Welcome back for day two of the summit. In keeping with yesterdays session with mr. Bowser, hectic schedules are in play by the members for the summit or notable. Senator warner and representative schiff both juggled their schedules to make this happen. Unfortunately their schedules didnt match up and we will be speaking with each of the sequentially. This afternoon, the white house codes is required and he wont be available and National Intelligence sue gordon will speak us to instead, and it will be one of sues first appearances in her new role. Let me reiterate the importance of your questions and particularly using intelsummit. Org for the first plenary. Due to the short period of time for each of the guests, you get the questions in early and nice and concise it will be much appreciated. Let me reemphasize to opportunity to interact with the sponsors of this event. I would like to introduce miss kelly. Miss kelly. Thank you very much. Appreciate being here. Welcome to everyone this morning. I hope youre all geared up for a great conversation. Congressman, thank you. Im delight to be in a situation where the house gets to go first. I want to compliment insa for recognizing the proper order of things. Well have to get to the bottom of that. Great to have you here. With so much going on and so much showing up on soundbytes back and forth. You take a deep breath and look at what were dealing with, security clearance reform and investigation into russia and 702 coming up for renewal later this year, how do you prioritize what you think is most important . It is an norms challenge this year in particular because also in addition to our daily oversight we have the Russian Investigation on top. Its not as if the other issues went away or went on hiatus. I think back and all of us must have felt the time distortion this year, not only have we done a good john with these responsibilities but also compartmentalizing our differences. To give you an example, the chairman and i have differences over the Russian Investigation and we decided where we will compartmentalize the oversight we have and not let our feelings on russia have anything to do with oversight and authorization responsibilities. We produced after numerous hearings and documents a very bipartisan authorization act that allocates the funding levels and authorizes protections we need in terms of privacy and passed it on the committee and house floor. That doesnt get the same attention as some of the twists and turns in the Russian Investigation but obviously is quite central to our responsibility. 702 will be another challenge. We have a pretty good track record when you look at how we accomplish the form of net ta data program how we passed the cyber sharing information session. We have a history to build on. Im confident that well get through the 702 debate, i hope, in a thoughtful way. Are you saying it works much better than it appears to on network and cable news everyday, behind the scene, theres more cooperation . We would have to by definition. It couldnt be worse than it appears. A lot of the work that gets done doesnt get the same attention and obviously of vital . I view our committee as having perhaps the most difficult oversight job in the congress because when you serve on one of the other committees doing oversight, if youre on the Transportation Committee and the athleticses come in and theyre talking about high speed rail and what a great project it is and how well its going and on budget and on time and the rest of that, there are any number of outside stakeholders who can hold the witnesses accountable and say, thats not true and this isnt right, you need to ask those questions. In our arena most of the questions are in closed session we dont have outside stakeholders to the same degree and give us insight to ask the right questions or know when were not getting a complete answer. Thats a very challenging oversight responsibility but i think were doing a pretty good job. That sounds like a very serious, maybe not flawed part of this system you have to overcome somehow because you do have such responsibility of oversight of these programs for the American People when they hear what is said and doesnt and important to get the right information out there. How do you personally handle that when you dont have the outside people to bring the level of expertise . One of the most important decisions we make when we hire our staff. We bring people often who have experience in the agencies and who do know the right questions to ask and expertise and background to help us with our oversight. We depend to a great deal to the professionals working in the ic, both on the government and contractors side to be candid with us, not just to the answer to our guess but bring us problems when they occur. That has by and lank happened. We benefit from the professional workforce we deal with. At the same time, human nature is human nature. People dont necessarily like to volunteer their faults or problems and people become vested in the way theyve approached issues or programs. We need to continue to challenge the agency, to do better and continue to demand the accountability in terms of what were paying for certain programs, whether something weve been doing the same way continues to be justice and getting the same results and setting the right metrics. We have to be demanding. I think we benefit from a very capable staff and the professionalism within the ic. You feel like youre getting the cooperation you need from the people