi pronged aspects that lead directly to the top line to what our economy does. >> thank you. do you have time for another question?

>> i beg your pardon? >> i yield back my time. >> the committee recognizes chairman smith. >> let me address my first question to you. it shows there is not much supports and the scientific and space committee for a near- earth astroid in 2025. is this helpful in getting us to mars? are there alternative missions that can replace that mission? >> there's a mission to an asteroid that is in the 2010 national space policy of the u.s.

in addition to not having been widely accepted, there were some shortcomings noted. as we look back in time, and there have been several presidents that have talked about mars. the rhetoric toward that was noted by the committee. there are different paths that one could go if that was the chosen destination for a human mission. it will maybe look at integrating some of the other aspects of nasa's work. for example, if that was the strategic goal then you will look at the robotic missions

that would support going there. >> the do you think we should reconsider that mission to the near-earth asteroid? >> the committee did not address that directly. there are many questions. it could be focused on the strategic goals. >> thank you. what do you think the american people would like for us to do in ? -- in space? the hubble is popular with curiosity. more specifically, how do you determine that coincidence between popular support in missions that are scientifically justified in

missions that can be justified by budget constraints as well? >> u.s. public opinions have been remarkably stable for space activity. it was never as large as people thought it was during the apollo. it has never been a low as people thought about after. the american public has a sense that we are and exploring, pioneering in nation. and they assume that our leadership is working on that. they trust that is happening. when things like the shuttle program ended without a clear path after, there was somewhat of a sense of shock and concern. not because they agree or preferred one pack or another but because they sensed, isn't someone working on this? getting too specific missions, i think we see over and over

people having an interest in people. when there is the possibility of organic life on mars ec lot of interest. much to the disappointment of the geologist who think they are doing important work. space tourism, said the sense of personal communication -- participation. >> would you put in that category earth like planets? >> absolutely. the number of earth like planet has been very exciting. with the james space telescope mirrors seen things we have never seen before. it will inspire that sense of wonder that the american people assumed their country is going to be a leader. >> how do we determine the balance between robotic and

human missions? there are advantages and disadvantages to both. >> clearly there needs to be an understanding of what humans can do best and what robots can do best. robots give us tremendous amount of information. in general, if they find what we sent them there to find. it is based upon our belief of what they might be capable of finding. humans have the advantage of going and finding things that we never expected. someone said the other day that the two small rovers that were on mars for many months did in the whole time that they were there about the same amount of work that one human could do any day and a half. it is the human ability to process information in remarkable ways that is needed. you do strike a balance. the precursor missions will

always be a robot id. there are tremendous science about the same amount of work that one human to do in a gained 1/2. it is in fact the human ability to process information in remarkable ways that is needed. i think you do strike a balance -- the precursor missions are always calling to be robotic, probably. there are tremendous science missions you can do with robots. in the and you want to but humans into a place where humans can find only those things. >> thank you. >> i am aware of mr. walker's problem space and time wise. we excuse you. >> i am fine. i have my office tell my appointment that i will reschedule it. thank you. >> thank you. the chairman now recognizes the gentleman from michigan. >> thank you.

thanks to all of you who testified on this excellent testimony. i am from an industry that has been affected -- benefited much from nasa and the technologies and everything that they have spawned from their research. i come from the automobile industry, everything from metals to paint to weight. i help nasa gets a long-term presence that they are looking for. it but it's this entire country. -- benefits this entire country. had not been for the stimulus we might not be able to talk about any funding. with that, i would like to direct a question to general. you testified that nasa needs

personal flexibility including the ability to hire contracts rather than civil servants. i would like to know if this is because there is not a long- term commitment to the program. or if you believe even if there is a long-term commitment that would be your strategy of personnel? what provisions can nasa make for the retraining of missions if you end up with those people? is the commercial markets long -- large enough to absorb these highly skilled people? could the market absorb those? >> as we looked one of our organization was to identify

the effectiveness of the mission activity. that is how we address that. as you are right at strategic objectives and goals and nastic create a strategic plan to -- nasa creates a strategic plan to accomplish those, we recommend the flexibility, not necessarily how it would turn out on the ability for infrastructure alliance with the strategic goals and electives. we did note that the jet propulsion lab is a structure. there are folks they're engaged in many aspects of research and development and operations.

different centers have a different mix in terms of contractors and civil servants. there were about four of them. they were about. about three of them were quite high. there is one of higher than contractors. it was more about the flexibility of doing what the center would be expected to accomplish. >> happen only assure that nasa's facilities are not acquired by foreign interests

that may be harmful to our national interest? >> that was not addressed in our study. in terms of the u.s. vs. foreign companies. >> you testified in your written statements that nasa's infrastructure flexibility and this be included in foreign countries? >> i do not recall that we specify in our deliberations the nature of the potential facility. a great facility.

some of nasa's missions need that. it also has the capacity for other work. issa have looked at doing some of the work in that facility. they were also discussing the facts -- t ofhe space acts -- the space acts. -- with spacex. some may be inappropriate for a sale. others may be greater utilization in more creative ways. >> thank you. you talked about the possibility for-profit

companies. we all know there are great minds out there thinking about farming in space and mining in space. are there really companies that can join in with nasa to help nasa become a viable program? >> absolutely. you do have working relations. we would like relations at work toward the future. we announced to a company that is looking to go to the moon. the expertise in that area would be invaluable. they are prepared to pay nasa for utilization of their facilities. there are lots of opportunities

out there that can be expanded even more into the future. you mentioned the automobile industry. they are in the process of building in autonomous vehicles. no one has done as much work on an autonomous vehicles than nasa. these are partnerships that could be expanding. >> i yield any time i have left. >> the chairman recognizes the gentleman from mississippi. >> this was especially appropriate considering the reauthorization. this is already been expressed. i came concerned with the vision going forward for causing such grief. what are our long-term goals for nasa?

how we form a strategy that takes into account all nasa initiatives to stem education? we are discussing some of the past nasa can take. none of them will be easy. our job become more difficult as budgets are shrinking. they will do a better job of informing the american people of the important job nasa does. this is worth investing it. we must not forget that this is an investment in research and future technology. nasa has a proven record and thousands of examples we cannot live without in 2012. i would like to remind everyone the speech president kennedy

gave in 1962. he addressed the effort to put the man on the moon and use the famous line "we did these things not because they are easy but because they are hard." the questions we must answer are anything but easy. we shall not shrink back simply because their heart. nasa must set up to this challenge. this is not now come anyone in this room wants to see happen. i believe i may have time for one question. given the end of this shuttle program how does the uncertainty threaten our industrial base? >> certainly. this was extremely disruptive.

they have contractors working down there. all of those people skills go elsewhere. it may very well go into other industries. we are extremely concerned that there be the kind of stability and long-term programs and ones that really do tap the outer edge of design talent. it was behind the many universities that are all combining support. >> had be replaced that lost talent? will not be a gap?

