tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN December 16, 2013 2:00pm-4:01pm EST
>> if you missed any of this conversation with the ceo of gm, you can watch it anytime online. we will have it on c-span.org. we are going to look at congress. the house finished legislative work for the year. i continue to meet in brief pro forma sessions. they will be out until january 7. the senate returns at 3:00 eastern time. they begin with judicial nominations. nominated as is secretary of state for near eastern affairs. jeh johnson is obama's choice to
head the homeland security department will stop -- department. a budget agreement and a bill something out defense department programs and policies for next year. we spoke this morning with a capitol hill reporter. >> we go to roll call. what can we expect on capitol hill this week? >> thank you. >> this is the senate final week in session for the year. it is a preview of what we can't expect to see over the next couple of days. the senate is coming back into session today at 3:00 this afternoon. they are guest: the senate is expected to work through. you will see the confirmation of and patterson to be an assistant secretary of state.
that will clear the decks out to with allo move forward the important votes and the debate on the budget deal with the defense authorization following that later in the week. >> let's talk about those bills for a second. from what you're hearing, does it have enough support of senate republicans to pass? it increasingly looks like it will. just turned from ron johnson to paul ryan, a republican from wisconsin who said he was going to support it. we heard a number of republicans who said at least -- or have signaled at least that they would vote to break a potential
filibuster, which is a vote on which the democrats really need their approach. even if they vote against the measure itself. theould be tough to see ,eal not going through unless and i was stress this, there have been situations in the past where minority leader mitch mcconnell of kentucky has pulled -- conferencey away from agreements and what happened then is there are no longer the votes were something that wasiously -- previously thought to have the votes. i also wanted to ask you about the fate of the annual bill that sets policy for the military. week?t going to pass this isler: the defense bill
looking like it will be an easier ride at the end of the day, partly because the defense authorization bill has been passed by congress every year for the last 52 years. it is one of those annual traditions. day, that billhe will get through before the end of the week. there will be some consternation of thee stalling because way the bill basically came to the senate floor and did not have any votes for amendments to speak of. anytime that happens you get a number of people who are not happy with what is going on. at the end of the day that will get through to. both measures will be heading to president obama's desk before he leaves for the holidays in hawaii. last time we spoke harry
reid was about to deploy the nuclear option to change senate procedure rules. i know a lot of lawmakers said they thought that would think reese what is already a very bitter partisan divide in congress. has actually gotten worse? i think it clearly has. the first one being last week's marathon session. the senate was in session for more than 48 hours continuously. as democrats look to push through a number of nominations, taking advantage of the new procedural rules they set up for themselves, much to the consternation of republicans. i will also give you an anecdote, which is myself and several other reporters were talking to john mccain late last sayingd he basically was
-- he was one of the republicans who was frequently part of these yield making coalitions -- these was making coalitions, he saying that a lot of the normal dealmaking that would normally go on would not happen. out for sure when the senate goes to leave for the year whether or not they are routineclear this nominations package that they normally too late at night when very few people are watching, which is largely routine military but -- routine military if all of that gets jammed up, we know we are going to have real trouble as the senate moves and 2014. host:
>> i wish you both a very happy christmas, and a bright and prosperous new year. >> it is a pleasure to greet you, mr. santa claus, and to have you open the sale of sales, which begins on thanksgiving day . autographingmind some of the christmas seals as a special favor for santa claus? >> it is one of the things i do best. it is a good thing, santa claus. >> it is wonderful. my father, santa claus, gave it to me. >> and it has some of the dog's hair in it. >> first ladies, influence and image, season two. this week, edith roosevelt to grace coolidge.
the first -- the first country in the world to sector forallocated medical body area networks. this allows monitoring vital signs without having to have intrusive monitors. he could be a game changer, in terms of tracking health and health care. wireless a remote patient monitoring solution. to be able to put devices inpatient homes. to be able to monitor and keep them well, and have better outcomes and keep them out of the hospital. >> it is an anticoagulated device. a patient on warfare and would have to go to the doctor once a week to get -- a patient on warfarin would have to go to the doctor once a week. now, they can monitor.
>> one of the things my office is working on is providing a model notice for health apps. can ofu go to buy a soup, there is a consistent fda label. it lets you look for things you are interested in. some people care about sodium, sugar, or fat. we are developing a tool -- we have already done this for personal health records. we are now expanding it to address other types of mobile and nonmobile apps. it says, these folks do not resell information, or this is how they use it all stop a consumer can help navigate this newly growing or exploding field. >> the government role in supporting mobile health care technology, tonight on "the communicators." next, a look at sanctions on iran. tim johnson is the chair of the senate aging committee.
he says he will not push for new sanctions as talks on the nuclear program continue. the committee heard from wendy sherman and david cohen. this is about an hour and a half. >> i call this hearing to order. yesterday, all senators had a chance to hear directly from kerry on theew and first step nuclear agreement reached in geneva between the p% plus one and iran. we will dig into the agreement in gritty detail, and explore the likely effects of congressional action on new sanctions legislation at this time, to which the president and the secretary of state strongly object. have talked with various
members of the committee about these issues, and ensured that all members have had the opportunities to be briefed repeatedly by secretaries kerry and lew and the intelligence community on the ongoing geneva negotiations. let me be clear -- i support strong sanctions, and authored many of the u.s. sanctions currently in place. i have negotiated a new bipartisan sanctions bill with my working member that could be finalized and moved quickly if iran fails to comply with the terms of the first step agreement in geneva, or if negotiations collapse. an effectivee been tool of coercive diplomacy, crippling iran's economy,
curtailing its oil revenues, and helping to persuade their reigningpeople -- people to vote for new leadership. iranian leaders have recognized the only way to relieve the economic pressure and lesson international isolation is to west,agreement with the to halt illicit nuclear activities. time will tell if that is true, but only if congress is willing to provide some time. some have argued that acting on it doesow, as long as not become effective in six administrationhe additional leverage in negotiations. the president disagrees, arguing that congressional action on new sanctions would be taken as a sign of bad faith by our p5 plus
be will those sanctions separated from a complex web of sanctions intended to address iran's sponsorship of human rights violations and certain types of advanced missiles? this may have for future policy options necessary to address iran's destabilizing activities. i hope witnesses will better clarify what them mutual
understanding is. sanctions worked to bring iran to the negotiating table. i remain convinced the much -- we musttain that maintain the leverage. the united states must continue to enforce the course sanctions architecture so they do not produce the results we all want. should diplomacy fail in its mission to control the apparent extent of the iranian nuclear program, whether six months or a year down the road, there is simply no time available to orte on creating bills executive orders. the united states must maintain existing multilateral sanctions pressure him and congress and the administration need to prepare now for the possibility that an effective final conversation -- comprehensive agreement may not be reached. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator.
