Latest Breaking News On - Matt reis - Page 1 : vimarsana.com

Transcripts For CSPAN2 Capital News Today 20130720

producer in the world. another reason why companies are coming back. the cost is a third to a fifth what it is around the world. we are prepared. we're prepared. to help other countries as well. our oil import are the lowest they've been in the last twenty years. i believe if my colleagues from abroad will forgive me. i believe remain the most innovative country in the world. but i also think, folks, that the rest of the world understands why this is happening. it's not just the good fortune of having shale gas or having two oceans, et. cetera, i think it's because of the enduring strength of our people and our system. for all of our difficulty in education for our children, they still taught to challenge orthodoxy. no one in america is diminished or punished for challenging orthodoxy. it's the only way there can be a breakthrough. it's a challenge orthodoxy. where ex -- competition is fair. people have a right to express their view, practice their religion, and decide their future. these are universal. they're not unique to americans. i believe there is no asian exception to the universal desire for freedom. the issue young people are seized with all across asia and the world corruption, land rights, pollution, food and product safety, these are all fundamentally linked to opennd and transparency. to greater rights and greem. my humble opinion no nation has to adopt the exact system we have in. i'm not suggesting it at all. it's awful hard to be innovative. you can't breathe free. it's a awful hard to make significant technological breakthroughs or orthodoxy is the norm. my humble opinion the things that made us such a prosperous innovative and resilient nation are openness, free exchange of ideas, free enterprise, and liberty. all of which have the down sides as we recently seen in boston and other places. they have done -- down sides. we would not trade them for all the world. presumptionous of -- never tell another country what they should do. i believe these elements are the fundamental agreement for success for any nation in the 21st century. there's the famous line by a founder of apple when asked at stanford what do i have to do to be more like you? and the response was, think different. you can only think different. think freely. you can breathe frieri. let me conclude by saying we see as neera said, it's not a diser aresome game. it's overwhelmingly in our interest that india continues to grow. it's overwhelmingly in our interest that china grows. it's overwhelmingly in our interest that the world economy grow. because we believe asia's success is fundamentally linked to ours. so the president and i are going to continue to reach across the ocean both east and west particularly to the indies penceble specific nations to help us shape the prosperous future for america, for their people, and i would argue for the world. thank you all for being so gracious in listening. thank you. [applause] [applause] [inaudible] at the today's white house briefing president obama made an unscheduled appearance before reporters to give the first public statement on the trayvon martin case. after saturday's verdict in the murder trial. here is a little what the president had to say from the white house briefing room. >> there are very few african-american men in this country who haven't had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. that includes me. there are very few african-american men who haven't had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the door of cars. that happens to me, at least before i was a senator. there are very few african-american who haven't had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously inholding her breath until she had a chance to get off. that happens often, and i don't want to exaggerate this, but those sets of experiences inform how the african-american community interprets what happened one night in florida. it's inescapable for people to bring those experiences to bear. the african-american community is also knowledgeable that there is a history of racial disparity in the application of our criminal laws. everything from the death penalty to enforcement of our drug laws. that ends up having an impact in term of how people interpret the case. this isn't to say that the african-american community is naive about the fact that african-american young men are disproportionately involved in a criminal justice system. that they're disproportionately both victims and perpetrators of violence. it's not to make excuses for that fact. although black folks do interpret the reason for that in the historical context. they understand that some of the violence that takes place in poor black neighborhoods around the country is born out of a very violent past in this country. and the poverty dysfunction that we see in the communities can be traced to a very difficult history. and so the fact sometimes that unacknowledged adds to the frustration. you can see all of the president's remarks from the briefing in our video library at c-span.org. in 2003, in an article you recommended a historical reckoning of crimes committed, sponsored or permitted by the united. unquoted. which crime were you referring to? and which decisions taken by the current administration would you recommend for a reckoning. thank you, senator. again, thank you for giving me occasion to respond to that. i as an immigrant to this country think this country is the greatest country on earth as i know do you. i would never apologize for america, america is the light to the world. we have freedom and opportunities here that people dream about abroad. i certainly did. and with regard to that quote, one of the things that had moved me, i had some have mentioned written very critically. written very