>> we are quite worried about that. as much as we support these programs be still have to have the opportunities and young people to see in front of them. if these opportunities are not clear, they will definitely go elsewhere. we do not see the kind of upsurge we should. it is a problem. we have a huge amount of required -- retirees in the industry. >> thank you. i do have a couple more questions but i will yield that

my time. i do agree with our colleagues from detroit. i am all in favor of limiting the capital gains tax for every american. thank you. >> the chair now recognizes the chair person from oregon for five minutes. >> thank you for all of the witnesses for your testimony. on going to follow up discussion we have already been having about education, especially s.t.e.m. education and the importance of educating the public about the benefits of the space program. there has been some testimony that begins to touch on this. you talk about how space programs have improved our lives from vaccinations research

to weather satellites. you talk about how do we define the purpose and meaning behind exploration of space within a society that is not always see tangible benefits. you say and this will be especially challenging unless there is a clear rationale linking such efforts that can be supported in a bipartisan manner. there is some discussion about the skills gap and s.t.e.m. education and the role of nasa and promoting s.t.e.m. should be marked strategically articulated. what is the industry doing to

convey to the public the benefits of space exploration? how can the contributions of our space program be communicated not just to stakeholders but also to the public? >> thank you for the opportunity to expand on that a bit. we did put a great deal of effort into this brand new report called space in our world. we will make certain that every member of this congress has a copy. you are all ambassadors. we also look at the factors social media this could be accessible to every american. we have been putting out nuggets of examples. we have been looking to young people. there are examples of a variety

of universities and in private sector where they have kicked off enormous benefits. i cannot believe the public has any idea how in their daily lives they are over and over again using the words that come out of our nasa programs including nro. it almost out eventually into the economy. it has been a huge benefit for our economy. >> does anyone want to add to that? >> i would say from the experience of being at the university i teach both graduate and undergraduate students. many courses in space and space quality you are not space enthusiasts. to me it is always a very

gratifying as they hear about the relationship of space to the economy. just how critical they realize the subject is. many will say they walked outside and they have a new perspective on the sky above them. they had no idea that all these things were going on overhead, gps systems, communications satellites. how deeply space is imbedded into the critical infrastructure. it takes on a new appreciation. and how the clinton administration used bring the russians into the space station. the centrality is something students come to know and

appreciate. it happens over and over again as soon as it plays out for them. >> thank you. i have a few seconds left. >> our committee did look at that as well. nasa is taking some very positive steps with regard to social media and their s.t.e.m. programs. one was a young boy in ohio during the apollo program's. in our study we looked at events that are clear and compelling. the communications to the

public was outstanding. in identifying the clear objectives and goals and identifying a strategic plan for nasa, at the story becomes clearer and easier to tell. >> thank you. the gentle lady yelled at her -- yields back her time. >> your testimony highlights the importance of maintaining the pipeline of engineers to make sure we innovate in the future with respect to both of you. what are your recommendations

for a program that provides opportunities to our graduate and post-doctoral students? >> thank you so much. my personal feeling is that such a program will be advantageous for this nation and could enable ideas that we're talking about on this panel. we have tremendous interest to really engage in this. such a program will be very positively reacted upon. >> i have had the opportunity to go to almost all of nasa's centers around the country. i have been very impressed with the degree to which local university talent is integrated into many of the nasa programs. there's practically no one

under 30 as to go around the entire facility. there is a bake effort in trying to pull in young people. one is seven minutes of terror. it has relatively young engineers talking about the seven minutes when they did not know what the curiosity rover was on mars. the other is a very funny rap video done by young people all about how exciting it is to work at nasa and how exciting it is to be involved. there is a lot going on. >> do you have any specific suggestions of what the federal government should be doing to encourage stem education at the collegiate level, or

postgraduate level? >> my personal recommendation would be to focus on these modest and small-scale programs with a tremendous emphasis, and make sure that suborbital programs and programs to support small scale missions as well as explore programs are funded at the level that really makes a substantial impact towards talent development. in my opinion, there is no other investment at the collegiate level that will have more impact than hands on experience and development of talent for industry and for nasa. >> i also would say that you see a great deal of emphasis now in industry on paring with universities on specifically focused programs that involve research for undergraduates that can take them all the way

into the graduate level with internships. and going back into the university where the curriculum is tailored to become a professional with a high degree of expertise in one or another of these specialities. there is a lot more that is no longer generalize, but is going into engineering schools and saying, let us help you teach so the people come out with very concrete interests and ambitions at the end. >> congressman walker, general sega and doctor pace, legislation has been introduced as a way to help stabilize nasa's strategic direction testimony we have heard makes it clear that the largest problem is not at the nasa level. but a longer term for the nasa administrator have a positive

effect on nasa? >> i think separating the nasa administrator from the political structure would be a mistake. i think that that kind of a situation would keep nasa out of the mainstream of were political thought is going. i do not think that would be the wise course. >> our community did not address it. >> do you have a judgment? >> i do not. i have not thought through. >> dr. pace? clerks i think a slightly longer term or a set term could be useful, -- >> i think a slightly longer term or set term could be

useful. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it has been a real pleasure. >> it might be one thing the house and senate could agree on. [laughter] i recognize mr. miller, the gentleman from north carolina. >> mr. pace, that answer would also qualify you to be a lawyer. congressman walker, i was interested in your idea of corporate sponsorships. i cannot quite imagine that picture of neil armstrong are ed white walking in space in