you allow for sufficient time, we are limiting opening statements to the chair and ranking member. all senators are welcome to submit an opening statement for the record. now i would like to introduce our witness. undersecretary for the political affairs at the u.s. department of state, and the undersecretary for whom risen and financial intelligence at the u.s. department of treasury. undersecretary sherman, please begin your testimony. max thank you very much, and good morning, mr. chairman, members ofer crapo, the committee, thank you for inviting me to discuss the details of the joint plan of action agreed to by our p5 plus one partners and iran. i also want to thank chairman johnson for your leadership on
your work over the past weeks and months and this committee's theort for bringing iran to table through sanctions. alkaline operation on sanctions is what has brought iran to the table. it is important to understand or that what we do from this point , ifard is just as article not more so, in terms of testing iran's intentions. in that regard i look forward to continued consultations over the coming weeks and months. i am available to any member of this committee at any time for conversation. today i want to give you the facts about the joint plan of action so you can judge its merits for yourself. the iranian nuclear program is one of the most serious threats to u.s. national security and to our interests in the middle east. thanks to sanctions and a firm united position during the p5
plus one, we have reached an understanding that is the most iran'scant step to curb nuclear program in nearly a decade. put plainly, this understanding in america's national security interest and it makes our regional partners saved her and more secure -- safer and more secure. it establishes a framework designed to block near term iranian pathways to a nuclear weapon creating space for us three diplomatic process to reach a long-term comprehensive solution which is what we all want. as the president has said repeatedly, we will ensure and he will ensure that iran never obtains a nuclear weapon. the understanding ensures the development of iran's nuclear program will halt and the program will be rolled back as we negotiate that comprehensive
solution. indeed, upon implementation in the coming weeks, the agreement jimmy lee halt progress of the iranian nuclear her grant, rolls back key of its of that program, and introduces unprecedented monitoring into the iran's nuclear activities. these measures will prevent iran from progressing toward a nuclear weapon over the next six months and increase ability to detect any move toward an iranian nuclear breakout or die version of materials to make of wrote -- to a covert program. then we talk about the first steps of this in detail. iran has committed to halt progress of its enrichment program. under the terms of this agreement, iran cannot increase its enrichment capacity. it cannot build new and richmond facilities. iran cannot install more centrifuges of any type, operate
more centrifuges home or place existing centrifuges with more advanced types. iran must limit centrifuge production to only those needed to replace damaged machines, itsing iran cannot expand stockpile of centrifuges. ofn's stockpile of 3.5% enriched uranium must be the same at the end of the six-month time than at the beginning. during the initial phase iran will rollback key aspects of its program am a specifically, iran must cease all enrichment over 5%. iran must remove certain equipment that is used to more efficiently enrich uranium over 5%, and iran must neutralize its stockpile, diluting it to a lower level of enriched uranium or converting it to oxide.
third, iran cannot advance work on the newtonian track. around water commission a heavy reactor. iran cannot transfer fuel or heavy water to the reactor site. iran cannot test additional fuel or produce more fuel for the reactor. iran cannot install remaining components for the reactor, and iran cannot construct a facility for reprocessing spent fuel. that is critical because without reprocessing, iran cannot separate plutonium from spent fuel and cannot obtain any to tinian for use for a nuclear weapon. even in this initial phase, this first-ever, this plan halts each of the three potential pathways to a weapon that had long concert us. it eliminates their stock pile of 20% enriched uranium. it can stop paul stockpile ther. all of 20% enriched uranium. installation of
centrifuges, and prevents accumulation of more 3.5% enriched uranium, and ensures that the iraq reactor cannot be brought online. some have said we should be skeptical that iran can live up to these commitments. quite frankly, we completely agree. the foundation of the agreement is not built on trust, but verification. the verification mechanisms are unprecedented and cover him so. iran must permit daily access by the international islamic energy agency inspectors to the facilities. they must permit more frequent inspections at the iraq reactor. iran must allow access to centrifuge workshops, including rotor production networks and storage facilities. iran must allow access to iranian mills and provide design information for the heavywater
reactor. significantly, these monitoring measures will provide additional warning of breakouts and add significant new checks against the diversion of equipment for any potential covert enrichment program. it will also help us to verify that iran is living up to the commitments outlined in detail under the agreement. in exchange for these concrete actions by iran, as undersecretary: will explain in detail, the p5 plus one will provide limited temporary and reversible relief while maintaining the core architecture of our sanctions regime, including key oil and banking sanctions. sanctions pressure, moreover, will continue to increase over the six months of this initial phase. and we will continue our vigorous enforcement of existing sanctions. moreover, the u.s. trade embargo remains in place, security council sanctions remain in place. all sanctions related to iran's military program, state
sponsorship of terrorism, and human rights abuses and censorship remain in place. and if iran fails to meet its commitment, we are prepared to ramp up sanctions, and we will have international consensus that is essential for any increased pressure to work. as the president has said, as the chairman outlined, now is not, we believe, the time to introduce new sanctions, because doing so could risk derailing the promising first steps outlined above, alienate our enforcement.nlist in assessing the agreement on its merits, it is important to compare where we will be where we will be in six months with its provisions, compared to where we will be without it. without this plan, iran's program will continue to advance. iran would spend thousands of
centrifuges, install next- generation centrifuges, and compress breakout times, advance its plutonium program by producing fuel for the iraq reactor, and install remaining components. it could grow its stockpile of 20% enriched uranium, all without powerful tools of intrusive inspections to help prevent breakouts. with this understanding, the joint plan of action, we halt nuclear program, roll it back, block likely pathways to weaponization, while creating space over the next six months to pursue the comprehensive solution we all want. finally, let me conclude by making one thing clear. our policy with regard to iran has not changed. we will stop iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. we will support our friends and partners in the region and counter the stabilizing activities around the world.
and we will continue to support the fundamental rights of all iranians. ensureworking hard to as a state sponsor of terrorism remain in place. sanctions on human rights abusers will continue. and we will also remain reuniting people with their families. as secretary kerry has said, one day is too long to be in captivity. and one day for any american citizen is more than any american citizen wants to see this indoor. i welcome this opportunity to issues and support these with you. i am happy to take your questions. >> thank you. undersecretary:, please again your testimony -- undersecretary
cohen, please begin your testimony. >> i appreciate the opportunity to appear with undersecretary sherman to discuss the impact of our sanctions on iran, they limited relief offered in the joint plan of action, and the mounting sanctions pressure that iran will face while the parties seek a comprehensive and long- term resolution to international concerns over iran's nuclear program. this committee is well aware of the impact our sanctions, in particular our oil, financial, and banking sanctions, if had on iran. i will highlight a few data points i feel are relevant. iran is in a deep recession. mentioned, theo 4.7% lastntracted by year, and we expect it to contract again this year. its inflation rate was around 40% last year. its currency has lost about 60%
of its value in the last few years. about $100 billion in foreign exchange reserves that is mostly or entirely restricted. it has lost roughly $80 billion in the last two years from oil that it has been unable to sell because of sanctions. this is the picture of powerful sanctions pressure. this sanctions pressure has begun to bear fruit. it brought iran to the negotiating table in geneva and help our team obtain key terms in the joint plan that halts and rolled back iran's nuclear program, while also allowing increased transparency and monitoring. we were able to achieve these terms of very little cost. in fact, the relief package in the joint claim is economically insignificant to iran. the package in the joint plan has several elements. first, we will grant limited
installments, over the six-month tenure of the joint plan come up to four point $2 billion of its own funds, currently locked up in bank accounts outside of iran. during the six months of the joint plan, we will hold iran's exports of crude oil flat, rather than requiring significant reductions from the countries importing oil. we will suspend -- not remove, suspended -- sanctions on petrochemical exports, the automobile sector, and it's trading goals. altogether, this could be worth about $1.5 billion to iran. we will help facilitate humanitarian transactions, which are already permitted under u.s. law. in this relief, not a single dollar of u.s. taxpayer money will be transferred to iran. they really fiscal prize mostly of allowing iran access -- the
relief is mostly allowing iran access to its own resources, denied by sanctions. the value of the relief package, which would be realized over the half-year of the first step, simply will not move the needle on the iranian economy. it is important to emphasize that the joint plan does not affect the overwhelming majority of our sanctions on iran. the corertantly, architecture of oil, financial, and banking sections remain firmly in place. we want to highlight several important aspects of the architecture. the revenue iran earns from oil sales during the duration of the joint land will remain subject to the financial sanctions which have so effectively locked up those revenues overseas. with the exception of the $4.2 billion that is part of the will beackage, iran unable to transfer or repatriate any additional oil revenues it
earns during the six-month duration of the joint plan. our banking sanctions and the ee you banking sanctions remain in place, continuing the near total isolation of iran's financial center. all u.n. and eu designations, as well as our sanctions tied to the government of iran -- it's wmd programs and its energy and shipbuilding sectors -- remain in place. this includes sanctions targeting iran's support for terrorism. and a long-standing trade embargo, which precludes iran from engaging in business with u.s. businesses and subsidiaries overseas remains in place. if the joint plan is implemented and are negotiations work toward a long-term solution, you will continue to take action to maintain sanctions pressure on a that- on iran, to ensure financial and commercial entities worldwide adhere to restrictions on dealing with iran.