critically about the clinton's administration's response to the rwanda genocide in 1994 great detail about that. president clinton has come forward and expressed the regret that the united didn't do more in the face of the genocide. when i traveled to rue rwanda, having been critical i was stunned to see the degree to which clinton's visit to rwanda, his apology for not having done more how it resonated with rue dwan. >> this weekend on c-span the senate foreign relations committee talk up the nam nation of salesman that power saturday at 10:00 a.m. eastern. on c-span2 booktv, live full day coverage of the 15th annual harlem book fair. your call, facebook, and tweet comments. on c-span 3 american history tv, lectures in history. and a history of u.s. political parties. sunday at 1:00. now a discussion with democratic congressman adam smith on the issue of foreign aid and national security. representative smith is the top democratic on the house armed service committee and the guest speaker at the hour long event hosted by the u.s. institute of peace in washington, d.c. [inaudible conversations] i'm jim marshall the president of the united united states institute of peace. i welcome all of the guests here. i see some employees, most are unfamiliar faces to me. let me tell you briefly what the united states of institute peace does. we stop fights. we do it globally. all of you are familiar with osteopathying fight the technique we have to use are different than try to keep friends from getting in to a fight in a frearnt or verity house. what we do is terribly important to the country and the united states' discuss in furthering a strategic interest globally. our batting average is a good bit less than 500. it's just in the nature of what we do. when we get a hit, it's a big deal. we have been teammates for years. not only were we member of congress together both democrats on the armed service committee. we are also on the democratic baseball team. i will say that adam batted 1,000 in this year's game. he went two for two. and one walk, so he's on base all three time. played center field, no errors, of course, because we have a great pitcher right now. they couldn't get it out of the infield. so, you know, maybe but had been hit to adam he would have thrown it out. he's a good baseball player. and he's a great member of congress. i've known him for a number of years. i described congress often being a high school, you know, there different ability lot of different interests and folks. it's very much like the high school. everybody is above average. but adam is a fellow who is extraordinarily thoughtful, and among other things, he takes notes this is a thoughtful guy that has interesting perch as a member of congress. and then he's been taking notes. he has a lot of interesting things to. i'm hopeful he doesn't cover the stupid things i did or said while i was a member of congress. with that, i want to introduce adam smith, a good front end me and the institute. adam. [applause] focused on the development of diplomacy and defense need to work together in u.s. policy to create greater stability throughout the world. yes, i do appreciate having played baseball with jim all the years, and my first twelve years there, we always lost because the republicans were better. then sed rick rich month got e leshted in louisiana he's young and can throw over 80 miles per hour. which doesn't happen very often. now we win. 22-0 this time, as a matter of fact. [applause] i appreciate it. i came at the issue from variety of different angle. number one, i've been on the armed service democratic national committee for seventeen years. i chaired the terrorism subcommittee which had jurisdiction over a special operation command. i got to travel around the world to a variety of different conflict zones obviously iraq and afghanistan. many places in africa and philippines and others to sort of see what our department of defense would do try to keep the peace and move forward with stability. at the same time, in the state of washington we have an incredible presence of development agencies. the gates foundation being the most obvious. but path and variety others as well. they pulled me in and started try to see what was going on in places like latin america as well. what instruct me is the intersection of the two. the more time i spent with our special operations guys, the more they told me we need to fund development. we need fund that to get stability. it's far eas so you don't get to conflict that it is to have to bring in troops to restore stability. they go hand and hand and have to work together. they have to work together closely to achieve stability. i believe the lessons have been learned. now we need to implement the policies that reflect that. there are still many challenges to fully funding and supporting diplomacy. you can look at the budget off the bat. the department of defense budget is enormous compared to what we spend on diplomacy and development. and we could certainly use a shift in that so we can help the element. there's also a trust issue. there is a still general feeling many in the department of defense that on the diplomacy development side they don't understand why security is important. and particularly on the development side they feel like well the military shows up and undermine the mission. we are doing a lot better. he's meeting regularlily who heads the special operations command to figure out how they can work together to actually use the best of all three elements of our foreign policy. you look at iraq and the amount of money we spend and the amount of troops and lives we lost going in there. what was particularly initially a military dominated operation. we were not prepared for what came after the fall of saddam hussein. they tried to take over in an area where they didn't have the expertise. so it was