you are overseeing . Yes. There have been very very few times ive felt like we were getting misinformation. Theres certainly times where i have disagreed with a briefer or their conclusion or opinion or questioned the underlying facts being presented, but its not a situation where i think people are deliberately trying to mislead us. There are times, i think, when we have a fresh perspective, not having become wedded to a certain approach. That can be very helpful and constructive. Im sure from the witness point of view, they may view it differently and think we dont have anywhere near the experience in time and task that they do which is certainly correct. It seems to work the end of the day. Obviously, an era where were dealing with new challenges in the forms of terrorism and asymmetric warfare. Also, now information wars, with very capable adversaries in a burgeoning cyber field we have to Work Together to make sure we have the capabilities to defend the country. What do you think the Biggest Challenges are right now . You wake up and read the same newspapers and websites the rest of us do and see whats happening with north korea and preparing for the next election and dealing with state level and federal level and how do you prioritize these things . Its very difficult because, you know, our tendency, i think, like most institution is to focus on the most immediate problem, which is not necessarily the biggest problem or most long term problem or the problem that requires you to be able to allocate resources in the way that builds over time. Im astounded just with the crush of things going on, for example, that so little attention is bag paid to the fact that rocca is going to fall soon. Soon, we hope. But we have the successful retaking of mosul. Rocca is going to fall. The last major urban holdings of the socalled caliphate are about to disappear. S which an important success on the battlefield. But its gotten almost no attention just because of Everything Else going on. That doesnt mean by any means the war against isis is over or nearing conclusion. Or no long ear threat. Or no longer a threat. We always worry how will it impact us here at home. We need to see that thread drawn and that connection made, do you think thats happening enough in the news . Sure, on certain things. On north korea people have a vivid sense of the threat they look at these missiles can reach anywhere in the United States and maybe carry a payload. On the isis threat, maybe the physical caliphate is disappearing but what about the virtual caliphate. Its dangerous to mention in their terms of people being radicalized. Here in this country. Here in this country. I think in terms of the two threats most in the news these days, the throat from aeronautic and the threat from russia, people are quite vividly aware of the nature and dimension of those threats. How were going to confront them, though, we still have a lot of work to do. Let me ask you, too, and get to questions from audience members, we already have some coming in here. Lets talk quickly about 702, because i think thats helpful and another one with the ability of the United States to collect information and private citizen, both are at stake. What happens the day after if it is not reauthorized . First of all, i dont think thats going to happen, the failure to reauthorize 702. The only question is what form it will take. I hope im not being overly optimistic about that. I think it would be irresponsible for us and weve done a lot of irresponsible things in congress. That doesnt preclude that. Could you say that one more time . Weve done more irresponsible things by omission than comission. I think we will reauthorize it just a question of what kind of reforms we make to it. It wont surprise people the old adage of where you stand depends on where you sit has resonance in the sense that members of the Judiciary Committee have an important oversight role have one perspective and Judiciary Committee have a different perspective. Not that we dont appreciate the Civil Liberties and civil rig s rights, we certainly do and not that the judiciary doesnt understand but we live daytoday how important that is to our national security. Also, i think having a vivid understanding how the Program Works is important and evidence in terms of have there been problems wex cushion and have there been any intentional abuses of it. Also, with respect to proposed reform, whats the real down stream consequence of that . Does the criminal justice model of seeking Court Approval of the search of the 702 database, is that really the right model . Does that work here . What happens if the persons identity youre seeking is a perpetrator or a place not a person or an address. Having an intimate understanding of the Program Helps in terms of what we think is a viable reform and what may not be. Abuse of power is a big question, right, for people who dont understand how the Program Works and theyre hearing headlines abuse of power, thats where the congressional oversight comes into play. Are you confident with the way the system is running right now with your ability to oversee when there are cases of someone using certain access they may or may not have . I do feel pretty confident about our ability to oversee this. I hope thats not wishful thinking. I dont think it is. Its not just because of the work were doing or just because of the fact that the agencies do come in and selfreport when they have problems but also that we have the tremendous valueadded by the pfizer