just this morning, treasury and state announced designations of more than a dozen companies and individuals around the globe for invading sanctions and providing support to iran's nuclear program. the targets were involved in a activities, from a list of fund transfers to ship to ship oil transfers. resolvehould doubt our to continue to hold accountable those involved in illicit conduct. we will also continue to strictly enforce iran sanctions, including by imposing strict penalties on those who violate them. today's designations as well as recent enforcement actions and the size iran is off-limits. iran is off-limits. they can do business with iran or they can do business with the u.s. -- not both. there may be some who believe now is a good time to test our resolve. i want to be clear.
we are watching closely and we are prepared to take action against anyone anywhere who violates, or attempts to violate , or sanctions. i look forward to continuing this important work with congress and this committee as we pursue our shared objective to ensure iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. >> thank you all for your testimony. as we begin questions, i will ask the court to put five minutes on the clock for each member. , we know it iran's foreign minister recently said the entire deal is dead if congress adopts new sanctions now. even with a delayed trigger. the most important factors in making sanctions effective against iran has been the cooperation of our international partners. expect would be the
effect of a new round of sanctions now on our allies and other p5 plus one countries? what have they said to us recently about this? >> thank you, mr. chairman. whatugh i heard as well the foreign minister said, my and the administration interest in the congress not pursuing new sanctions at this time has to do with our p5 plus one partners, and with international partners around the world who have been enforcing sanctions. the reason sections have been effective is not just the cause you have taken the superb action you have, and the president has moved executive orders, and not only the terrific work that david and his colleagues have done on enforcement. it is because countries around the world have actually followed through on what, quite frankly,
our unilateral sanctions on our part, as well as un security council sanctions and eu sanctions. and they have done that because we have said to them, if you in fact enforce the sanctions we have imposed, you will be able to continue doing business with the united states, the largest and most important economy in the world, what will more importantly put pressure on iran to come to the negotiating table. and we are committed to negotiations as a first and best resort to resolve concerns around the nuclear program. entries around the world did that. the worldes around did that. now that we are about to begin negotiation on the comprehensive agreement we want, if we say, we did not really mean it -- we are going to impose additional sanctions you have to live with around the world, our partners are likely to say, wait a minute. you are changing the rules. we agreed to harm our own
economies in service to diplomacy, and you are not giving diplomacy a chance. our great concern here is if this committee -- and i know this committee is for diplomacy. we must test that diplomacy. the way to do that is to see through the compliance of this first step, and to negotiate that comprehensive agreement. congress always has the prerogative to act. it can act very quickly. i know that, particularly when it comes to sanctions with iran. that is why the administration is asking congress to keep its powder dry for this moment, so we can keep our partners on board to enforce all of our sanctions that remain, since the vast majority do, so we can give diplomacy a chance, so our p5 plus one partners stay united, which has been key to our diplomacy with iran. >> a question for both of you. i am concerned that if congress sanctionst on new
now, not only could we hand a potential p.r. victory to iran -- it could also lead to other tontries cooperating with us peel away from their commitment to sanctions. how difficult would it be to reinstate sanctions if major countries decided to do that? and what effect would a breakdown in negotiations, attributable to premature congressional action, have on further diplomatic efforts and our standing in the world? mr. chairman, let us start with you. >> on your first point, there is no question that we do not want iran to be in a position to say that the u.s. is the cause of the agreement not going forward. isi said, my greater concern with our international partners
in the p5 plus one. but there is no doubt that what you say is indeed the case -- that iran could use this as a propaganda point. that does not mean we would accept it, of course. as them sure they would, foreign minister has already attempted to do. cohen? >> i think there would be a real risk to the effectiveness of our international sanctions regime if congress were to pursue new sanctions legislation now. think,d be difficult, i if that regime afraid, to put it back together. to downplayt person the strength of our sanctions. on the legislation to the actions we have taken, like the ones we have took today -- that has had real impact around the world. but the overwhelming pressure on is due in part to what we have done and what our
international partners have done to us. in this effort, as undersecretary sherman described, of pursuing a dual track strategy of offering a diplomatic resolution while threatening increasing sanctions pressure as the alternative. i am concerned that if we lose ,hat international coalition our ability to pull it back partners around the world think we are not serious about pursuing a diplomatic resolution, will be difficult. >> thank you. senator crapo? >> thank you, mr. chairman. ambassador sherman, before we get into the plan itself, i want to talk to you about saeed.
