Is there any justification, General Bolden, for advancing SLS with a funding profile that provides the taxpayers a 50-50 chance that it will succeed on schedule and on budget?

I am concerned that the budget request for SLS is a sign that NASA intends to advance a funding profile that supports a Joint Confidence Level well below the 70 percent threshold.

That's picking winners and losers, in a sense, in the marketplace, which is what we don't do.

I'm not convinced that all of the satellite projects that the Department is focused on are truly necessary to the core mission of NOAA.

I think that we need to make sure, under all circumstances, that you and your fellow Inspector Generals have unfettered access to documents that could root out wrongdoing in any Department.

But, we want to make sure the Inspector General can do his job, even in the Justice Department.

It's statutory, is it not?

But we are going to do everything we can to fund NASA.

It's sickening. But on the Banking Committee I remember Senator Sarbanes... we worked together on this a lot.

But it is very important that we keep funding SLS at a confidence level, a level that they can finish their job, on time and on budget.

So that bipartisan clarity needs to be offered.

What would you expect to get out of this? This is an important question.