spacesuits that made them look like nascar drivers. a part of me rebels added in the first place, but second, i worry about the stability of the funding. we heard a lot about the need for stable funding and leadership today at nasa. corporations merge, they get a car, the run into trouble, they have to scale back. well sponsorships be a stable source of funding? >> there is instability now, but the appropriations process has been a very unstable source of funding for nasa as well. this is one way of reaching out to bring additional resources

into nasa. these are industries that then take a huge interest and nasa's activities, people who provide sponsorships then billed out. we have been talking about the need for nasa -- build out. we've been talking about the need for nasa to be broadly recognized in the community. this is an opportunity for us to have an outreach that goes to people who then have some skin in the game. i think it could be an extremely important way of bringing other resources into an agency that is badly in need of

significant resources for the future. >> i was not picking a fight with nascar. let me make that clear. i want to be able to go out in public. [laughter] there has been a lot of discussion of public-private partnerships. we do need to think about commercial applications. but, i worry. we've had proposal discussions of privatizing the national weather service, which is entirely built with taxpayer funded research. it is a capability that has been entirely provided as a public service, built by taxpayer funding. proposals seem to be coming from a company that wanted to by the

national weather service. have monopoly power, and so the data for a profit. since there is not an active market in national weather services, pricing it seems to be kind of hard. the problem of having that information provided for profit by somebody with monopoly power worries me. it strikes me as what happened with the sale of state enterprises and companies in the soviet union. how do we make sure we are not taken in these public-private partnerships and are not giving a monopoly power for something that perhaps should be provided as a government service? >> one of the problems we have with the weather service right now is the fact that they have not been able to fly their new modern satellites. we risk a lot of the label

information going forward because the government has not been capable of moving forward. -- delay of information going forward because the government has not been capable of moving forward. there are a number of ways that you can write bills to ensure that kind of activity, as i mentioned before, you can do it through a mechanism where the federal government remains actively involved in how these companies are doing their job, and provides an annual stream of funding. there are ways of structuring this that would assure the public interest is still maintained. >> the chair recognizes the

gentleman from california, mr. rabat. -- rohrbach. >> let me echo the gratitude that i have for having served with you. it has been an honor working with you. and those who will be leaving us as well. from our last question, let us know that we have $1 trillion that we are spending more than we're taking in. one-third of the federal budget now is that. we are increasing in debt. -- now is debt. we are increasing in debt. we have got to be creative. we've got to find new approaches.

that is the number one commitment we have got. otherwise, it will fall apart. when you have $1 trillion more in debt that you have to deal with, i do not believe the american people are going to put nasa and the top of their priority list, which means we have to be even more creative for those of us who do believe in the portents of space related assets. for the hearing today, we already talked about how this infrastructure that we depend upon -- and remember when telephone calls cost so much money -- it is a space-based assets that have brought that down. people have no idea the potential, even future potential of gps. we're just now experiencing that. these are all things that deal with space-based assets.

i believe that nasa should be the one that is pushing the envelope on what space-based assets will benefit humankind in the future. one thing that is sure, if we are to have space-based assets, we have got to have environment in space that is capable to use. today, that is under threat. if there is anything i can see that nasa and irresponsibility for along with a global partnership and lead the way -- responsibility for all along with a global partnership and lead the way, it is that we clear the debris from space. we have not really focused on that. maybe that is one of those challenges the young people and

everyone else can understand. the other challenge, i do not know if anybody noticed -- i do not know if i have the actual number -- did anyone notice, 2012xe54? that happened to of been an asteroid that was discovered sunday, and yesterday flow between the earth and moon. -- flew between the earth and moon. that had the same destructive power as the asteroid that destroyed hundreds of miles of siberia about 100 years ago. yet we did not discover it until sunday. those are huge challenges that we need to take up.

we're not going to have space- based assets unless we clear the debris. and will not have a safe plant unless we can deflect -- detect, and deflect these types of challenges. -- we will not have a safe planet unless we can detect, and deflect these types of challenges. above the 45 seconds to comment. -- you have got 45 seconds to comment on my pontificate and. >> -- pontification. >> space debris is a crucial issue. the commercial industry is facing all sorts of problems with monitoring that. much of what we monitor is larger than some of the particles that could actually cause the real damage in space. that is a real problem that needs to be addressed. there are some people out there

in the private sector that have some interesting ideas about how we could do that. >> as our committee looked at the issue of asteroids, i commented on the human mission to them. also recognizing the importance of increasing our understanding of the asteroids. currently there is a satellite that is in that area. >> okay, thank you very much. crux the gentleman yields back. -- the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes mrs. edward from maryland. >> i want to echo how delightful it has been to have you as our chairman for the past couple of years. i have enjoyed your company and your service on the committee. i think you for that, and for

tolerating meet occasionally. -- me occasionally. i am a twitter follower of nasa's. nasa has 2.3 million followers. it is not insignificant. it is more than the first lady and r g three and nascar. -- rgiii and nascar. how we can capture that so it also translate into support on a fiscal level is the challenge, the range of activity that we expect of the agency. over this next couple of hours or so, as i am following my twitter feeds, i noted that nasa assures us that the world is not going to end on december 21.

#curiosity was the fifth most followed hashtag over this past year. when i was growing up, our embrace of the agency was because of the apollo missions. did was sitting in kindergarten and first grade and whenever those other grades and watching of the liftoff. that inspired a generation and a nation. administrator blakey, you pointed out that it requires that kind of public inspiration in order for us to generate work with the agency does. -- that the agency does. one of the things i would like

to look at, especially where science is concerned, is that the difficulty the agency has in doing science and a year by year basis -- it really does not make any sense. it is not what you generally find in university and other kind of research, were you know as an investigator and where you are starting, what your resources are over it. of time, and then you can plan out the investigation -- over a period of time, and when you can plan out the investigation. in fact, you have instruments that surround the are not supposed to be sitting here because they're supposed to be up there. and then you end up over a course of time spending a lot more money.