i appreciate the discussions we pastord previously about -- about the pastor imprisoned for his christian beliefs. as you have discussed today, we have other americans who are being held wrongly in iran in an unjust legal system. as you know, i have discussed this her smelly with secretary clinton and with secretary kerry -- discussed this personally with secretaries clinton and kerry. they will not be forgotten, and everything will be done to obtain their release to freedom and their families in the united states. i appreciate your comments today about it. in the run-up to the october talks, the united states unleashed a convicted iranian proliferator from a california prison, but had no relief for these detained americans. the pastor was transferred to
one of the worst prisons in iran just prior to the bringing home of the joint plan. and you tell me why we are not negotiating, with regard to joint releases, or why we have not made progress in the context of the release of our own citizens, and we are releasing iranian prisoners who are known proliferators? >> thank you very much, senator crapo. hard tod, it is very talk about these three americans, because it is heartbreaking. i have met with some families, and i know what their lives are every day. nothing i say is going to give them the comfort they need until they are home. i say that as a preface, because i know it to be true. we vigorously pursue every avenue. some of those avenues are best pursued in private, to have a
chance of success. the secretary raised these cases directly with the iranian foreign minister during their meeting at the u n general assembly. all threeobama raised americans in his phone call with president rouhani. on the last round in geneva, i had a separate conversation with the deputy foreign minister responsible for this, going over each of these cases and trying to find out whether there might be some avenues for getting their release. as i said, if there are, we will pursue them in every way possible. i also had breakfast with the swiss state secretary, who is our protecting power in tehran, who has gone repeatedly and asked constantly for consular visits, and went over some of the possibilities and some ideas the swiss had. we will pursue every idea that is brought to us. i know there is this notion
about allegations of a prisoner exchange deal. they are frankly simply untrue. at this point, we have asked for humanitarian release. we did not specifically talk about these three americans in the context of the nuclear negotiations, because quite frankly, we do not want them to become pawns in the negotiation. we do not want iran to up the ante on the nuclear side or american citizens side i'm mixing them up in this. iran should free these three americans because it is the right thing to do, the humanitarian thing to do. it should not be part of a deal regarding their nuclear program, which they should deal with on its own terms. their freedom should not be tied to the success or failure of these negotiations. the three iranians you mentioned that had been released are not in any way related to the joint action and a report that the two issues are connected are simply
not true. these are folks who have gone through our judicial system and all of the judicial processes that we have. >> thank you. i appreciate the efforts you have undertaken, although we have some differences. whether some opportunities could've been pressed further -- can you give me your reassurance that our state department, our country, will take every advantage, every stage, every rum to ensure the release as soon as possible for these citizens? >> you have my personal commitment to do so. >> i see my time has run out, so i will wait. >> senator reed? secretary -- quick ohen, you made the point that additional enforcement actions were taking
place. it seems to me it is critical that even more accelerated enforcement takes place under the existing sanctions. without that, you could either unwittingly or wittingly signal that there is going to be an but inevitably, and that would be disastrous in many different respects. can you give us assurances you will in fact ramped up the , contact us if you need additional legislation enforcement, if penalties have to be increased? i think we really have to make sure that they get the idea that they are not going to get a pass here, so much as a subtle way to ease and erode these sanctions. senator, i completely agree with you, and i think the actions we took this morning,
these designations of more than a dozen persons and entities, is the first step to really reaffirm and demonstrate our very strong intent to continue to enforce our sanctions very, very vigorously. the president said this when he announced a joint plan two weeks ago, that we would continue vigorous enforcement of our sanctions. we are going to do so. the vast bulk of our sanctions architecture remains in place. the critical sanctions on oil, on banking, on financial activity remain in place. sanctions on anyone who thinks -- to try to develop iran's energy sector remain in place. we will continue to vigorously enforce sanctions. i agree with you. one very important aspect of our effort going forward is ensuring that the pressure continues to mount on iran.
that they understand that the only way they can get relief from the pressure on their economy is by negotiating over their nuclear program. that is the purpose of our sections. it has been the purpose from the beginning, to create the leverage for the negotiations. we are going to do everything possible to ensure that sanctions pressure continues during that period. thehere are discussions in press of the iranians reaching out to international oil companies, looking about their long-term future. obviously, since they have been deprived of critical equipment and infrastructure improvements, they are going to have to get investments to increase their capacity. are we actively dissuading these companies from doing this? it would seem to be sending a very sort of complicated message, saying these s -- the sanctions are really
tough but you can talk about -- when the day's over. >> very actively dissuading international oil companies and others who think that now may be a time to test the waters in iran. secretary lew over the past several weeks has met over hundreds of banks to make the point our sanctions remain in place. we have been meeting with foreign companies, foreign banks, foreign businesses around the world, to our embassies and through teams from here going out. i'm traveling next week to reinforce this point. we are doing everything possible to make sure that no one misunderstands that our sanctions remain in place and that we intend to enforce them. anybody who tests us will be taking a very, very serious risk. >> will you on a regular basis notify the senate of countries or companies that are not complying strictly even if -- or at least their compliance is suspect?
you might not have sufficient evidence for some time of enforcement action, but it would be extremely helpful if the information was public of which countries were standing with us and which were not. >> i commit to being available to this committee at any time and communicating with this committee on these issues. i think it's enormously important that we all work together on this issue. >> i've got very little time left. this might be too big a topic, but in the issue of the preliminary agreement, there was no -- there was suggestions about the military progress. can you very quickly give us very quickly a sense of what we are at? >> there're three places in the agreement that speak to the possible military dimensions of iran's program.
the first paragraph it talks about having the conference agreement address all remaining concerns. that is a reference to their possible military dimensions. it talks about the need to address past and present practices, which is the iaea terminology for a possible military dimensions, plug the -- possible military dimensions. it also says the u.n. security council resolutions must be addressed before an agreement is agreed to. and the u.n. security council resolution specifically addressed their ballistic missile capability. we have had very direct conversations with iran about all of these. they understand completely the meaning of the words in this agreement, and we intend to support the iaea in its efforts to deal with possible military events. >> senator corker. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank each of you for your testimony and work. i think all of us want to see a
diplomatic solution to iran and have been encouraged by the fact that the administration has been dealing with them in this way. i think what has shocked folks has been the text of the interim agreement. i think it calls many of us to want to become involved. the former nuclear czar has said based on the interim agreement was negotiated what he actually sees is a series of rolling agreements that go on for a long, long time. i think what congress, the reason congress has been wishing to weigh in, is to try to make sure that we get to an end state that's appropriate and do so over a very short amount of time, which to me seems to be a very reasonable place for congress to want to be. i would like to ask you this, when does the clock, when do they actually start, very succinctly?
>> sure. senator, our experts are in vienna this week working with the p-5 plus one, iaea and iran to determine that start date and to make sure that the sequence happens in the order in which we all believe it should. >> we negotiated a six-month agreement a month ago, but we don't know when the actual start day is? >> it will happen in the next few weeks. i don't want to set a date today because they are finalizing the discussion. >> mr. levin, in meeting at the white house, suggested to keep us from being in a series of rolling agreements that we ensure that this interim agreement has an end date in six months. that six months hasn't begun. but instead of that, you guys agree to six months, six months deal, and i'm just, again, you can understand why folks on our side would be concerned because we understand sort of the elements of the program. let me ask you this. if arac, i know it cannot be commissioned, but it's my
understanding based on a document that work can continue on the elements of this plutonium facility, is that correct? >> none of the issues that would make iraq function as a nuclear reactor can move forward. >> i understand. >> they could build a road. they could put up a wall. >> a country that is interested in peaceful activities only with a plutonium facility of its size that has no commercial purpose, doesn't that raise a little bit of an antenna they are continuing to do those things? i mean people generally act in their own self-interest. why would an economically starved country blow money on a plutonium facility that has no commercial interest if their intentions are good? >> senator, we agree with you. there is no reason i can see that a 40-megawatt heavy water reactor has a peaceful purpose i know of.
we have been very clear with iran that this will have to be addressed in full in any comprehensive agreement. >> let me ask you this. the u.n. security council resolution i think, i know this administration negotiated one element of the agreement, actually, in 2010. why within the four corners of this agreement are we already agreeing to things tacitly that are in opposition to the u.n. security council agreement? i think that's what has everybody alarmed. we have tacitly agreed to the fact that iran will be enriching down the road. i think you know we negotiate all kinds of one, two, three agreements around the world. we try to get to a gold standard. here we have a rogue nation, a rogue nation that is wreaking havoc, that is using a portion of our sanctions proceeds to kill people in syria. you know that. they are using a portion of this to funnel it to hezbollah to kill people in syria.
i guess i don't understand why you would already agree on the front end to them not having the gold standard, if you will. we don't let vietnam and others do that. why have we done that? that raises alarms that a lot of a lot of people think that secretary kerry is so anxious to make a deal for lots of legacy reasons that he is willing to overlook some of the details that are so important. why have we done this? >> i would like to say several things, senator. first of all, we have not conceded anything. nothing is agreed to until -- >> if i could. you don't think that any preamble where we talk about -- you don't think -- let me put it this way, do the officials in iran think that we have agreed to allowing them to enrich?