very, very difficult. it was enormously costly. one of the most interesting trips i took while i was on the armed service committee was the trip toll philippines. to be sure, but they have various terrorist groups and insurgency there. what we did in was a combined emptd prestill there. special operations command is there. so is u.s.a. id. our troops there have not fired a shot or been involved in the conflict. what they've done is train the local security forces in how to provide adequate security and worked with u.s. id and other development agencies to build schools and drill wells and create the atmosphere where people don't want to be part of an insurgency. i think one of the greatest misunning or misstatements i've heard is somewhat popular to say that poverty has nothing do with instability and terrorism. and people make that argument because they look at people like bin laden and others who say, you know, these people are middle class or way above middle class. it's the intellectual who tend to start terrorist movement. i think it's unquestionably true. we end less supply of people who are convinced they developed the one true philosophy that will save us all. they feel it's our obligation to jam it down the throat. those will always come up. the question is, cothey find people who will follow them? are they just some, you know, crock pot on the corner spouting off id? do they build movement that begins to cause damage? that happens when you have people who don't have a feeling of opportunity. of freedom, you know, when you look across the world where al qaeda is recruiting, you look at the world of dysfunctional government, a lack of opportunity, a lack of jobs, a lack of freedom. we have to put in place the broader building blocks of just society in order stop terrorism. i have no illusion here. even if we do that, there will still be challenges. thereby a need for at military. there still be people who rise up against that. it will be a much more manageable problem if we properly implement the development dipty leg of the stool in order to build a more secure world. i think that's we need to do and where we need to go. i think things are getting better. i'm the co-chair of the caucus for effective foreign assistance with andrew, and i look at the lessons we have learned and how we implement development policy. it's getting better. we are understanding that not really effective development to simply spend u.s. money to hire a bunch of u.s. contractor to go in to a country and build a bunch of stuff they didn't leave. it's got to be bot tom up. to develop the own development policy and implement through the structure with our health instead of top down approach and bottom up approach. we continue to do so. i think the other big development the last ten years in the area is the private sector. the gate foundation is the largest element of this. it's 45 or 0 billion. some unbelievable amount of money. you have seen a ton other group rise up to get involved in development policy. i think they have taken an approach helped spur the government side of it to greater efficiency and effectivenesses. there's a bill introduced last congress that i cosponsored introduced in this congress to measure -- we get a better idea where we should direct our dollars if it's going work properly. you are moving in that direction. i think there are some improvement that need to be made. you know, my biggest argument in u.s. development policy is that we need elevate the importance of u.s.a. idea and concentrate the money. right now there's something like 35 different pots of development money run by a bunch of different agencies. if they want to impact on development, he's got only a tiny little sliver of that money in order to do it. the department for international development in great britain. what they have done is concentrated. they have rise ton a cabinet level department. it does not report anybody. t itself own cabinet level and concentrated the money. if you are in charge with the development policy you are actually in charge of development policy. you can control the money and where it goes and the program goeses. it's universally recognized as the most effective government policy throughout. i would like to see us must've the u.s. more in that direction to elevate the importance in u.s.a. idea to give to consolidate some of those programs. now the problem with that, of course, everybody has their own program. in the u.s., we tend to like to basically protect our own program. particularly in an era when the budgets are being cut. there's the tendency to narrow one's focus to say i care about education for women in africa. i'm going make sure there's a line item for the program and protected. we have to spend a certain amount of money on that. in doing that, you tie the hands of those in charge of development policy and make it more difficult for them to make the type of flexible decisions that are necessary. another example is we made an effort to reform the food for peace program. it's an excellent program. it's a great idea. u.s. agricultural and u.s. ships taking, you know, food to places of the world that needed. the problem is we have written in the law that requirement that 85% of our food aid has to go through that program. there are times when it makes more sense to simply buy the food closer to the source of the problem and get to the people who need it then. it is a more costly more expensive and time consuming from go through the food program. you need a balance. so the state department proposed closing that gap to say the mandate 55% of it. go to food for peace. the problem a lot of money gets spent on u.s. interests. i can't blame them. it's important program. i understand why they need it. again, it's a lock to our ability to have the flexibility to be as efficient as we need to do. if i have one overarnling goal