i wonder if i could hear from any of you about the idea with respect to scientific and funding, just for these programs, understanding that it is different than funding other kinds of things that the government does. i wonder if you have some comments about that. >> i have currently eight ph.d. students who are supported by funding streams that you're talking about. i know firsthand the difficulty of managing these young people's lives in an environment in which decisions can happen on a week-to-week basis and all of a sudden a funding stream disappears. once we lose a ph.d. student like this, we cannot -- we will do whatever we can to follow that ph.d. student through but

we have many cases, especially in areas where space interacts with biology where in the past we lost, just in our university alone, 30 ph.d. students that never came back. so tools that will create stability in that regard, that would be tremendously considered by me and others. >> congressman walker, you've been in this place on an idea like that and where we might be able to take it. >> i've long believed we do great damage to our science programs with the annual appropriations process. the fact is, you do have to have a long-term outlook when you're doing science, whether it's space science or bench science. so we have a real problem in that we have too often scrubbed

the authorization process in favor after the appropriations process. one of the great reforms tharned place that would work would be to actually enforce the rules of the congress and say you have to have an authorization in place before you can pass an appropriation because the fact is we need to have the stability of long-term set policy in order to do science well. and by abandoning authorization process too often, we have put the policy decisions in the hands of the appropriators and they have a one-year ryeson. one-year horizons do not work in science. >> i would mention one other thing. there is good precedent for this in terms of some defense programs. the industry would like to see more use of multiyear in term offings complex development programs but when you look at those in the d.o.d. arena, you see it has been an excellent source for holding do you think

costs and having the stability that's need. so there is precedent. >> the chair at this time recognizes, i believe, mr. hultgren of illinois for five minutes. >> thank you so much. mr. chairman, i also want to thank you for your great service and great work as chairman. it's been a good couple of years, i've enjoyed my time on the science committee and wish i could stay longer. i also want to -- have enjoyed seeing you speech time in in committee, it reminds me of my funeral director father who says it's always better to be seen than to be viewed. that's my dad's line. it's great to be here. i want to echo and agree with my

friend and colleague congresswoman edwards that we have to start think manager long-term when it comes to nasa an science. i think it really puts us at a disadvantage to so many other nations who are thinking five, 10, 20 years in the future. we're lucky if we're talking one year. often we're talking 90 days, a continuing resolution kicking something out a little bit further. we have to change that and reach across the aisle to make sure that happens. so thank you all for being here. this is such an important discussion, something i'm passionate about. i want to ask a couple of quick questions with the few minutes i have. first, general, i want to address your thoughts, would the n.r.c. report have had the same the nor and con cluges had president obama not canceled the constellation program four years ago? >> the -- the factors that brought us to a point that we

talk about in terms of transition was also the, terminating the shuttle program and also something else follows it. the ability to have a consensus on strategic objectives and goals, this longer term thinking is important and to be able to have it for long term, clearly it crosses administrations, it crosses terms in congress. and so i -- the study was prompted by congress clearly to nasa and then to the n.r.c. but the issue of the longer term piece, i think that would be an enduring theme regardless of some other events. >> i wonder if i could ask the other folks here, starting with

dr. page if you wouldn't mind, your thoughts of how you think these results and conclusions would be different if the constellation program hadn't been canceled. >> well, i think there's really two parts to the disruptions that occurred. one is, the constellation program itself and the industrial base impact. i think certainly we would have maybe a slightly different tenor if the program had not been canceled. but the deeper problem really is the policy. ok. the national space policy in 2010 i think is quite a good document. i think it's thoughtful, balanced, there's a lot of good material. the part that as a policy professional sticks out for me is the section on civil space exploration. the asteroid and mars aspect of it. which to my mind really comes out of left field. it didn't have an international context or a commercial context. it wasn't mindful of the

industrial base realities. so it's distinct from the rest of the policy. i think if that mistake hadn't been made, i think you could have had a more rational discussion about how to either moderate, change, turn, revamp the constellation program into a way that would have been acceptable for the administration going forward. so as in most things, it's really policy choices that are at the root of the issue. what is the strategy you're following. then the programmatic outcomes and budgetary outcomes follow from that. that's where i would point. >> i ask the other three members if you have any thoughts on that. >> certainly the variables at the industrial base, it's been very difficult. we feel very strongly moving forward that it is important to maintain both the emphasis on commercial crew and commercial resupply for i.s.s., we have to

keep that on track and at the same time have the ability think s.l.s. to get to deep space. those two things are parallel tracks and both very important. >> i just would comment i think it has to be recognized that financially the constellation program was in an unsustainable cost profile. and it was about to eat alive the science programs and a number of other things inside of nasa at the kinds of costs it was accumulating. so, you know, you have to look at it in terms of where would we be in terms of those costs undercaughting other nasa programs if it had in the gotten the kinds of money that chairman hall referred to earlier. of course it could be done if you give nasa an additional $3 billion. no one believes nasa was going to get $3 billion. >> thank you all for being here. these are important discussions.

my hope is we can continue these and have a great vision for nasa and from nasa. again, chairman, thank you for all that you've done. i appreciate your service so much and your friendship and look forward to working together for a long time to come. thank you. i yield back. >> you have my assurance we will work together. and for your undertaker father, let me pass along one to him, that my funeral director uses on me, don't worry if you don't like flowers, they'll finally grow on you. i think mr. clark has asked for recognition. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate the opportunity. i briefly wanted to ask everyone for their comment on how nasa, long-term, strategically, can work more effectively with the private industry. it's an -- it's an open-ended question, i'll focus on two specific areas, one with technology transfer, the

transfer of nasa's research to private industry or maybe other federal agencies could play a larger role in our strategic vision for nasa. general, you can also address that if you wish. the other issue is how we can best restructure nasa in a way that would likely need congressional authorization. these were issues raised by chairman walker in his illustration of the sponsorship of one of our missions, although i prefer the wolverine rover would be more appropriate than the go daddy rover. but congressional authorization needed to restructure, to promote the restructuring of nasa that could lead to more effective private partnerships and how do we strengthen the role of technology transfer in

nasa's strategic mission? >> quickly, i will give you one. there are a number of ways douked this. but the aldridge commission recommended that the centers be turned into ffrdc-like operations. they would have to be modified, not all the centers do research and development. but that they would be structured in a way that would allow them to receive both public money and private money into their operations. andic that something like that is certainly one of the place it has to look. one of the things the n.r.c. said was the alternative to that may have to be the closing of some centers. or the reduction of the size of nasa. this is a way that you can begin to look at how do you keep the centers in place, how do you make them into viable economic

units inside the communities they have and for the nation. and you know, i think that this committee needs to look at how you might restructure them in a way that allows them to attract private and public money. >> does the gentleman yield back? >> mr. chairman, before i do that, i wanted to thank ranking member johnson for his steadfast leadership providing me the great opportunity of participating as a freshman member of this panel. chairman hall, you're a true gentleman in every respect in how you govern this committee and a fair -- in a fair and balanced way. it's been an honor to serve with you and all of you in this country. thank you so much. >> thank you. ms. johnson, i agree with you completely. you're a complete gentleman.