court, by the fact that the pfizer court itself does a very rigorous review of these programs. Where they find problems they often will suspend an effort until they get the results they want or change what a program can do until they get the result this is a want. We will have access to those opinions and concerns raised by the pfizer court. I think the combination of what the courts do in their oversight, what we do in our oversight and whatses do in selfreporting is pretty comprehensive. And working . And working. Let me get to some of these questions. A lot of what the audience is thinking about oversight resources, 702 reauthorization and questions about election security. Do you believe the United States government is doing enough to prepare for another cyberattack for our elections, given the elections are principally a state responsibility, what role does the federal play . I dont think were doing enough with the powerful industry, when i talk to those involved with the machinery of these elections, when i talk to them they say these systems are not impregnable, they are vulnerable. I felt for quite some time any state or voting jurisdiction that doesnt maintain a paper trail is negligent in this day and age. I think theres a lot more we need do, a lot more that we need to understand. I think the vendors of the Voting Machines need to be more transparent with the government about their systems and software to analyze vulnerabilities. The states have to be willing to accept the government help being offered. The government and the ic has to be more transparent with the states. The states still dont know if they were victims of russian hacking. We have not shared that information with the states. I think thats crazy. I know my colleague, mark warner, has been very outspoken on this and properly so. I hope we will have a hearing on our committee, an open hearing where we can talk about the vulnerability they feel in terms of their infrastructure and need for us to be more forthcoming with them. We learn each and every day, today, there was a report by symantec within the last 24 hours about the vulnerability of our power grid, the fact that outside hackers have been able to get into the operational parts of those systems, not just probe some outlying parts of those systems. We find those systems are far more vulnerable than people may have expected. Weve been talking about it for years but havent done a lot to protect critical infrastructure. A lot of studies, a lot of meetings and a lot of talking. The big thing that fell out of the cyber information sharing bill was critical infrastructure. That was the one area there was too wide a gulf between the party is in terms of whats the federal governments role protecting critical infrastructure. It is largely set by private industry. There are incentives for private industry to improve their security. Whether it is enough is an open question. I will say the fact there are still vulnerabilities doesnt mean nothing is being done. What it does mean in some cases, this is a very asymmetric field where the advantages are all on the offensive. Those on offense only need to find one open door and those on defense need to borrow every window and lock every door. Thats inherently challenges and a big field for adversary, theres always going to be deniability. We have gotten good attribution but they know they will always have deniability areas. We have Great Questions here on russian influence. I know were running out of time and you have another appointment you need to get to this morning. Let me ask one more question. What is congress doing to build the federal Cyber Workforce . How can the ic compete with these to attract the right personnel with training pained them enough with the state youre coming from and is the cyber military corps possible in the future and might that bring benefits . First of all we cant compete financially with Silicon Valley. Some of the bright capable people start in the Silicon Valley with salaries higher than yours or mine, certainly higher than mine and a lot of people in the audience. Probably mine, too. Im sure thats true. Were benefitted by the fact a lot of People Choose to work in the ic because they feel a sense of patriotism and calling. It drives them to that. A lot of patriotic people feel the same call to work within the private sector that are serving the ic. Thats tremendously beneficial. We do need to continually work to recruit people and continue work to diversify the ic work force. We do need to explore creative ways to bring people into the industry for a period of years, then have them go back into industry. Yeah. I heard that a lot. A real benefit for that. There are great models for that. Look at arthur e. For example, great people going into next Generation Energy technologies and bring the knowledge they have from the private sector and add value to the government and go back to the private sector. There are obviously difficulties and computations in the ic environment but nothing that cant be overcome. We do need to look to these models as well as interesting partnerships that already exist in terms of Venture Capital with the Silicon Valley. Absolutely. Know we need a seamless congressional transition this morning. I will thank you very much for taking the time to come here. I know youre very busy. We should all come to your office and talk to a highly qualified staffer. Thank you for submitting them. If we could have senator warner, i think he was supposed to be here about now . A few