Their life, of the iranian cycle. From the mining, the mills, the yellowcake production, the gasification, the centrifuge, out into waste. We will have an ability, iaea, what have the ability to appropriately monitor that every step of the way. If we have x amount of roger radium coming out raw urate x amount of raw uranium humming out, we dont see it going into the place, we are going to have extraordinary insight into this. In addition to that, under the Additional Protocol for Civil Nuclear programs, all of the facilities are declared. It is a Civil Nuclear program. As such, there is literally before seven visitation literally 24 7 visitation in those sites. Its only for the undeclared facility about which you have a suspicion that you have to go through the other process. We are going to have amazing insight, because they are living by the npd, or allegedly they will. That is what we have to make sure they are doing. We have daytoday insight into that. I might add, our colleagues, under the interim agreement, which by the way a number of people called an historic mistake, a tragedy, you heard all the same rhetoric you are hearing now those same people asked for us to keep that in place to years later because it has worked. 2 years later because it has worked. Iran has lived up to every component of that over the course of the last year. They produced 20 uranium, they undid iraq, so on and so forth. We will have this level of insight, which i think is not being examined enough or understood enough. Nothing ends at 15 years. Simply the size of the stockpile, the limitation, and enrichment, they can enrich further, but we have insight into that enrichment. Requiresuclear Program Enrichment at 5 or so, that is the high end of it. If you start to enrich higher, around 20 , you are talking about the Tehran Research reactor. No pressure for research about that. We would have insight into that program and instantly know if they are beginning to go somewhere else. Red flags go off everywhere and we would be all over with it. We would have months to respond, to be honest. The Breakout Team never goes down to level below which we have the ability to respond. Mr. Chairman, may i ask one note, it could be a collateral benefit. Uranium supply chain, i want to add this is something that the iaea wants to have much more broadly. This would be a first in moving towards cradletograve safeguards. I would say to mr. Secretary, theypeople have said that would keep it in place then moved to something worse. That doesnt mean people to delete people particularly like the program to begin with. I want to clarify that. Congressman Elijah Cummings of maryland, the Ranking Member of oversight and government reform has come out in support of the deal. He released a statement tuesday saying in part, i believe that the rejection of the Iran Nuclear Agreement would likely cause more harm to the United States, american interests, and our allies by allowing for continued progress for an Iranian Nuclear weapon. We have the debate here on cspan when members return. Secretary of state john kerry speaks about the Iran Nuclear Agreement wednesday at the philadelphia constitution center. You can see it live at 11 00 a. M. Eastern here on cspan. On the next washington journal, the chief legal officer of the financial revelatory bob colby talking about his role as a nongovernmental regulator of the securities industry. A look at the socalled cadillac tax, a 40 excise tax on expensive insurance plans. That goes into effect in 2018. We will talk about it with julie appleby. Peter grier of the Christian Science monitor talks about his recent article on how americans decide who to vote for in president ial elections. Washington journal is live with your phone calls and tweets every morning on cspan at 7 00 a. M. Eastern. Kerry,retary of state Energy Secretary moniz, and treasury secretary lew testify about the iran nuclear deal. Siz democrats six democrats and all republicans have come against the deal. This is about one hour. This hearing will come to order. Today we continue our review of the Nuclear Agreement of the Obama Administration reaching with iran. This is a critical hearing on one of the most sweeping dramatic initiatives of years, some would say decades. Demanding the committees thorough review. The global threat from iran has been a focus of this committee for as long as i can remember. Last congress, we passed country has of sentience comprehensive sanctions 20. Islation by a vote of 400 it would give iran a choice between its Nuclear Program and collapse. But the administration was successful in blocking that legislation. So instead of us considering a verifiable, enforceable, and accountable agreement, we are being asked to consider an agreement that gives iran permanent sanctions relief for temporary nuclear restrictions. Should iran be given this special deal . In september, Committee Members will face the important decision of approving or disapproving this agreement. We will have that vote only because of the Iran Nuclear Agreement review act, passed in may, which the administration did not want . To be frank, the administrations preference has been to sideline americas representatives. So i was not entirely surprised when the administration went against bipartisan calls and gave russia and china and others at the Un Security Council a vote on this agreement before the american public. Thats backwards and wrong. We have heard serious concerns from experts about the substance of this agreement. First, iran is not required to dismantle key bomb making technology. Does that make the world safer . Second, it is permitted, reversing decades of bipartisan nonproliferation policy. Does that make the region more stable . And third, iran is allowed to continue its research and development to gain in industrial scale Nuclear Program once this agreement begins to expire in as little as 10 years. 