>> i want to thank the panel for being here today to review what the stratswri is going forward. i want to ask for his comments on a particular aspect, and dr. zerbugen and dr. pace, it leads off what chairman walker said. at some point there is important input from manned missions. but to be honest, a lot of the critical things that we are doing, defense-related, weather related, there's no manned input necessary. i'm an anesthesiologist. i work in an operating room. the robotic surgery we're doing you could do from around the world. you could have the surgeon sitting around the world from where that machine is performing an operation. with tactile feedback. so you feel what the tissues feel like. a lot of inputs that the chairman indicates, you know, the human input, is being done -- and i have teenagers at home,

robotics, there are robotics classes and clubs in their high school. this is to some extent the future. given the expense of the redundancy necessary in a manned program, and our need to get the most training and research and engineering experience and knowledge for the dollars we spend at nasa, isn't it time to say that maybe manned programs should be really rare and reserved for rare occasions buzz they just don't deliver the bang for the buck that -- and i'm talking about basic science knowledge. dr., your testimony is excellent. i think it points out we need to know these things and there are other societal benefits. but to the two doctors on the panel, isn't that the way we ought to think of going? if your basic expansion of

knowledge through a government-funded entity like nasa, and of course all the weather-related and other things we do, is that the way we should go? >> my personal feeling is that there is tremendous value over time both from demand and from the robotic -- from the manned and the robotic missions. i believe robotics in the next 20 years or so, probably as we make predictions, which as you know is always hard but as we make prodictions, will have more economic impact on how we're going to drive our cars, fly our planes, how surgeries are being performed and you know, human space missions. it's my belief if we go to a time scale of 30 or more years, that's prediction will be tougher to make. i believe in many ways, once we put a human in the loop and especially if you go places where you do not know where you are going, the true exploration, that there, things happen on the

innovation front that help us uncover aspects of our experience and also aspects of technology that will have tremendous impact in long time. the same happened on the apollo site. it's not the case that even though the examples you're mentioning are truly compelling, there are many aspects to our lives that did come from the human side of nasa as well. so basically if you ask the question as clearly as you did, what, should we just forget all about it, i would not subscribe to that recommendation. >> and i want to to the emphasize, no forget it but lower the emphasis a little bit. dr. pace. >> i think first of all, you have to make a distinction between science and exploration. nasa is more than just a science agency. it's also an exploration agency. it's a tool of u.s. foreign

policy. it does a bunch of things other than just science. if we're just looking at science as defined in the surveys, it's straightforward, robotic systems are what you do. but the reason you do humans in part is we're exploring the unknown. by putting people in an unusual or alien situation you learn things you wouldn't learn if you stayed at home. there's a wonderful example of looking at salmonella viruses and how they become more fluid in space. that mean there's a gene sequencing issue. if we control that we could have a vaccine for salmonella. that wouldn't emerge in a ground-based lab raher to. it emerges when we put life sciences people in a very different environment to go into the unknown. human space flight is probably the most interdisciplinary scientific and technical activity this country can engage in. much broader than biotech, i.t.,

any of the other fields. you have really all fields have to come together to pull off a successful mission. it's incredibly, incredibly hard. that's where really the benefit is from pushing into the unknown. i would say as part of your portfolio of activities, that humans have to be part of it. because they do represent this challenging interdisciplinary problem that is unique. it should be part of our national portfolio. there's nothing that replaces the symbolism, the emotion, the connection that it makes not only to the american people but also to our partners around the world. the u.s. -- the international space station is not only an engineering triumph but massive diplomatic triumph that's paid great benefits, i think, for this country in terms of building relationships around the world. so the question for nasa and human space flight is, what do you want it to be? what national interests do you want it to serb? if it's only science as defined in the survey, i think you can go down a purely robotic path.

but i think the vision for nasa is much bigger than just that. it is a science agency but it's so much more. >> thank you very much. thank the panel and thank the chairman for the opportunity to serve on the committee. >> i have a feeling the general wants to add something. can't turn the general down. >> thank you. i just wanted to add, the question itself poses one of the key points of our study, is that national consensus determining strategic goals and objectives are important. from that would flow the balance and integration of exploration science, technology, and err naughtics for nasa. -- and err naughtics for nasa. -- and aeronautics for nasa. one thing we did was to reduce infrastructure and personnel cost. we didn't go into detail of

whether that was an option one would choose or how to do it. thank you very much, sir. >> thank you very much. gentlemen -- the gentleman has yielded back. i want to thank everyone. thank you for your time, preparation, travel and presentation. and all the staffs here, i want to thank these wonderful staffs that make this world go and i'd like to ask unanimous consent that as we close today, that we close in memory of the life of gabrielle girlfriend, honor her life and remember the death of neil armstrong for a moment of silence. >> amen. we are closed.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> new jersey governor chris christie said today in his state of the state address that thousands of eem are stiss displaced from their home and he asked for a full, clean, sandy aid bill in congress which the house is scheduled to debate next week. governor kristie's remarks are next on c-span -- christie's remarks are next. and later, a hearingen nasa's budget and mission. >> wednesday on "washington journal," adam green of the progressive campaign committee on his organization's work and why they're hoping the 113th congress will shift to the left. then, club for growth president chris chocola on upcoming budget battles between the president and congress.

and then recent articles looking at the tenure of house speaker john boehner and what his legacy will be, plus your emails, phone calls and tweets. "washington journal" tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> new jersey governor chris christie delivered his third annual state of the state address today where he focused on hurricane sandy relief. last week, congress approved $9.7 billion in fema flood aid and they're scheduled to vote on another bill for more aid next week.