as someone who serveses on the armed service committee. it's bring defense diplomacy and development closer together. particularly defense and development. the military spend a -- they do health care. they have built schools and drilled wells. it's not been safe. so you need definitely to work with the military to make sure you have a secure environment to do the good work you need to do. that partnership needs to be strengthen. as i've said, i think there are steps being taken at dod and strengthen that partnership but we need to look for every opportunity to make that a strong as possible in order have the proper national security posture. in order to do the best we can to bring greater stability to the world. at the end of the day, i think you have to sum up with the goal with the u.s. foreign policy and defense policy is. it is stability and security. then it is the steps to get there from economic opportunity and diplomacy all of that is critical to security and stability. we have the elements within the u.s. government to do that policy. we need make sure they're working as well as they can together. thank you for the opportunity to at least outline the id. i look forward to your questions, comments, answers are also welcome. so i look forward to questions. thank you. [applause] [inaudible] maybe you line up mind the mics. questions and comments behind the mics. that will make it easier on us as far as getting you heard. on the television cameras, and -- i guess let me start. this is not so much a question as an observation. the national television committee is 2030 report estimates that by 2030 half the world's population will be middle class. but that means, of course, that the other half of the world's population is going to be mostly still quite poor. we head in the right direction? what do you think the effect of this trend which is more and more people climbing out of poverty and in to the middle class will have on questions like violence around the world? >> well, i think it certainly is improve the situation. more people have economic opportunity the better off we are. it is a stark reminder how many are left behind. .. >> forced into that when countries like lebanon lebanon, these are people who want to get through the day, a feed their family and have a decent life. if you give them that they will not consider violence for a second. that is the direction we need to go. >> congress as people in it today with these kinds of issues that are critically important and with that, why don't we start over here? >> first of all, thank you for your leadership with the community here in washington. i am from international media development organization and my question is as the america's troop draws down what can be done to protect women, human rights activist than the other could fall soon have put their faith in the west and the good work that has happened in the last 10 years? >> it is very difficult. '' we're doing is working very, very hard particularly since 2009 to trade the afghan national security forces. they are now in the lead of all military operations except counterterrorism and with that security forces it will continue to be challenges if you look at development you'll protect women it is educating women that are far more prosperous they and those that don't and like those that those that will rely heavily hopefully we will get a bilateral security agreement so there are still some there to help with that but it is an enormous challenge but we cannot kid ourselves of u.s. military can show what there record to protect everybody. that is why the bride three legged stool the approach we have to get to the point where local populations we simply cannot do all. in nobody likes to be occupied. trading a certain amount of hostility and we have to help them the best way that we can. >> we are convinced that political transition is important to and all entities need to be focused on trying to help the afghanistan get the right kind of transition if the turmoil is part of the presidential election than the following year if the government falls apart the with the fbi and security forces together they are well armed dan will trade we could see one heck of a civil war in progress shed where it has been made in concerned so queer very focused on the political transition to help pakistan get that right. >> just a of a quick follow-up on the last question, we are disappointed to see dod takes the program supporting treating women of the nash -- national security forces to be a bad day in but there is a debate in the administration over the last four or five years if it is more to have contractors to do work in order to the local ngos. the locals may not be able to do it in those countries where we have a program's that is pretty high so where do you come down on this? >> we are more proponents of the local approach we're so much on the other side of it. we have spent so much money on foreign aid but we haven't spent that much money but we're giving the money to ourselves. we err on that side is common sense and sustainability just doesn't happen. a and it is true with security you can do it and do everything for everybody and whites is gone is what is left we have terrible stories of these projects built in then i would err on that side but there has to be a balance and to trade the local population so it is a balance between the two but where we haven't but appeared on the past is not true the trading talking about agriculture, rule of law, government, a health care, education, we really need to focus on that point that we will not be there an a more. will these people be capable of doing it? but also there is a role for experts to come in. like those in kenya talking about agriculture based on building a more resilient crop to be modified. said doing it the way you are supposed to do. so it is a balance