every press statement they have made says that. how could there be such a big misunderstanding over such an important issue? >> what i was about to say, senator, is nothing is agreed to in a final agreement until everything is agreed to. what we have said to iran and what this says is that, yes, we will talk with them about the potential for a very limited enrichment program, matched to practical needs, with staggering constraints, monitoring and verification. if, if, if they agree to everything else that we want agreed to. that is totally consistent with the u.n. security council resolution which does not talk about stopping enrichment, it talks about suspending enrichment and saying once the iaea and others confirm that iran has met all its responsibilities and obligations it could be treated like any other n.p.t. state. it's not about ending, it's about suspending enrichment. that said, senator, i completely agree with you.
we all do that there are many questions here about what iran is up to. that is why the secretary of state, the president of the united states, in his address at the sabahn forum as well as the secretary's said we are quite skeptical whether we'll get to the comprehensive agreement that we wish to see, but we must test iran because that's how we keep the international community together. that's how, if we have to choose other options, we will have the international community with us to do so. >> mr. chairman, i just want to make one quick statement in closing. i do think that we are stepping away from these u.n. security council agreements. i think what congress wants to see happen is that not occur. i think that's you have seen such a reaction. i realize we are going to a rope-a-dope here in the senate and we are not going to do anything. i understand that's sort of
baked in the blockage and i know we are participating in a little bit of a rope-a-dope today. i just want to say to david cohen, i was just in the region and i concur with senator reed. once you begin loosening sanctions and people begin to see that iran is now going to become not a rogue country but part of the international community, we are basically ceding much of middle eastern activities to them. we have been now for about a year, once they see that there is a rush, as senator reed mentioned, to do business with them, and i think that's why we are all concerned. we did an interim deal that has no sacrifice on their part whatsoever, none. they are still spending 19,000 centrifuges every single day. they are not going to violate this agreement.utopeful that
somehow you can put the genie back in the bottle and end up with some type of agreement that averts warfare, because all of us do want to see this succeed, we don't know how we get there with an interim deal framed the way this one is. thank you. quick senator menendez has a committee hearing vote and , --up quite soon >> five minutes would be more than enough. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i have been pursuing a rant since 1996 well-earned as a member of the -- that the u.s. was sending contributions and in addition to membership dues whose voluntary contributions were going from [indiscernible] that was not in the national interest of the security of the united states.
i have been continuing to pursue iran for 17 years, when it was not in the spotlight. what i have seen is iran aceive, delay, and over various administrations, march forward to the point that it seems that we are now ready to accept some form of an enrichment program in iran. skeptical,are very because of the reality of what is history so far. part of my challenge in trying to listen to the administration is some of the same statements -- in december 1, 1991, many of the arguments i heard then against the pursuit of any sanctions are the ones i'm hearing now. let me quote from the transcript. with thern we have menendez kirk amendment is that we think it risks to things we
want to avoid. one is to risk fracturing the international coalition that has been built up over the last several years to bring pressure we would rather consider voluntary action. , we thinkn to say that to be clear, our judgment of the best course is not to apply a mechanism that could -- put at risk the largest central bank of some of our closest allies. you went on to say our position that the right course is not to adopt this amendment. that is basically what i heard then. that amendment went on to pass 100-0. me if i, having heard many of the same arguments we will break on international
coalition, we will not have partners, that has been the argument as of two years ago and it is the argument today. what we hear is versus what the iranians say. the iranians say in published thatts "iran says according to the agreement, they would not make any further activities ats the iraq reactor.
>> the reality is if you continue to construct all the elements except for the nuclear core, that is a fundamental it is not and insignificant, especially if our view is that iraq really isn't and to be allowed at the end of the day, why would we allow them to even move to any form of construction which puts a greater investment in their part to achieve their ultimate goal? in we see today that the a rocketare launching next week, and though this was supposedly made at their space program, it's well-known that this is just a cover for military ballistic weapons program. i think that is a provocative midst of such negotiations and should be interpreted as a sign of bad faith, and only reaffirms in our mind why we need to proceed with some efforts here.
i know i have been a proponent of pursuing additional sanctions prospectively at a time frame beyond the scope of the intended is annths that we think insurance policy. i am beginning to think, based upon all of this, that may be what the senate needs to do is to find the endgame, at least what it finds acceptable as the final status, because i'm about what ius perceive will be acceptable to us as the final status versus say to fact -- when i us, meaning the administration, versus what the congress might view as acceptable. it may be defining that through a resolution, maybe it course of to an outcome that is the most important one. i just want to put on the record
my skepticism based on the history we have had here, one for 17 years, the other may be more recent, but i have heard many of these arguments and they are the arguments nonetheless the have had the -- help administration in the past ultimately achieve some of its goals. >> we will resume the hearing immediately following. this hearing is in recess.
>> i will give you an opportunity to respond to the , and ms.resented -- ms. war in and ms. sherman, would you like to respond? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i know that senator menendez is not here so i made the offer to senator menendez and i'm happy to follow up with him directly. what i would say is that i don't think anyone can deny the importance of the international coalition of countries that we have been able to put together and hold together. it has magnified enormously the
strength of our sanctions. we have been able to do that to ensure that the innate -- the legislation that is enacted strengthens the international coalition. after the testimony that senator menendez reference, we met with senator menendez and others and expressed our concerns with the provision that would impose sanctions on the central bank of iran that was directed at iran's ability to export its oil and we work with senator menendez and others and very much appreciate is working with us to modify the provision that gave us the greatest concern in a way that when it was ultimately enacted, it was enormously effected. over the course of the past two years it has resulted in a
rant's ability to export its oil being severely impaired. it is now down to about a million barrels per day. we were able to implement that provision in a way that brought partners.ht along our i appreciate senator menendez's work with the administration in crafting that legislation in a way that was enormously effective. today we had this very strong international coalition. the risk of legislating right now is that it weakens that coalition. i cannot sit here and say that it will blow apart the coalition, but i don't think anyone can deny that there is a risk that if we legislate now, the coalition will we can. if it weakens the effectiveness of our sanctions and the concerns that senator corker and
senator reid expressed about the business community going into a rant become more real. if our sanctions weaken, the leverage that our negotiators and ourdiminished, ability to reach the long-term agreement that we are all trying to achieve becomes more difficult i would just say that given the absolute certainty that congress can legislate if the iranians don't fulfill their obligations under the joint plan or are unable to reach a long- term agreement, as well as the certainty the administration will work with this congress, with this committee, with senator menendez and others on legislation that could be enacted at the appropriate time, just seems to me that it is not a risk worth taking right now. you, mr. chairman. let me just add, i totally understand senator menendez and
all senators, all members skepticism about iran. do good things around the world for the most part. we are concerned about what they have done regarding missing americans. we are concerned about their destabilizing activities, about their human rights abuses, there censorship. we are skeptical about whether comprehensive agreement that addresses all of the international community's concerns about their nuclear program. but we are equally convinced that we must test and try to see whether in fact we can resolve this peacefully, because that is what the american people want. that is what the united states congress wants. that is what the senate wants and that is the right thing to do. we are in a somewhat different place than we have been in the lead up to this moment where sanctions have been so staggeringly effective. plan ofave a joint action. we now have an understanding with iran of actions it is to
take in order to get very limited, targeted, and reversible sanctions released, and to enter into a comprehensive negotiation for a comprehensive agreement. because we are in a different place, we should respond differently. just to say we should test that agreement. one of the provisions of the agreement is that the european union, the un security council and the united states not impose new nuclear sanctions during the six months while we negotiate that comprehensive agreement. it seems to us that it is worth ,omplying with the provisions understanding, testing iran and then coming to the congress to this committee and the senate as undersecretary cohen has said to take action if and when needed. thank you.