>> thank you very much. thank you. thank you. thank you all very much. >> lieutenant governor guadagno, madam speaker, mr. president, members of our congressional delegation, member os they have supreme court, members of the legislature and fellow new jerseyans. since george washington delivered the first state of the union in new york on this day in

1790, it has been the tradition of executive leaders to report on the condition of the nation and state at the beginning of the legislative year. so it is my honor and pleasure to give you this report on the state of our state. one year ago, we were scheduled to gather on this second tuesday in january when our friend and colleague alex decroce passed suddenly the night before, causing us to delay this report. i miss alex. i miss his hard work and his kind spirit. i think of him often, but i am so pleased to see his wife betty lou here in this chamber as a duly elected member of the assembly today. she continues his work and does honor to his memory. thank you, betty lou.

[applause] just three months ago, we were proceeding normally with our lives, getting ready for a national election and the holidays to follow. then sandy hit. sandy was the worst storm to strike new jersey in our history. 346,000 homes were damaged or destroyed. nearly 7 million people and 1,000 schools were without power. 116,000 new jerseyans were evacuated or displaced from their homes. 41,000 families are still displaced from their homes. sandy may have damaged our homes and our infrastructure, but it did not destroy our spirit. the people of new jersey have come together as never before across party lines, across ideological lines, across ages, races and backgrounds,

from all parts of our state, even from out of state. everyone has come together. so today, let me start this address with a set of thank-yous from me on behalf of the great people of this state. first, i want to thank the brave first responders, national guard, and emergency management experts who prepared us for this storm and kept us safe in its aftermath. i want to thank the members of this legislature for their cooperation in answering sandy's challenges and for being by my side as i toured so many of the devastated areas of our state.

thank you, members of the legislature for standing together for the people of new jersey. i want to thank the community food bank of new jersey, the southern baptists, the salvation army and the american red cross, who helped us deliver over one million pounds of food and over five million meals and snacks to families who needed them. they are part of a network of organizations, a family really, who make life better in new jersey every day and who really came through when the times were toughest. thank you to them. i want to thank the new jersey business and industry association, the state chamber of commerce, the commerce and industry association of new jersey and the national federation of independent businesses for keeping us in touch with the needs of small businesses in the wake of the

storm, so new jersey can help get these businesses back on their feet. -- back on their feet as soon as possible and working again for this state. thank you again to those organizations. i want to thank the 17,000 out-of-state utility workers who came to new jersey from all over america. you saw them, in their trucks, on your streets, and they joined with 10,000 of our own to get power restored as quickly as possible so that within nine days of this horrific storm, electric power had been restored to 90% of new jersey's customers. let me thank all the governors, republicans and democrats from across america who sent their utility workers here and let me thank those ewe till workers who

worked 18 hours a day, seven days a week to make sure new jersey got back to normal. i want to thank the members of my cabinet and senior staff, who for days before the storm and weeks after it, put their own personal losses aside, worked 18 hours a day and slept very little. they led their departments and their dedicated colleagues in putting the safety and well-being of others ahead of their own. new jersey and i were both well-served by these great, great group of public servants. thank you all. to everyone who opened their homes, assisted senior citizens, fed their neighbors, counseled

the grief-stricken, or pitched in to clear debris, remove sand, or get a school back opened, i say thank you. see, you've defined new jersey as a community, one which, when faced with adversity, rolls up its sleeves, gets back to work, and in word and deed shows that new jerseyans never, ever give up. now, make no mistake about it. we will be back and we'll be back stronger than ever. the spirit of new jersey, our community, was shown in the days immediately after the storm. in sea bright, mary pat was by the side of one small businessman at the moment when he was allowed to return to his business and see what sandy had done to his restaurant. as the plywood was removed,

allowing him to see for the very first time the complete destruction of his means of earning a living for himself and his family, he turned to mary pat and said without hesitation, don't worry, we're going to build this back better than it was. his words were forceful. they were optimistic. and they were emblematic, capturing the indomitable spirit of this great state. and he was just one example of how new jersey and its citizens were showing our whole country how to bravely and resolutely deal with a crisis. citizens like frank smith, jr., the volunteer chief of the moonachie first aid squad. his home was destroyed during the storm. then his headquarters were doe destroyed during the storm. after securing the safety of his three young children, he did not take himself to higher ground. no, he led his team through fires and flood waters, through

buildings and trailer parks, and saved over 2,000 lives. moonachie's citizens were saved -- [applause] moonachie's citizens were saved because he put them first. ahead of himself. frank is here with us in the chamber. please stand up, frank, and let us thank you for your bravery. [applause] in toms river, marsha hedgepeth,

an emergency room technician, had the day off when sandy hit her hometown. she could have gotten herself to safety and forgotten about her colleagues at the community medical center and most importantly her patients. instead, facing several feet of water on her flooded street, she swam -- she swam -- to higher ground. then, she hitchhiked with a utility worker from michigan and got to the hospital and put in a 12-hour shift treating her fellow citizens who were harmed by the storm. swimming through flood waters to save lives. marsha is here. please stand up and let us thank you for setting such a great example. [applause]

in brick, tracey keelen and jay gehweiler watched as the flood waters consumed their town. concerned about jay's father, they tried to reach him and could not. not content to wait, they put on their wet suits, got in their row boat and rescued jay's dad. it would be a great story if it ended there but that's just the beginning. in the process, they saw dozens of others stranded in their homes. so after they got jay's father to safety, they turned back around and one by one saved more than 50 of jay's father's neighbors along with their pets. then, for those they rescued who

had no place to go, they housed them as well. they admitted they did not know these neighbors that well before the storm, but they didn't care. they put extending a helping hand in a crisis ahead of social comfort. tracey and jay are with us as well. i want to thank you them for saving lives and making a difference. [applause] new jerseyans are among the toughest, grittiest, and most generous people in america. these citizens are a small example of that simple truth. our pride in our state in our