10 year. That is a flash in time. Then iranian obligations start unwinding. Does this make the world more secure . We appreciate president obamas effort to secure the most Intrusive Inspections in history. But it came up short. Instead, there is managed access with iran, russia, and china having a say in where International Inspectors can and cant go. The deals 24 day process is a far cry from anywhere, anytime. And this provision expires, too. While the administration has professed absolute knowledge about irans program, it is a fact that we have been surprised by most every Major Nuclear develop in irans history. Iran has cheated on every agreement they signed. So i ask, mr. Secretary, has iran earned the right to be trusted . This deal guts the sanctions web that is putting intense pressure on iran. Economic,all financial, and energy sanctions disappear. And where does all of that money go . To the largest Terror Network on earth. Gone are the sentience on irans Nuclear Program, but also on the bad banks that has supported irans terrorism and Ballistic Missiles of element. And to our dismay, iran won a late concession to remove International Restrictions on its blissett Missile Program on its ballistic Missile Program and arms, imperiling the security of the region and our homeland. If this agreement goes through, iran gets a cash bonanza, a boost to its international standing, and a lighted path towards Nuclear Weapons. With sweeping sanctions relief, we have lessened our ability to challenge irans conduct across the board. As iran grows stronger, we will be weaker to respond. Yes, the u. S. Would royal that the muddy waters if Congress Rejects this deal, but the u. S. Wields the most powerful economic sanctions in the world. Sanctions iran desperately needs relief from. Sentience that would continue to deter countries and companies from investing in iran. I understand the effort that the ministration has put into this agreement. These are about as highstakes as it gets. The committee must ask, if we made the most of our pretty strong hand, or are we willing to bet, as the administration has, that this is the beginning of a changed iran . These are, what issues, and i look forward to what should be an extreme informative hearing. These are complex issue. I now turn to the Ranking Member. Mr. Chairman, thank you for convening this meeting, secretary kerry, lew, moniz, welcome to the Foreign Affairs committee. Thank you all for your dedicated service, no matter what side of the issue anybody is on. I dont think anybody here it doubts her commitment to the u. S. And your good intentions on this deal. Thank you for the time you have taken over the last week to engage with members of congress on the proposed deal, and thank you for your testimony today. Congress gave itself 60 days to renew this deal. I sincerely hope my colleagues take full advantage of this time to study this agreement, ask questions, and to make an informed decision when the time comes. Weve had many months and many hearings to discuss different aspects of the Nuclear Agreement with iran. At this point, we are no longer dealing with hypotheticals. We have a specific deal on the table, and we have to decide if that deal is in the National Security interest of the u. S. And our allies. To answer that question, to be fair, we also need to ask ourselves what are the alternatives . If this deal fails, how would we get the iranians back to the table . Would new sentience have to be coupled with military action . As i continue to reveal to review the deal, there are a number of issues that i find troublesome. I hope the three of you will address them. First, i have concerns that International Inspectors were not have immediate access to underclass sites. Iran has 14 days to grant access. If iran eases access after that time, then members of the joint commission could take another week to resolve the iaeas concerns. After that, iran has three more days to provide access. Were already nearly a month after inspectors first access. If iran continues to say no, another month could go by while this gets resolved. That potential amount of time gives me pause. I would like to know how we can be sure that iran cannot use these delays to sanitize sites in a way of breaking the rules. Already, we are seeing irans leadership to that military sites will be offlimits to inspectors. Human with tough International Sanctions, there are militias and the assad regime. If this deal goes through, how do you propose to keep it out of the hands of terrorists entirely . I am glad that iran will be limited in the development of advanced centrifuges for eight years. I worry about what will happen down the road. Iran could quickly move toward the next stage of its enrichment activities. I would like to know the other provisions that will mitigate the risk, if any. Finally, i have a fundamental concerns that 15 years from now iran will be off the hook. If they choose, their leaders could produce weapons highly rich and uranium without limitations. They could use advanced centrifuges to speed the progress even further. This amounts to iran being a legitimized Nuclear Threshold state in the year 2030. My big question is this. What happens then . We back to square one . Is this deal pushing the pause button for 15 years . I have trepidation barely a week after the iranian site the deal with us. The ayatollah was chanting, death to america, death