Ted Cruz

Let me ask a final question, which is, in your professional judgment, and I would ask this to anyone at the panel who would wish to answer it, what else should we be doing to assess the threats that could seriously jeopardize human life…

Do we have indication of near-Earth objects striking the water in the past and producing tsunamis?

If that same meteor, instead of striking a relatively rural area, had struck Manhattan, what would likely the consequence of that have been?

I am eager for our collective journey to ensure that NASA and all of the related programs have sufficient resources.

Space flight and our capacity to maintain world-leading advantage in space flight is a critical priority for the nation.

You also testified about your estimates of the probability of a 5-megaton incident or a 100-megaton incident, which, if I remember right, was 30 percent and 1 percent, respectively?

OK. But that would likely not be large enough--I guess there it did strike, so----

You know, going back to the discussion about potential meteor impacts, I would assume for an impact that the most likely place for an impact would be in water, given the percentage of the Earth that is covered by water.

What would the consequences be of an impact from an object of that size?

I have not been, but I will have to add it to the list of places to take my daughters, and hopefully it--

Hollywood has done more to focus attention on this issue than perhaps a thousand congressional hearings could do.

I was disappointed that Bruce Willis was not available to be a fifth witness on the panel.

I think there is a real concern that the day-to-day conduct of American citizens going about their business might be monitored, catalogued, and recorded by the Federal Government.

It seems to me that overseas our conduct needs to be consistent with the laws of war, and domestically in the United States that our conduct in all circumstances needs to be consistent with the Constitution.

I think drones have proven an effective tool in certain circumstances, and in particular have enabled us to deal with terrorists without placing servicemen and -women directly in harm's way.

In my view, the surest protection of consumers is vigorous competition.

My focus for a long time has been and I think the focus of all of us should be on economic growth.

In terms of my remarks, I have about an additional 10 minutes I wish to give. But I was just informed that the Senator from Utah had a scheduling issue, and asked if we could show him consideration. I am being told now that--if the Senator…

The DISCLOSE Act is a subject of deep, deep division within the U.S. Congress.

My counsel, at least, would be to leave the political disputes to the members of this body.

The FCC has a long tradition of being nonpartisan.

I am very glad to hear that it is the opinion of the Department of Justice that it would be unconstitutional to kill a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil if that individual did not pose an imminent threat.

I think it is unequivocal that if the U.S. Government were to use a drone to take the life of a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil and that individual did not pose an imminent threat, that that would be a deprivation of life without due process.

I would like to start with the topic you were just discussing, the topic of drones.

If that individual is not posing an imminent and immediate threat of death or bodily harm, does the Constitution allow a drone to kill that individual?