moment of loss and challenge is reflected in the eyes of these extraordinary people. you see, some things are above politics. sandy was and is one of those things. [applause] these folks stand for the truth of that statement. now, we have our congressional delegation here and i thank them for being here. we look forward to what we hope

will be quick congressional action on a full, clean, sandy aid bill, now, next week, and to enactment by the president. [applause] we as a state have waited 72 days, seven times longer than the victims of hurricane katrina waited. one thing i hope everyone in america now clearly understands, new jersey, both republicans and democrats, will never stand silent when our citizens are being shortchanged. [applause]

the people of new jersey are in need, not from their own actions but from an act of god that delivered a natural, human, and financial disaster and let me say on behalf of all new jerseyans that we are thankful to the people of the united states because i know they will honor the tradition of providing relief. you see, we have stood with the citizens of florida and alabama, mississippi and louisiana, iowa and vermont, california and missouri, in their times of need. now i trust they will stand with us. [applause]

so make no mistake. new jersey's spirit has never been stronger. our resolve never more firm. our unity never more obvious. let there also be no mistake, much work still lies ahead. damage that comes only once in a century will take in some cases years to repair. but here's some of what we've done already. we created a cabinet-level position to coordinate the state's efforts across every agency. marc ferzan is here today and is ready to work with you on this restoration effort. we've requested the federal

government to pay 100% of the costs of the significant debris removal that we require -- and have already received $18 million for that task. we have secured $20 million from the federal highway administration for emergency repair of our roads, bridges and tunnels -- a down payment on a major infrastructure task ahead. we have directed our department of environmental protection to streamline approvals for restoring critical infrastructure. we have overseen the removal of over 2.5 million cubic yards of debris. 17 towns have already completed debris removal. over 1,000 trucks are working daily to continue debris removal, with 26 more towns rapidly moving toward completion. we are now removing debris from our waterways. new jerseyans need to know

this. nearly 1,400 vessels were either sunken or abandoned in our waterways during sandy. 1,400. in mantoloking alone, 58 buildings and eight cars were washed into barnegat bay. we will remove this debris and dredge the bay to reduce the risk of flooding and to improve the health 240e6 bay, and we'll do it this week, the very same week that this administration furthers its commitment to the health of the baby implementing the toughest fertilizer law in america. [applause] we have helped get temporary rental assistance for 41,000 new jersey families, and where necessary, secured transitional shelters in hotels or motels or even in fort monmouth. we have worked with the small business administration to secure nearly $189 million in

loans for thousands of home and small business owners and through our new jersey economic development authority we have provided lines of credit for businesses awaiting insurance reimbursement, grants for job training and benefits for displaced workers. our new jersey dot has been one -- department of -- adopt of transportation has been one of the busest agencies. they've removed over 4,400 truckloads of debris from state and local roads and they're in the midst of cleaning another 4,300 truckloads of sand to restore and replenish our beaches. our department of education has worked night and day to get schools reopened as quickly as possible. where that wasn't possible, to get them restored by the next school year, all while maintaining our commitment to a full 180-day school year of education for all of new jersey's children.

executived offer 107 makes sure that when insurance pames do come they're not compromised by excessive deductibles and will ensure that our citizens maximize their reimbursements from their insurance companies. while there are dozens of other examples of the never quit attitude of this administration and our citizens, there is none better than the miracle of route 35 in mantoloking. at the mantoloking bridge, route 35 had been completely washed away by sandy. i stood at the spot where the atlantic ocean flowed into the bay where route 35 once carried thousands of cars a day to vacations down the shore. within days, commissioner jim simpson, the department of transportation and our private sector partners had a temporary road built to allow emergency vehicles onto the island. now, merely 10 weeks after our state's worst storm, you see a permanent route 35 already being rebuilt. that's what an effective

government can do. that's what a determined people can do. that is how and where we will lead new jersey in the months and years ahead. [applause] there is no question that sandy hit us hard, but there is also no question that we're fighting back with everything we've got. sandy took a toll on new jersey's economy. just when we were coming back from the national recession, sandy disrupted our economic life -- cars weren't bought, homes weren't sold, and factories couldn't produce. from those things we can catch up, and we are catching up. but make no mistake, as common sense would tell you, sandy hurt new jersey's economy. some losses we will never get back -- electric power that wasn't produced, visitors who didn't come to our casinos or our downtown centers.

in all, sandy cost us over 8,000 jobs in november, mostly in our leisure and hospitality industries. but we were relatively fortunate. louisiana lost 127,000 jobs after hurricane katrina. sandy may have stalled new jersey's economy, but there is plenty of evidence that new jerseyans have not let it stop our turnaround. the direction is now clear. here is some of the latest economic news. unemployment is coming down. 2011 was our best private sector job growth year in 11 years, and 2012 was positive as well. personal income set a record high in new jersey for the seventh quarter in a row. gross income tax receipts are exceeding the administration's projections for this fiscal year prior to sandy. sales of new homes are up. consumer spending is up. industrial production is up. since i took this office, participation in new jersey's labor force is higher than the

nation, an the number of people employed has grown as well. that means more people have the confidence to be out looking for jobs and more people actually have jobs. in total, we have added nearly 75,000 private sector jobs in new jersey since we took office in january, 2010. i mention the words "private sector" advisedly, because we have not grown government. quite the contrary. we have gotten our house in order by keeping our promise to reduce the size of government. in the last three years, we have cut more than 20,000 government jobs. in 2012, we had fewer state government employees than at any time since governor whitman left office in january 2001. we promised to reduce the size of government, and we have delivered. we have also held the line on taxes. we have held the line on spending. we have made new jersey a more attractive place in which to grow a business, to grow jobs, to raise a family.