but some of that is money. obviously but we would be better off trading the local population that is why the corporations are such a good idea thought give. >> plus of my career is with usa it and we have come a long way to fix things but there are some few key issues in the development of the big picture development and one of them is public understanding of how much we spend on foreign assistance with these famous surveys you ask people how much we spend on foreign aid is 10% of gdp but they really think we should spend four or five. there is a problem to get that message out. also in terms of the food aid programs, reduce the any way to get around those issues? what you alluded to was though whole question of accountability. i watched over a 25 year career where accountability it became the end rather than to check on what we we're doing and those resources that usaid puts into measuring things like those silly things is a bit out of proportion. a and i ended stand we need to show impact and start from the bottom up such even that needs institution in building and human development in human-resources development. those are very, very hard to measure a and can take decades that will sustain the work we have been doing on the ground so had you think congress can deal with that? >> i completely agree. a very enthusiastic supporter but there is one downside but it's to assume that everything can be measured public sector always say why can't they do with like the private sector? we measure efficiency but the private sector could not possibly be simple what is the mission and? tried to make money. period you have five departments three make money into of them are not it is simple to measure. it is not the government's job to make money if it was we would charge you a hell of a lot more to drive on our roads. we would charge you more when your house caught on fire. i have seen private sector systems that they spend all there time to come up with a perfect process. but there is a human element is an art more than scions you cannot measure something so you have got to have the balance some of the private sector folks get out of balance they imagine there is an algorithm that all perfectly show if the dollar spent on food aid is worth as much as tuberculosis. not really. as far as public opinion is concerned there is an article that everyone is entitled to an opinion? no. if they literally don't know what they are talking about about, you could ask me in a poll what is the best way to fix the car in jane? my answer would be utterly and completely worthless because it'll have a queue when i and talking about the injury pattern -- reprint that but then 60 percent did not know what they're talking about. i will say that liz of research poll there is a clear consensus that we need to balance the budget while providing $2 of services for every dollar in taxes they have to pay. but there was a poll to say what do want to cut? they said you want to keep it to save or increase or decrease? if you added up the american public wants to cut literally nothing. foreign aid has been voted not to cut it but the broader argument is why it is so important to domestic interest. we are 4% of the population nobody on earth has as much a mistake that we do but we are dependent upon exports for our business even small businesses is. but the point is keeping stability in other places will benefit from that. with that there is 3 billion people living on less than $2 a day with the lifestyle that we have as our own interest i have given many speeches wide use of foreign aid is important and make that case. >> congressman i ever of the institute of peace, your focus of diplomacy diplomacy, development and defense is a very important perspective for this city to take into account. you're touching on a whole of government aid to 96 under president clinton issued a presidential decision directive that mandated there be entered agencies treating to tackle these kinds of issues but yet it fell apart because nobody was willing to fund it or support it. d.c. there is time for something like that to be crafted? a and who would be the lead to organizing the trading? >> in order this for relief to have been is how they try to get the services to work better just like goldwater nicole's coming to much division becomes that of foreign desert from one disaster the still have their force and army compared to what was it is part of the promotion of your in the are you have to spend one year at the air force base sur you build up your understanding of the of there culture and built relationships so for this to work you have to spend what you're at the state department and they spend one year at the u.s. military and, we have seen some of that with the intelligence community you have the fbi and cia all working side-by-side and they build relationships a and work better together. but what the state department will tell you is we can't take one of our people to send her to the pentagon so that is the inhibitor to that if we get that interagency that is why you have to do with that of prince mcdevitt change but the gentleman chris to the guy a few pull together the counterterrorism unit he set a taste of that work to build the network he pulled together all the elements and doing a pretty darned good job? lead of my favorite quotes they we're doing the concept of the military liaison to go in in to work with the state department over 70 odd countries and their blood to be there with the indictment and then one country was working really well and that they did not have a clue what the mission was and they were talking about things that cause problems. he just said the problem is if you have seen what you have seen the other. that means to say are they committed to work together? so not just obsessively focused to get credit to also work with other people go but it