>> thank you, mr. chairman. very quickly, i will be as concise as possible. mr. cho and following off what senator reid has said -- mr. cho cohen. >> the actions today were not against american companies but about two weeks ago there was an action settled with an american would practice to be clear, is this public information? >> absolutely. these businesses do business with the u.s. government? x i don't know. i would be very surprised if any did. that if werenk --ng to do something >> i think it is very unlikely. happen -- iwould
happen to be over in israel when this agreement was announced. prime minister netanyahu was not happy, as you well know. though, itimation, seemed like everybody in the middle east was not happy with it. not just israel, but everybody. why? >> senator, i understand everyone in the region's anxiety, because it is our anxiety. that is that iran is it destabilizing influence in the region. they are sending their own military advisers into serious. they are financing actions in yemen. they are not good actors in the region, so there is a concern among people in the region that , thisuclear agreement understanding, is going to lead to normalizing our relationship
with iran. .hat is so many years off corrects the hope is for that, but we are a ways off. >> a long way off. >> in relation to the iaea inspectors, are they there on a daily or weekly basis? >> right now, the iaea inspectors go on a weekly basis and this agreement now will require them to go daily. >> do they have access to everything they need to succeed? >> they will have. they do have and now will have additional access to things they need to see. xd these inspections have to be preannounced? >> because they are there every day, iran will now know that they will be there every day. makes you had talked about the iranian policy in regard to has h and hamas.bolla
part of my concern is you have iran acting very improperly on one side and then a hope that on this side they are going to act separate from the rest of their foreign policy. what gives you any sort of confidence that that even could happen? confidence.about it's not about trust. it's about verification, in the first instance. msandly, why frankly, the and the foreign minister have responsibility for the nuclear negotiation. the leadership on their activity that destabilized so much of the region in parts of the world. givenent rouhani has been license by the supreme leader to then give license to foreign ministers to try to address the concerns of the international community. for that is because
of the horrific economic situation that the undersecretary outlined. >> one of the things that is kind of ironic to me, and i wasn't aware of what ranking member crapo was talking about with folks being held hostage. one of the things that would seem -- where is the goodwill that comes out of iran? we have seen good will come out of this country. we always see good will come out of this country. where is the goodwill? these guys are the ones that have been blowing up the world, not us. >> senator, i wish i could tell you that i thought there was a lot of good action coming our way. there was an american who was briefly held and then let go by iran. they saw that as a goodwill gesture. they saw their letting go of our hikers as a goodwill gesture, but quite frankly, there is a long way to go before we see the goodwill that you are referring to.
flex iran sits on the fourth largest oil reserves in the world, second-largest natural gas reserves. why should iran even be interested in nuclear power? >> this is an excellent question, one we have asked them repeatedly, and it is why this joint plan of action that we want to understand what their practical needs are, because quite frankly, it is not clear to us why they need a stockpile of 3.5% enriched cereal, why they need the nuclear reactor. that is what we are going to have to work through to get to a comprehensive agreement. >> there is not a soul at this table that does not want to see these negotiations work. on the other hand, we don't want to see iran become more powerful, either. >> thank you, mr. chairman.
i thought i came to hearing on sanctions, and what we are really hearing is that hearing on the legitimacy of the proposed agreement, which presents three categories of my kind of analysis. number one, the congress obviously plays a very large role in providing policy advice and certainly participating. i think there's a lot of people, certainly in this room, who have expressed dissatisfaction with the agreement, dissatisfaction with whether we have mutuality of goals, whether we have been speaking with one voice, which is critically important if we are going to be successful. i understand and share your concern about the international community and your international sanctions. i share your concern about whether we can continue to test the waters, so to speak, in little, interim steps. but i also share the concern of
every minute members with her today about not having mutuality about the end goal, about not really appreciating and understanding -- and we can all say we do not want them to have the capability, but the bottom line is, the devil is in the details in any negotiation. i would really advise and cautioned the administration am certainly both of you through the series of discussions, you have been very forthcoming. i think you probably have an office somewhere in the u.s. capitol, you have been appear so much, but i just really believe more,here needs to be better listening to the concerns that have been expressed here today. thatt to cover something hasn't really been covered yet, which is the internal conditions in iran for the development of this agreement. there's a lot of discussion, just as you are going through this process here internally, there is a lot of discussion about the internal politics of iran, and whether in fact there
is a mature enough diplomatic situation in iran to actually deliver anything that we might hope for as we pursue these in the region. i would like comments from both of you about how you see the internal politics and how you see -- how fragile is this agreement in iran? >> thank you very much, senator. first of all, i take to heart your imprimatur to us to listen better and understand the concerns here of the united states senate, and we will work and endeavor to do so. secondly, as regards the internal politics, i would urge you if you haven't had a classified briefing with our national intelligence manager for iran, to avail yourself of that. i think you have heard some of it, because you will get some insights into what is going on, but in this unclassified setting, let me say my own understanding -- >> i think i have a pretty good idea, but i also think it's
really important for the mac in public to understand that at least some characteristics of who we are negotiating with. thank you. >> the supreme leader is the only one who really holds the nuclear file, makes the final decisions about whether iran will reach a comprehensive whatment to forego much of it has created in return for the economic relief it. the supreme leader has, however, given to president rouhani, who was elected to get that economic relief, and was quite clearly not the first choice to be president of iran, but was acceptable and is himself a conservative cleric. no one should misunderstand or believe that president rouhani is not anything but a very conservative cleric. he is about preserving the regime, not changing it, not changing the supreme leader. so none of this is about regime change for him, nor is u.s. regimeheaded about
changes. it is about addressing concerns about iran's nuclear program. rouhani was given license to go and try and see what he could do to get economic relief, with some red lines in place, including making sure that iran can keep some of its capability. rouhani passed off to the foreign minister, who knows the united states very well, having lived and studied here and work your for nearly 30 years, to see whether in fact he could move the negotiations forward. so it is in that setting that we have begun to really make some progress, because they want this economic relief. additionally, i have to add that they do have differences among their country. there are hardliners who are much more conservative than the conservative cleric resident of iran, president rouhani, who do not think that they should be
talking with the united states or anyone else, for that matter, about their nuclear program. there are some people who are more reform minded, but there is a general belief among the iranian people that they have a right to enrich. the united states does not believe any country has the right to enrich, but the iranian people do, and they have a great deal of pride and a culture of change and don't particularly want to adopt all that the united states stands for, so they very much hold on to their own tenets. briefly, justjust picking up on what under- secretary sherman said about the it wasn of rouhani, generally understood as an expression by the iranian people of a desire for relief of the economic conditions there currently facing.