this legislature knows the history. you know it well. in fiscal year 2010, we faced a $2 billion budget deficit with only 5 1/2 months left in the fiscal year when we took office. we cut over 200 programs and balanced the budget with no new taxes. in fiscal year 2011, the picture was even worse -- a projected $11 billion deficit on a budget of $29 billion -- in percentage terms, the worst in the nation. in total, we cut 832 programs. each department of government was reduced. an 8% cut in spending, in real dollars spent -- not against some phony baseline. but with this legislature's help, again we balanced the budget without raising taxes. because we had made the tough choices before, last yore's budget was a bit easier. we were able not only to balance the budget, but to actually

begin to reduce taxes by enacting the first year of job-creating small business tax cuts in new jersey. meanwhile, we devoted a record amount in aid to schools in new jersey. and in the budget which governs the current year, even with growth in the national economy slowing again, we have been able to achieve balance with not only no new taxes, but with a second year of small business tax relief. and let me make this point clearly and unequivocally. despite the challenges that sandy presents for our economy, i will not let new jersey go back to our old ways of wasteful spending and rising taxes. we will deal with our problems but we will continue to do so by protecting the hard-earned money of all new jerseyans first and foremost. we will not turn back. [applause]

our handling of the budget is but one example of the change that i told new jersey had arrived with our inauguration. i've come to this chamber in the years since that day urging us to do the big things to transform our state, to make the tough decisions we had avoided for far too long. we asked this in the context of a state where only 27% of our -- only 29% of our citizens felt that government was moving our state in the right direction in january of 2010. we asked this while the citizens of our country watched a dysfunctional, dispirited an distrustful government in washington bicker and battle, not against our problems, but against each other. against that backdrop, few would

have bet on us. few would have bet on new jersey. -- on new jersey leading the way to restore people's belief that government could accomplish things for them. but here we are three years later and look at all those things some called impossible in this town that we've made a reality. a real 2% property tax cap, interest arbitration reform, pension and health benefit reform, teacher tenure reform, higher education restructuring resulting in rutgers now being in the top 25 in research dollars in the nation and the newest member of the big ten. $1.3 billion in new capital investment in all our universities for the first time in 25 years, a ground-breaking teacher contract in newark that finally acknowledges merit pay, three years ago, a national reputation for corruption and division and waste,

today, a national model for reform and bipartisanship and leadership. that is today's new jersey. [applause] so let's review this new reality specifically, specifically, remind our constituents and ourselves how far we have come and to resolve to never, ever return to the old, dark days of our past in this town. four years, four balanced budgets, no new taxes, new tax relief to create 75,000

new private sector jobs -- a far different picture from the prior eight years, which saw 115 increases in taxes and fees. it hasn't been easy, but we have done it together. and the people of new jersey are better off for it. the story is the same on property taxes, maybe even better. they had increased 70% in the prior 10 years -- the most in the nation. together, we enacted a 2% per year cap on growth and the interest arbitration reform that was needed to make that cap work. many said it wouldn't work, but the record tells a different story. last year, property taxes in new jersey grew by only 1.7% -- the lowest rise in two decades. and our pension system, which was on a path to insolvency, is now on much more sound footing. with your help, we tackled the problem head on, modestly raising the retirement age, reducing incentives for early

retirement, suspending cola's until the plan is 80% funded, and, yes, asking for something slightly closer to market in terms of employee contributions. in total, the pension and health benefits reform package that you passed will save taxpayers over $120 billion over the next 30 years. [applause] just as importantly, it will help make sure the pension is actually there when our public employees and school teachers retire. believe me, other states have noticed. this reform is becoming a model for america. when we combine this needed discipline on spending and taxes, with responsibility in addressing our long-term liabilities, with pro-growth actions on the regulatory side, we make new jersey a better place to do business.

the combination of policies that are not hostile to business and an environment which actually welcomes new businesses and new jobs is working. it is clear. in a competitive world, policies matter. because companies have choices. job-creators have choices. that is why our work is far from done. that is why a top priority must be to continue new jersey's record of excellence in education and to fix problems where we are failing. in higher education, the task force led with skill by former governor tom kean has helped us develop strategies for making new jersey's institutions more competitive. we need to turn new jersey's universities -- including rutgers -- from good to great. [applause] we all know if we do this, it will help us keep more talented new jersey students in new

jersey and will strengthen the link between higher education and high quality jobs. at the heart of the reforms is the plan to make sure that new jersey's critically important medical and health sciences institutions remain world class. by merging rutgers and umdnj in the north and rowan and umdnj's stratford campus in the south, we will enhance three established hubs of educational excellence in north, south, and central new jersey. and we will bring rutgers, and new jersey medical education, into the 21st century. i thank you for passing this plan, and i was proud to sign it into law this summer. in k-12 education, we have made great strides, but there is much more to be done. who would have thought, just three years ago, in the face of entrenched resistance, that i could stand here and congratulate us today for the following -- ensuring accountability by passing the first major reform of tenure in 100 years, establishing performance-based

pay in newark through hard-nosed collective bargaining so that we can reward and retain the very best teachers in the city where we need them most. implementing inter-district school choice, which has tripled its enrollment in the last 3 years and will grow to 6,000 students next year, growing the number of charter schools to a record 86 in new jersey, signing the urban hope act to turn failing schools into renaissance schools in newark, trenton, and camden, and finally, investing the largest amount of state aid to education in new jersey history -- $8.9 billion in this year's budget, over $1 billion higher than in fiscal year 2011. in new jersey, we have combined more funding with needed reform. both money and reform of our schools are essential, but neither alone is sufficient. in new jersey, we are leading

the way for the nation by providing both reform and funding. as we assess the state of our state this afternoon, we should be proud of our record. our record. the state is stronger today than it has been in years. we are recovering and growing, not declining and descending. we are working together, not just as a people in digging out from sandy and rebuilding our economy. we're working together here in trenton, in this chamber. we've had our fights, but we have stuck to our principles, but we have established a governing model for america that shows that even with heart felt beliefs, bipartisan compromise is possible, achievement is the result and progress for the people is the payoff. so i want to thank president sweeney and speaker oliver, leaders kean and bramnick for your hard work, for your frankness when we disagree, and for your willingness to come

together on the truly important issues, on the big things. we have served the people of new jersey well and i thank you. [applause] since we have some of the guys here already that i know agree with this, maybe the folks in washington, in both parties, could learn something from our record here in new jersey. [applause] our citizens certainly have. now 61% of them believe our state is moving in the right direction, more than double the amount that believed it on that cold day in january three years ago. ago. make no