comes down to the individuals to build a culture. >> if i could do it interjects we hear about jeff special operations command we are small as to put but that is why there people scattered trying to help those who help themselves if we have to step it has some pint hall -- some point. but as saddam has said with stability globally but with the proliferation of thing is like that it is quite impossible in the modern age with these economic benefits of stability with the threats that we have great darrell --. >> have now and i went like to follow-up with the last question with good organizations you don't have to choose between them and in that regard with the energy with reform with the first rabil of the administration and in congress there's a lot of attention to the matter with this but so to talk about secretary clinton to institutionalize this it is incredibly difficult to get cooperation unless you have something you can count on. can you comment? >> i am not sure where that will go. and to consistently analyze the approach i don't know if there really was that for the state department view of the world in even as it was coming yell was competing with the national security council effort to put out its own findings so i guess i would say i think that is great if we have something this is the interior agency analysis for that location at all things development but you have to have more than just the state department so that would make sense but your question has prompted me to look into that more closely because i do think that would be more helpful. >> with that washington end window the judge's qqdr means nothing to 99 percent of the people. [laughter] >> you kind of wonder with the. [null] of a the qqder. [laughter] and with the defense department it would be nice to do all three at once a and to plan to the two? >> they key issue for your time. earlier talking about building the closer links of defense and development i thought back to africom that was to be some pain differed from the other combat and command units so i was wondering if he thought they could build closer ties or in the war brodeur cents if there is too much wishes to creep from pentagon and? and that they should focus on what they are good that? >> i would say those people are wrong because there is too much crossover between the two. if you want to say you need to be careful not to get out of your labor and pick the right people to do with cover that is fine but i think the best people have to know what is going on so depending on how you put the question i don't agree with that because a lot of times three is in it is a default they are there first to provide security they have the money so if it is providing medical care to a village they do it but if they need to do that as temporary the other thing i will say is they have done a pretty darn good job of doing with it is set up to do to have one example of that right now is to be in there interest and in our interest. and also to reduce that troop level and afghanistan's and pakistan is a challenge that most would agree between somalia and the official number is classified but a chapel digit number of military personnel and that entire area to recently effected jobs of violence in somalia to use spread out with close to 100,000 how did they do it? it was built with the capacity so we cared so like we paid them to do our bidding we had a mutual interest in there doing most of the work so to have that local population id jack partnership at the same time the military has trained those folks balsa development projects but now we have a great challenge trying to figure out how to make it work in to we also have not had as much success where chaos continues to rain but it seems we can use the elements effectively. >> a couple months ago to participate and aren't part of it was a seminar so we cannot say who was there or who said what but i gave several works arguing internationally businesses have to be more actively involved. a and the response i had was we have to be careful about rules the admissions it is our role and mission to do that and that is why business should not be doing it. i could not agree more. that is clearly, we don't want to go out there is in the in competition way but it -- incompetent way but with the key business interests there. >> costco and other people got involved and trying to deceive the egypt. there are small companies there a and in seattle that are beginning to source cocoa to get the business going. all of those elements is key >> to talk about having a catch phrase, who wouldn't want to join people to stop the fight? everybody has an interest. >> 84 being here but how can we help other countries come of friendly nations promote this strategy that may or may not be doing? i work for a small ngo but that is what nation of many with a defense interest and a relationship with that does not offer their development to all citizens and they say we have behind the season's confrontation anwr we can't assure the friends and the government but i think there is more to be done and i would be interested to hear the ec can be done and with the ngos have private sector. i've a big favor of of what the work they're doing. i think there is a role for the. >> that is a great question and a great challenge. there probably isn't a single local partner that we have had some of the said yes but the government is awful is certainly i have heard that. there are concerns about their government with the well-documented terms. it is very difficult and passed to go case by case but there is a tendency to overreact to cut off our nose to spite our face. added is the most famous example. i certainly think he writes and most americans don't nova pressler amendment but i think every pakistan the nose because it cut off all to pakistan but then they develop a nuclear weapon in search of