more minutes . Hes late. We get to talk. I think we should talk more about the russia question. Wait. I think i see senator warner. Im kidding. I believed you. What does the scope entail of russian influence in the United States, a small little question we canned by time with. Thats really what were aiming to find out. Were looking at each of the modalities russians have used elsewhere some we know with great certainty they employed here in the election and others where we still need to find out where these tactics that the russians used. I do want to make one point. I know we have limited time but getting to an earlier question of yours implicated in terms of what do we do about all of this. There is no Software Patch for what happened last year. There is no Cyber Defense capable enough. If the russians want to get into the dnc in 2020 theyll get in. If they want to get into the rnc they will get in. The best protection that we can have is somehow forging the consensus we didnt have last year, that no matter who it may help or hurt, if any foreign power intervene is in our affairs let alone our elections, they will be repudiated. Any one who tries to take advantage of it will be repudiated. More than anything else thats what i think why need to defend ourselves. What has been unleashed is not going be put back in the bottle and not just an issue with russia. It will be an issue with any country that wants to influence our affairs and moreover an issue with lots of other countries and their relationship with each other. What worries me and i wonder if it worries you, you look at influence operations and how were getting news today and you look at fake news and whats fake and whats not, were getting it through social media charges, is there more of a responsibility that needs to be placed on the consumer of the news to question things that dont quite seem like they fit a pattern that they saw a story yesterday when things are coming out of left field. Should we put part of the responsibility on the person receiving news, to say, wait a second, i will throw up a bs flag . Absolutely. This is a challenge for americans and a challenge for people around the world. I found it bewildering in russia during soviet times people were so disbelieving what they read in prague, they recognized it was merely the party line. Propaganda. People now are so believing of the russian media, its exextraordinary. I wonder what happened to the russian skepticism what the government has to say. I think we all need to bring a certain inherent skepticism. I think we all should take a very serious look at what facebook has just revealed publicly in terms of its own analysis. One thing in particular, the russian, this is completely consistent with what the intelligence could be found in its unclassified assessment. One among other things to sew discord in the United States, look what they were doing and what they were choosing to grow the divisions in america. We ought to recognize that for what it is, this is a vulnerability they see we have, these terrible divisions within our country. If they feel thats a vulnerability, we need to recognize it as a vulnerability and we need to do something about it and why its so important from the top on down we make an effort to bridge these divisions and not aggravate them further. Now, i do see my senate colleague. He is here. Id like to thank you and i dont want you to rush off because id like to get a quick photograph. If we could have everyone in the audience come up . No, im kidding. Congressman schiff, thank you very much. Senator warner, welcome. Do we need to get a quick photo . Bear with us while we get a quick picture here and do a transition. Behind the scenes. To both of our guests for juggling their schedules. When you pass each other in the hall i guess you dont do that quite often but when you do, what do you say . We were talking about the proper order of the house goes before the senate. Youre always welcome. How do you follow that. In full disclosure, i was doing an interview. I jumped out of the car and grabbed a jacket and unfortunately i grabbed my aides jacket whos about 6 inches shorter than me. Im not sure if its reflective of being a senator or vice chair. Either that or in august i put on an awful lot more weight than i thought. You will get yourself in trouble. I will get in trouble for that. Thank you for being here. I know youre on a tight schedule. I appreciate you being here. We have very well informed audience of what youre tackling on a daily basis and we went through a high number of priority things for senator schiff and want to go through those with you. Security clearance reform being another, how big is a cyber threat . Walk me when you wake up and turn on the news or read the paper, that moment of, oh, wow, what next . Let me step back and first of all, even before i wake up, a couple general comments. One, this opportunity to be the vice chair of the Intel Committee is probably my greatest opportunity i had in the senate. It still remains as one of the committees that actually still functions in a bipartisan way, that gets bills out and works through issues in ways i think are appropriate. Ive been generally very very pleased how our committee for example has taken on the whole Russian Investigation. I feel as a virginia guy i have an extra burden and responsibility since so many of our intelligence professionals either live in or retire to virginia. A. They know where you live. I feel like im the local home guy. I feel its very