among the skewed list of candidates, he was the one who was most likely to try to bring about approved economic conditions through engagement with the west, understanding full well that the only way you can get improved economic conditions in iran is to get the sanctions lifted, and the only way to get the sanctions lifted is to address concerns of the nuclear program. , jointitial first step plan of action, will not improve the economic conditions in iran, but he was greeted with excitement among the people of iran because they think they saw potential,wing the the prospects for economic improvement down the road. months ase next six the iranian people see through this joint plan of action that there is the potential, if their
government negotiates in a serious fashion about the nuclear program, to get real sanctions relief, ken create additional internal pressure of the kind that we saw that led to the election of rouhani, additional pressure to push their government to do what's necessary to address the concerns. >> senator warren -- >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here. america and its allies are committed to preventing iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and committed to protecting our allies throughout the region, including israel. are onal track policy we now, imposing tough sanctions on iran while engaging them
diplomatically, i think reflects this commitment. that approach has clearly brought iran to the negotiating and is a promising first step toward achieving our goals in the region. of course the interim deal doesn't get us everything that we want. that is the nature of the negotiation. each side has to give a little, but it is certainly no giveaway to iran. concessions,tical the core existing sanctions on their oil, and banking sectors remains fully in force, and all the sanctions relief in the deal provide are time-limited and fully reversible. more importantly, it seems to me the interim deal is a necessary step in reaching a final deal. that,d like your view on under-secretary sherman. could the u.s. plausibly hope to get a final agreement that
iranian nuclear weapons program without an interim deal of this kind? >> thank you very much, senator. know, i think secretary kerry has said, i have said, and the president of the united states has said we wish we could have gotten a comprehensive agreement in the first stage. there is no doubt we would all be happier to have a comprehensive agreement, but it simply was not available. it was not possible. so what we thought was critical was to get this first step and stop the advance of their new leader program, to put time on the clock to negotiate a comprehensive agreement. not too much time on the clock, because we didn't want them to play games, but enough time to really see if we could get that negotiation underway and fulfilled. so in our view, we needed this first step to put that time on the clock. we understand that are very
strong ally, partner, israel, tactically leaves that we should have waited for comprehensive agreement, that we should have kept sanctioning in the hopes that iran would capitulate. but our concern with that is because of the culture of resistance, as we were just discussing, that would take a very long time, and although it might ultimately happen, it might not. all that while they would be advancing their nuclear program, and since the time for breakout was already short, it would become shorter and shorter am a leaving us with very difficult options and diplomacy fading away. ask if i can just follow up just , little bit here, to be clear the value of the temporary sanctions relief, i take it from all you have said, is miniscule in comparison to iran's economy, even in this greatly weakened state. is that correct?
>> yes, senator orrin. the total value of the deal is in the $7 billion range, that is about one percent of iran's gdp. it doesn't come close to closing the budget deficit that iran faces, which is in the $35 billion range. it doesn't come close to providing the funds necessary for iran's foreign exchange needs which run about 60- 70,000,000,000 dollars a year. isi said, it is -- it insignificant in particular because of what remains in place. the banking sanctions, the oil sanctions, the financial sanctions, the fact that their ports are largely cut off. this relief will not improve the economic situation in iran in any significant way. ask one last question i want to ask about this.
president rouhani was elected in part because, unlike his predecessor, he was interested in negotiating with the international community, but he still has to contend with a significant number of hard- liners who oppose negotiation. ifer-secretary sherman, congress has additional sanctions now, even sanctions that don't kick in unless the negotiators failed to reach a final agreement in six months, would that make it more difficult or easier for president rouhani to make a final deal? >> i think there is no doubt that if, in fact, sanctions were passed, that the hard-liners would say you can't deal with the united states, you can't deal with the p5 plus one. there is no good faith. although that might indeed tanked the agreement, as i have said, are greater concern is 1 together.p5 plus
>> thank you, mr. chairman. >> can you explain specifically how the u.s. will in sure that iran complies with the terms of the first step agreement, and can you describe the different roles played by the safety department, the intelligence community, and the iaea? let's start with you. >> first of all, the iaea will be working with us. we are member of the board of governors of the iaea, so we are part of the regular meetings. they will help do the verification of the agreement and will lead the verification of the agreement, as i have , more, daily access
frequent access to iraq, managed access to uranium mines and mills and centrifuge production, getting the plans of the iraq reactor. in many ways, they will provide the compliance oversight for this rig in addition, of course, to our own means as a government , both national intelligence means as well as diplomatic means. we will be monitoring the compliance and we will, of course, be available to this committee and to the united states congress for ongoing briefings, consultations, and hearings to keep you apprised of compliance. >> with respect to compliance, i would just make one point, the relief that is afforded to iran in this package does not begin until iran begins to comply with
its obligations in the agreement. theone of the relief in petrochemical or auto sanctions begins until we see the iranians complying with their commitments under this agreement. moreover, the financial aspect of four point $2 billion that iran will be allowed access to, that is doled out in installments over the six months duration of this deal, so the iranians will need to continue to comply with their obligations under this first step in order to get access to those funds. -- >>senator crepeau senator crapo. >> thank you. the united states and the other 1 ares of the p5 plus bound to the principle of no new nuclear related sanctions. have you specifically defined what that means?
what are nuclear related sanctions? >> there are growth practices and legal definitions of that -- that a crew with that, and i would be glad to get your briefing from the team at state about how we will sort of work through those issues, but it's quite clear in the nomenclature of how we perceive what are considered nuclear related versus what would be terror related or human rights abuses or censorship or military related. >> this just generates another series of questions for me. let me pose it this way. given that there are different kinds of sanctions, and the agreement focuses on nuclear assuming wetions, can specify exactly what that is and distinguish between the different sanctions, does that mean that congress would be free to pass other sanctions while we
are considering the plan? >> we have said to iran that we will continue to enforce all of our existing sanctions and we have said that this agreement pertains only to new nuclear related sanctions in terms of what we, the european union, and the un security council will forgo. and indeed, right now, there are considerations by the human rights council about a resolution on human rights abuses in iran. we fully support that. on an ongoing basis, and all of the international forums, where we have ongoing concerns about counterterrorism, human rights, censorship, we will be active, as we always have been. >> that me ask it in another context. shouldwe proceed, and
iran succeed in proving that it can run a purely civilian program and move forward with the resolution of the issue as you have discussed is our objective as we all hope will be achieved, would the united use allhen be able to the tools in its toolbox. what i'm referring to here is something such as petroleum sanctions, to address the otherilizing nature of aspects of iran's conduct, such as at state sponsorship of terrorism or advanced ballistic missile production or its human rights abuses? >> i think we have to look at ,hat the specific language was so i think the best i can do without specific language sitting in front of me and a front of our lawyers this to say to you that the only commitment we have made in this agreement is no new nuclear related sanctions is the only commitment
we have made. >> i would like to pursue that little further with you following the hearing to see how we distinguish between the two and what kind of limitations would be on the united states as we move forward in that context. just another couple of quick questions. these questions relate to the un security council resolutions and the u.s. civil nuclear cooperation agreement. can we assume or can you confirm to us that those resolutions and agreements would be required to be complied with by iran as we move forward in any final negotiations? councilecurity resolutions must be addressed before a final agreement is agreed to. you, mr. chairman. i have no further questions at this point.