the with all manner of problems but while researching the have these the pakistan-- is like us as much as they do. did that help us more than hurt us? site don't know. there we're tweaks that made a lot of people upset by our military cannot continue to train with proven human rights abuses itc agreed to be to have that mechanism but the question is how broad? the other argument is we need to be there to help fix this. that is where people have not caught up. our military is not what it was they are the enormously important part in the hell we train security forces a big part is how to get the local population on your side. shooting people is not to do that. that is what we're trying to do so to have a human-rights problem does that make it better? i don't say no matter what but he's the kid is better? but do not the that the decision maker led to what you want them to do. that is what we would like to do it is a delicate balance. i will not be what of those who are self righteous to say yabber but how much better? what have we accomplished? you have to balance that out of. >> what i was in congress people wanted to close the school love the americans said the assertion and was somehow with the human-rights violation because there were a lot of protest but then they would stage of the school of america's pearly perhaps then change to the school of the western hemisphere. then we shall also have a school of the world. we have got to have these relationships. but at the same time we could trade a and teach and educate those to come through the schools better than these individuals to have the power or those that do not see matt also free to have the fact that we have to communicate to the world that the way that we change the way we are approaching. >> a good morning. i just rabil one observation with april 2012 to have components really had approximately 21 businesses of the departed does stay, to barbara to justice kevin usaid and of those there is only one dividual with the staff planning process and execution but it was very difficult for her to get around the commands of the group's slate definitely a proponent to have cooperation of the staff members throughout. my first question for the last decade or so with iraq for afghanistan but developing the capability is with reconstruction teams. is your view they should maintain those capabilities? lawyer shadows maintain those resources? >> it is my opinion they should but they should do so in a close cooperation with the affirmative response of those the and the recent the duty started day aristotelian was there that had the money and had the permission. fellow happened there and then to say it is all good. but you will need a transition period. but better to have greater respect of the development so now let's get out of here. i think that has staged a lot rage you rather have respect? but i would that say that this of the nation and not do. >> if i could interrupt you said that was the first question but we don't have. >> fire of the second one quick civic we have one minute. >> what is your view of the dod expanding authorities for the security systems to build the partnership and capacity? >> i think it is great hindu enormously helpful. >> could answer. >> what will it take to start the peace process with the zero option? at the height of the surge that we never had? >> it is more earthy announcement but there is 900 option even without a bilateral security there is the ability to stay in some numbers that is complicated but that is true. and but i've the key will have a better kids of restarting and we have to have negotiations. >> to listen to the foreign aid to encourage dependability? >> it depends on how we do with it helps to build a better health care system so doctors and nurses can ineffective lee operate, no. view drill wells to build schools cover that is exactly why the shift is to simply say get out of the way i will do it to work coffee with the local population to say you will do it but if we have a little love monday to build something that we will head in that direction from above that is the way to do it. >> i think we need a big round of applause. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] not only with with the rate of lincoln side so i thought drew could this a fellow be? when i open the archives i realized by germans life pecos' there was rincon on one hand and was his personal secretary and as much as well rigo with intimate contact but the sanitary us do before roosevelt era did fed you realize that in many cases it happens. >> the held in a and entertaining that is her heritage to do it again the white house right after the administration during the johnson years the hold rule erupted. as those who went to work and then get divorces. but dead we missed all that. [laughter] but then the whole world there is a whole new concept of women. >> >> could rory and welcome to the subcommittee markup. and for the dedication of the subcommittee in the leadership in we have the strong working relationship of the subcommittee. it is a pleasure and i respect very much did i want to take all members of the subcommittee with the participation in a thoughtful contributions. and meet the needs and to express the cistercian and the batteries. we continued to use mentor of your support. as you know, spending by billions of dollars from current levels with the very real economic problems we face here given this challenge with the most fiscal priorities first 17 directly related to national security. with everything at the levels of previous years including the programs the support that we know we need to bettis terrorist attack in and benghazi last fall were tragically we hope they would not happen again. this continues to recognize the security risk fully fenced in the security request of four wait $8 billion. we recognize the instability of