important and one of the reasons i was so frustrated both during the transition and the early days of the administration, ive got a lot of differences with the president but where the president didnt seem to have that kind of respect for the intelligence committee. I think thats been troubling and i think its challenging now. Has it gotten any better . I think he is growing understand you cannot be the president of the United States without having a strong relationship with your Intelligence Community. I think thats gotten better. For a community that doesnt get the thanks and appreciation on a regular basis that it deserves its got to have respect, if were going to continue to attract world class talent and if the communities can continue to do its most important responsibility, to speak truth to power and not be toll lit sized. We have mike pompeo in place now seems to be working well with the president and sue gordon. Shes been a longtime friend. Do you feel we are getting away from the politics and focused on the substance and the issues that affect all of us regardless of party . I think there is progress. You think of Robert Cordell low and and sue gordon and trish and admiral rogers, lot of the community has stayed in place. Mike pompeo has good background from the cia and dan with good appreciate of the ic. I think we have made Good Progress there. Some areas that may not rise to the level of news on a regular basis. There are things a little bit nittygritty im still very interested in, for example one of the things that jim clapper and i spent a long time with in his last year, can we make sure that the Oversight Program or for example the motion of a uniform it backbone across the whole ic, kind of nerdy but when youre talking about how we communicate and make sure theres better ability to move past that is very very important. The question of clearances. This has been a problem for ages. Our intel bill that we passed out of the senate committee, we start a reform process there long overdue, the process particularly if were going to attract world class talent and bring in people as they come out of school but think about midcareer transitions into the agency and Intel Community you cant have this 12, 18 month, 24 month security clearance process. We tried to say more uniform across all the agencies, you shouldnt have to duplicate that. The clearances. The main systemic change were trying to push is rather than having an arbitrary every five year rereview, this ought to be more riskbased, more ongoing. There are clearly models in the private sector on security we can implement on the ic side. One other area i want to get to before we get to 702 and russia and other things. An area i dived into for some time, over the last couple of years as a former guy from tech, was the whole question of our overhead architecture. Im a big believer we need to move from the world where we built on a 10year cycle the worlds most exquisite overhead architecture and we had a procurement process that said we will take a year to two to get your requirements and in 510 year period before we move from design to launch, that just doesnt make sense in a world where an overhead things are changing on a two year basis and were building sometimes i think multibillion dollar platforms in the sky that are exquisite but i felt like in a way that for a long time nobody in the ic community had ever seen a james bond movie because back in the early days of the james bond movies, the bad guys always used laser beams to blow up satellites. Now, were seeing that. I compliment others about moving from that old style architecture to something more quicker and much more smaller and much more use of commercial, these areas that dont always make the headlines but a lot of capacity needs to move the community forward. I love that. I feel like were getting into good substantive issues and you need to provide good oversight making sure we allocate issues we need to. Global coverage. With final resources the ic focused on hard targets and terrorism. Countries like guinea might not be important until there is a coupon that gets u. S. Interests. Does the ic have an adequate understanding of socalled Global Coverage country. That is i think there is a growing recognition that problems can pop up anywhere. If we think about it, in the last 30 years, weve been counterterrorism, weve been russia, china, north korea, iran. When were thinking about environmental challenge, thinking about pandemics and the emergence of terrorism revolutionary forces that are j specific country. You have to have a broader footprint. That means we need greater collaboration with allies. We cannot do it alone. It means greater usage of open source documents. It also pushes us completely into the fact that a group of dedicated activists in some small country can actually challenge our nation. Particularly within the cyber domain. Because its so asi met tri kal. Thinking through the broader coverage rather than checking the boxes as is an issue that the community and we from the over sight capacity need to think. Do you have time to think about whats coming next bh youre living in a daytoday environment where you have 20 things popping up on the radar. Ten of which need immediate attention. Do you have time . Its not like the congress is getting a lot done in other areas. Can you say that again for me . Listen, i think you have to carve out the time. One of the things that richard and i on this chairmanship and as we try to think through all right