So if we take the after event with Public Law 84-99, could we, should we apply that before the event?

Let's see, super floods, super hurricanes, atmospheric rivers, climate change. This is the reality of today and even more so in the future.

I would recommend that we build into it incentives and specificity that this be taken into account.

we worked with this Committee and these members because OMSA understood that if changes to the Jones Act are necessary, Congress should enact them.

The answer is no, we cannot wait unless we want a bunch of airplanes sitting, unable to fly.

Thus far this program has not worked well. Made progress, no doubt about it. But we got some very, very serious problems that have to be resolved.

I thank you, Mr. Norcross. That is the fundamental point we have been raising throughout this entire hearing.

This is an issue that has--that requires our attention. We are talking $1.4 trillion over the next 25 years or so--an extraordinary amount of money that is really going to be controlled by two companies, both of whom are at this table.

A lot of this is blowing in the wind to today. We will see what comes of all of it with the meeting that is taking place as well as the congressional point of view, which may differ from what the White House point of view is at the end of…

I want to thank you and your colleagues at the GAO for its work--your work--over almost two decades now on this program.

I don't see a multiyear contract going forward until the fundamental questions that have been asked thus far and several that have not yet been put on the table are resolved.

So the answer is yes, you do those things?