nuclearg iran's activities is filed to our national security and that of our allies, including israel. reached,al deal is iran fails to comply with the first step agreement. this committee will act swiftly to impose a new round of sanctions. in the meantime, i agree with a pausewitnesses that on new sanctions legislation is justified to see if such a deal is possible. i would like to thank the witnesses for their testimony, and this hearing is adjourned. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013]
[captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> the senate is in session today. this afternoon they will continue work on two of president obama's executive branch nominations. secretary of state for near eastern affairs, and president obama's choice to head the homeland security department. two other major items on the senate agenda this week include the 2014 defense programs bill and the bipartisan budget agreement, which was approved by the house last week. the washington post reports it appears the senate has enough votes to pass the deal through the chamber this week. you can watch the senate live right now on c-span2. the house is on winter recess. house lawmakers will return for legislative work on january 7. you can watch the house, as always, here on c-span. >> i wish you both a very happy christmas and a bright and prosperous new year. >> it's a pleasure to greet you,
mr. santa claus and have you sale of sears which begins on thanksgiving day this year. would you mind photographing some of the christmas cheer as a special favor for santa claus? >> it's one of the things that i do best. [laughter] you must have performed like this before. >> my father gave it to me. , influence and image, season two. this week, even its -- it is roosevelt to grace coolidge, weeknights on c-span. >> the first country in the
is something that allows monitoring of vital signs without having to have intrusive monitors. it could really be a game changer in terms of tracking people's health and health care. >> we are a remote monitoring solution to be able to put devices in patients homes, to be able to monitor and keep them well and have better outcomes. anticoagulation device. typically, a patient that is on coumadin and warfarin would have to go to the doctor maybe once a week to get blood work, and then the data goes into this device and then it goes to our service center, our nursing senator, monitor thean help patient and alert the cardiologist. >> one thing my office is working on is providing a model notice. for example, when you go to buy
a can of soup, there is that fda label that let you look for the things you are interested in. some care about sodium, others care about sugar or fat. and wedeveloping a tool, have already done this for personal health records. we are now expanding it to address other apps and tools. this can help you say these folks do not resell my information am a so a consumer can help navigate this growing and exploding field. >> the government's role in supporting mobile health care technology, tonight at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span2. energyhead of the information administration today said that u.s. oil production is 1970 levels. peak according to findings released in the agencies 2014 energy outlook, the gap between production and demand could close by 2040.
this was hosted by the johns hopkins school of the advanced international studies. it is an hour and 20 minutes. >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. i am senior adviser in our energy resources environment program. it is a great pleasure to welcome an old friend, administrator of eia, to our session which has been done now for the last two or three years. we are very pleased to cooperate on that. been in his current job for about a year and a half. before that, he had a distinguished career for about 14 years both as chief energy economist and before that, energy strategist.
prior to that he worked for about 10 years in a similar role. is former president of the u.s. association of energy economics and former president of the national association of petroleum investment analysis -- analyst. he has been on a number of committees, spent some time at also at least two advisory committees in the past year. occasional an lecturer several times here at sais, so we are very pleased to have him back. he will talk to us about the reference case of the 2014 energy outlook. will perceive with some discussion q&a after that.
>> ok, will, thanks very much for the introduction. it's great to see you back here in this role at johns hopkins, and i appreciate very much your words. i did hear you say that we are old friends, and i am saying we are friends of long-standing acquaintance. [laughter] i wanted to go through our annual energy outlook. let's see if we can make that work. there we go. the first thing i wanted to do is thank john and paul. paul.omes q&a, the hard
questions will be answered by john and paul. i wanted to remind you that these conclusions are all based of analysise set and model that includes some alternative cases, and more that will be coming out early next year as we move out toward full publication. there is a lot of uncertainties, and sometimes i use a slide that why it will be wrong, long- term forecast by their very .ature are difficult that doesn't mean that you should not do them, even if you think you're going to be wrong. you still want to do long-term forecast, because the reference case provides a really good way towards side cases
that can illuminate what it is you are doing. what is going to change, regulations and laws and consumer preferences and economic growth could be bigger or smaller than forecast. what we have really seen recently is changes in technology, especially in things like horizontal drilling and multistage hydraulic fracturing and so on that have dramatically improved the efficiency of both drilling and well production. so keep that all in mind when you go through these conclusions . one of our main conclusions is that natural gas and oil will continue to grow. natural gas throughout the entire time frame, oil until sometime in either later this decade or maybe early into the next decade.
one of the interesting things from this forecast is we now see u.s. oil production reaching 9.6 million barrels a day. that was the prior high back in 1970. keep in mind that's in our reference case. light duty vehicle energy use is declining as vehicle miles begins to slow and vehicle fuel efficiency continues to improve. growth inmentioned shale gas production, but that growth in production is going to considerable increases in consumption in the industrial sector and in the electric utility sector, sometime in the , even in the 20 30s our reference case it will
surpass coal in terms of electricity generation. we see that growth in natural gas production is not just sufficient to enable industrial and electorate utility use, but enough output to allow natural gas exports to be even larger than what we have forecast in the 2013 annual energy outlook. with growth in both oil and natural gas production, we see the u.s. moving closer towards , and there arey some very interesting economic and geopolitical implications of all of that. even with all of this activity, carbon intensity of
tols in the u.s. continues decline, and carbon emissions related to energy consumption are unlikely to ever see the 2005 peak of 6 billion metric tons, and in fact, may continue down,her plateau or drift depending on further regulations. so let's look at some of the details on this. this shows total energy consumption and total energy production in the u.s.. gap backat fairly big in the year 2005 has already gapowed towards a 16% between consumption and production.
that should narrow further as we in 2034,hat 3% number it is essentially in the same ballpark. that means improvements in the u.s. trade deficit, and in fact, were going to be doing some today, and energy article tradeg at energy and u.s. over the course of the next few weeks, so keep your eye out for that. production that oil is projected to reach the prior peak back in 1970, u.s. crude is projected to reach the prior peak back in 1970, u.s. crude nine .6uction reached million barrels a day. we are going to touch that level or come very close to it by the end of this decade. i think it will plateau. the current forecast shows it coming down.
it has a lot to do with the resources shale oil and production. this is a significant increase aeoually from the 2013 forecast, which had numbers well below this level. let me explain something that i'm actually very excited about. when we published the 2013 aeo, that was december a year ago. we had oil production data coming from our survey that at best in december -- i actually have to back up and say the models really got locked down around september. that meant we were working with numbers from june.
in some cases, those numbers are really not complete and so you are working with data -- we were wasting with data that already relatively old and incomplete as a starting point. what we do to fix that problem the drilling productivity report they are sending out monthly now. the drilling productivity report actually gives us a forecast from this month and next month's production, so when we were locking in the aeo .14 numbers, we had a pretty good idea back in september and october what current production was going to be and what it was going to look like toward the end of this year. so we are starting with numbers that are six months to one year for our long-term forecast and what we were able
to do in 2013. is going to go a long way towards improving the near-term accuracy of the aeo .14, and i'm very happy about that. aeo 2014. -- of the the numbers are shown in quadrille you and british thermal units, 25 million btu's is roughly 12.5 billion barrels a day. you can think of transportation being roughly two thirds roughl. oil consumption and break it .own in those percentages
we can see jet fuel picking up a little bit, and growth in the lopez and things like liquefied natural gas being used in transportation. a little bit of an increase in ethanol as a part of the motor gasoline consumption numbers. near 2005 was --ut 14 million billionaires barrels a day paid we are starting with