lets not just i felt like the first three years i was on the committee was a little like being in a kids soccer game. The meetings were whatever was the hot spot that week. Whatever the bad guys were doing that week and whatever specific location. Youre reacting . We need to be more proactive and forward leaning. Has it changed . Were trying to move it in that direction. But as you mention, theres always something that requires immediate attention. Well get a classified brief on north korea today. Thats absolutely critical. And but we have to also be able to sort through what are the emerging threats. Ive been for example, i have been saying since the beginning of the Russian Investigation that i have real concerns. About the way americans and for that matter the world takes in news. I think that adam was taking on this at the end. And it appeared to me that the very social media sites that we rely on for everything, facebook and google and twitter, it was my belief that the russians were using those sites to intervene in our elections. And the first reaction from facebook of course with all the crazy. Nothing is going on. Well, we find yesterday there was something going on. All we saw yesterday in terms of the brief was the tip of the iceberg. I want to see twitter back in, i want to see others back in. Not to be necessarily critical because you have seen for example in the case of facebook, they denied any they were being used and any way. By the time, didnt do anything. By the time o. French election. Took down 50,000 accounts. So here is an emerging threat and challenge, that we have to see from the ic side. We also breaks us into the whole legislative side. For example, even in the craziness after the with Unlimited Campaign contributions flowing into the campaigns, and america can figure out what content is being use td on t advertising. You can look at it, you can look at the add. You may nod be able to find the source. In social media theres no such requirement. We may need legislative. There maybe a reform a reform process here. That i think the social Media Companies would not a oppose. Americans when it particularly comes to elections ought to be able to know if theres foreign sponsored content coming into the electoral process. Right. And thats an area thats a brand new field. Does it just fall on the ic side, not necessarily. As we think about how we become more and more dependent on devices. That becomes a method of influence. But almost bigger than tv and radio. We talked about before. I approach it with the soccer mom mentality. I understand what people in Political Parties are saying. And i understand theyre gaining momentum based on what the messaging is. You win senate seats on catering to the people who support you. But is that necessarily the best thing for america. Thats a great point you brought up being more critical. This is brand new world. Were communicating and receiving information in a different way. The ic has to understand that. And we have to sort through it. Okay lets get to a few fantastic issues. Space. Do we have the policy, the organizations capability in place to optimize our utilization of the space doe ma domain i dont think we can deny our adversaries the use of space. What i worry about is do we have the resilience, the flexibili , flexibility can we move away from the model of the exquisite means to a more distributed system. I would argue in many ways our e enormous communications, reliance on space, our enormous system reliance. Enormous over head capacity in terms of radar, makes us in many ways more vulnerable. Because if i go back to the james bond analogy. We thought we were going to control and dominate space forever. Now were able to see nations, smaller nations have the capacity to if they can jam or interfere with those devices, that makes us more vulnerable. How do we think. And how do we think just again im obsessed on the over headpiece. We think about how we need enormously greater coverage of north korea. But as we think about even if we can get the space coverage, do we have the ground capacity to review all the data that comes in. This needs a whole new systemic approach. Huge problems. You mention innovation with satellite. They may have the technology and cant sell it. What degree has the Intelligence Community incorporated cunning Edge Technology from start up and smaller Tech Companies and have entities helped nd this regard . Were making progress. I do want to make the point again that while theres some Great Innovation going on in the Silicon Valley, in over head. Theres a lot of Great Innovation in the Greater Washington area. On the virginia side. We need to look in both spaces. We also have to and i would say this on the dod and ic side. We have to move the process away from being so risk adverse. Its always easier to go with the big brand name. We have to move on a more innovative side. The chairman and i. Hes really come around on this. I want to give richard credit. You cant have a two year requirement cycle. And then a five to ten year procurement and launch cycle when you have my background is in the cell phone business. Back in the mid80s, wall street and the thought it would take 30 years to build out a single cell phone system. And at the end of the 30 year is 5 of americans would have cell phones. They were wrong i got rich because i started an ex tell and other companies. Were in the same transition in satellite and we have to move much faster, much more rapidly. We may not get it all right and we have