to israel. You think after a deal was signed, there would be a modicum of good will. They went back to business as usual. How can we trust iran when this type of thing happens. It is disconcerting. I am looking forward to hearing from our distinguished guests on these issues. I yield back to the chairman. Chairman this morning we are pleased to be joined by john kerry, moniz, and secretary of the treasury. Before being appointed secretary of energy dr. Moniz was the professor of engineering at m. I. T. From the director of the office of management and budget, secretary lou now serves as the 76 secretary of the treasury. Welcome and without objection, the full statements will be made part of the record. Members will have five days to submit statements and questions and materials for the record. The four turning to the testimony, we have the members here. I know we all recognize the gravity of this issue. We want everyone to have a chance to question the secretaries. To accomplish that, i would ask everyone, members and witnesses to respect the time limit. Leave them in appropriate amount of time to answer. We will begin with a summary of secretary kerrys testimony. Secretary kerry chairman, and all of the members of the committee, thank you very much. We appreciate the opportunity to be here. To frankly, clear up a lot of misinterpretations. Some element of public distortion that exists out there. There is one at i have seen on tv that has three or four major incorrect facts on which it bases the advertisement. With respect to the chairman and the Ranking Member, there are conclusions that have been drawn that do not, in fact match with the reality that this deal sets forth. We happily look forward to clarifying that in the course of this hearing. We welcome the opportunity. We are convinced that the plan we have developed with five other nations accomplishes the task that president obama set out. That is to close out the pathways to a bomb. I think as you listen to armie moneys ernest moniz, i think it is a conclusion everyone will come to. I am joined by two cabinet secretaries, both ernie and jack are critical of our ability to do this. The treasury departments knowledge of the sanctions and application of the sanctions has been exemplary. I have helped us understand the implications of the sanctions. As jack will let you know, we are not talking about 100 and 50 billion, we are not talking 150 billion. From the day the negotiations began, we were Crystal Clear that we would not except anything less than a good deal. One that would shut off the pathways toward fissile material for a nuclear weapon. After 18 months of intensive talks, the facts are pretty clear. The plan was announced this month by six nations. It encompasses that. All of the nations have Nuclear Power or Nuclear Weapons. All are extremely knowledgeable in this challenge of perforation. Proliferation. Iran has agreed to remove 98 of its stockpile of enriched uranium. They will dismantle two thirds of its installed centrifuges. They will destroy, by filling it with concrete, the existing core of its heavy water plutonium reactor. Iran has agreed to refrain from producing, or acquiring highly enriched uranium or plutonium forever. How do we enforce or verify . Particularly, to speak to the Ranking Members question, what happens after 15 years . This deal applies to forever. We have an extremely rigorous inspection regime. Iran has agreed to accept, and full ratify, prior to the conclusion of the agreement. If they do not, it is a material breach of the agreement to ratify the Additional Protocol. That requires extensive access, as well as significant additional transparency measures. This includes cradle to grave accountability for the countrys uranium from mining to milling through the centrifuge production to the waste for 25 years. The bottom line . If they fail to comply with the terms of the terms of the agreement, our intel community, our Energy Department of that is responsible for nuclear weaponry, are absolutely clear that we will quickly know it and we will be able to respond accordingly with every option available to us today. When it comes to verification and monitoring, there is absolutely no sunset in the agreement. Not in 10 years, not in 15 years, not in 20 years, not in 25 fears. No sunset, ever. Remember, two years ago when we began these negotiations, a luck to people are today. People are saying, oh my gosh this is going to happen in 15 years. Iran will have the ability to be a capable Nuclear Power. When we begin the negotiations, we faced in iran that was already enriching uranium up to 15 . They already had a facility built underground in secret that was rapidly stockpiling enriched uranium. When i began negotiations they had enough enriched uranium before 1012 bombs already. Already they had installed as many as 19,000 nuclear centrifuges. They had nearly finished building a heavy water reactor that could produce weapons grade plutonium at a rate of one or two involves a year. Experts put the breakup time when we began, which remember, is not the old breakout time that we used to refer to in the context of arms control. That is the time to be able to deploy a weapon. Breakout time as we have applied it is extremely conservative. It is the time it takes to have enough fissile materials for one bomb. It is not the amount of time to the bomb. When we say babel have one year to a certain amount of when we say they will have one year to a certain amount of material, they still havethey still have e bomb and do a bunch of other things. You will agree, no nation will consider itself Nuclear Capable with one bomb. If this deal is reject