to move to much smaller. Whats your role in making that happen . We have been very specific with our colleagues in the ic. That they have to speed up the requirements in the process. And i think i have seen a real positive movement forward. I have . Were headed in the right way at a fast enough pace . If again were taking over head. If you look at the transition on the commercial side and satellite. Just in the last three years. And from the cost of the bird to the launch cost, there was one tenth the cost. Now many cases its one 50th the cost of what were talking about. A question here on potus information sourtss. Without getting too political. Most president s are relied upon the Intelligence Community for information about global development. Do you think trump is drawing on the Intelligence Community insight to inform policy decision. Ill add on a last question. Do you think thats changed from a president who was just coming into office. Who had no experience working with an Intelligence Community to one who has been in office, has people in leadership in the loerd ship companies. Have you seen a shift in his confidence in the assessments . A face is worth a thousand words. The combined knowledge, experience, and analysis of the ic versus bright bart. I sure as hell hope so. Listen, that is a continuing worry. I think of. Do you think. Listen, it is critical i want the president to succeed. Its like the most important for the country sake. He has to learn that. But its been it has been a slower process than id hoped. Hows that for a an answer. I just everyone to get along. I just want to take the focus onto the issues that are going to impact us. I agree. Its frustrating from the person outside of washington. To look at whats going on. And think are we doing the best we can. Again the ics role, really goes up exponentially and more important. The notion not just the president. For an average American Consumer of information, the amount of Information Sources that overwhelm you. And this goes when the normal question. What keeps you up the most at night. In terms of traditional threats. I wouldnt put the five. I would put the asymmetrical threat around cyber. It bothers ne terms of the fact, it drives me crazy that we have had 21 states broken into. And we have a response that we cant share with the top election official. They dont have a appropriate clearances. We have to be better prepared. Im going in just one minute. We have to if you look at the fact we have ten billion devices connected to the internet at this point. Were going to 25 billion. We dont have any security built in most of the devices. Each of those can be weaponized, taken over. When we think about the notion of our Technology Advance make us vulnerable. Sorting through how we gt our information and not a way that interferes with First Amendment rights. What is at least the source of the information to make a judgment. We have to use our tools more. That means for the ic both to the president and to the congress. The responsibility to analyze sort and get this information to policy makers. Is more important than ever. Its critical. I know you have to go. Well wrap up. When you look at the role of congress and all the issues that we talk about this morning, and the responsibilities. Give me an honest answer. What can congress do better . What can just in your own backyard . I would argue beyond just the ic. What i would say is i was at dinner last night for john warner. A series of folks talking about the good old days of congress. I would argue there are two things we can do. I think that committees, and Committee Chairs need to take of the power back. And not have congress continuely driven simply by the democratic and republican leadership. Number one. And number two, i think in this day and age we need to realize that most of the issues from our economic challenge, i would argue if somebody was blessed to do well in business, the fundamental challenge we have from the economic standpoint u how do you make modern capitalism work for enough people. We have to understand that most of the issues we are arguing about are frankly 20th century issues. Were relitigating liberal vs. Conservative. Left versus right. When the issues are future versus past. If we can reset the frame work on future vs. Past. There maybe a way for a new set of alignments. The vast majority of members of the senate get along, at least privately agree on 80 of the issues. And we ought to produce a lot better product for the American People than were producing at this point. Thats a great thought to end on. I thank you very much. For your time this morning. Thank you for your service. Thank you for the excellent questions as well. Very nice to see you. Thank you. Cspan washington journal live every day with news and policy issues. That impact you. And coming up tuesday morning, document tear film makers ken burns and linn will join us to discuss the latest film called the vietnam war. Also california will talk about the future of the daca immigration program. Also joining us Louisiana Republican congressman. On how vulnerable coastal areas need to prepare for storms like Hurricane Harvey vi and irma. Watch live at 7 eastern tuesday morning. Join the discussion. Now, the confirmation hearing for nominees picked to serve on the six and seventh Circuit Court of appeals. Their testimony is followed by other nominees for District Court in tennessee. And civil rights division. This hearing was held by the judicial committee. Its three and a half