predictable environment in the middle east but there is broad support from key allies but at the same time with their partners in latin rijeka real strength of law-enforcement in the bill also focuses on democracy promotion and the international broadcasters to help those values abroad. hiv/aids with the committee period aspect attracts for the trafficking prices this is a national security issue. a multibillion dollar industry to threaten the stability of the african countries to support criminal and terrorist networks that affects the security of the united states. three reduce consumer to rea data and reached diplomatic cooperation. and then to a eliminate many lower priorities. but as the important policy of a security interest we cannot predict tough things will turn out. the ability to respond and we strength and conditioning and so congress can oversee these funds. everyone is close to watching the situation in egypt in their relationship best ever been more critical. for the reason if they continue to fund it should not pose certain conditions. first and foremost, we succeed to put the peace treaty with israel even though there are many and at home. we expect the relationship with israel in the united states to continue but also to make it clear that we want to embrace democracy democracy, but not just democratic elections and we're hopeful for the egyptian people in those who go through this very difficult time. it it may not be possible for unilateral placement but it is for the palestinian authority in this regard. it will stop end is equivalent to at the united nations. and as a result there has not been funding provided consistent with the law that prohibits it. the bill continues to support of iraqi strategic partner is still five funding with debris and the subcommittee a trustee of subcritical is to support israel whether the ongoing threat and to the instability of israel's security faces serious threat in the cause has never been struggler for commuters to the risk and by the state for both israel and the united states supports as a partner in a did allied with the requested 660 million threats but they are dealing with the spillover. it but those that have been welcomed into the country. our partners remain a parody and continue to support our river mexico that has a direct impact everyone to work with them with government to the one that benefits both countries said then the government of colombia to include the great works they're doing to train security forces from other countries. but with the contingency operation operation that allows spending for critical programs in iraq and afghanistan and pakistan will -- where terrorism and his ability threaten us. if it goes down 42 percent then admissions in the front line countries are scaled back. being forced to be in afghanistan we have to make sure our staff but this bill helps to transition them more detail how we would keep our people save on the ground in addition focusing an oversight, accountability and the likes of women and girls. the bill continues from pakistan by prove pivoting unless the government is cooperating with united states talking about terrorist efforts. is a cut -- supports with courage to the shins of those the benefits of foreign country and also those with the multilateral development to ensure transparency and accountability. it increases it by the money that we provide to the united nations and other international organizations it changed how we do business with the red those that put the audits online for american taxpayers the bill includes language to say it does not support abortions but that funding is part of the address of the policy problem. of what they had to make it in that environment aw but with his very hard work with the staff he was given a difficult one for the of outstanding job and the dedication is recognized in the majority staff five what to think alice, alice, susan, cecilia, a and j.b. in my personal staff john again show. -- and joe they work very hard to head very well together are live now turn to the ricky member for the opening statement thank you for your good work and as the chair will been mentioned we work very close together in the system. i know that we're both committed i want to thank the staff as well with the majority staff i also want to thank my staff but the house majority refuses to go to conference to agree on a budget resolution. that has placed him in members of this committee in a difficult situation. the discretionary spending is a completely unrealistic starting point which led to the subcommittee allocations of the chairwoman really did the best she could the bill now before us today represents 20% reduction. so has we have noted time and time again the agencies and programs with national security. economic prosperity and leadership. but g7 her deficit or to pay down heard that. in with the in the standing in the world to make it more difficult of the world. we can settle this bill of the middle east. the gulf war is threatening their neighbors but asking the significant questions. with the iraqi and iran that continues with the search for nuclear weapons said despite the instability throughout the region reconsider an ally and a strong democracy is more important than ever. the funding provided security a country that is in the part of dade and d evil. it is fundamental to our success with all development efforts. we cannot build strong and stable healthy societies to succeed. robust systems save the houses of lives each year and part of the data collected -- battle against disease. with that woefully inadequate position in the number of the specific types are deeply troubling. this bill proposes a massive retreat of the engagement of the united nations cover will bake and multilateral organizations. a compromise many of the overall objectives of the bill and this is vital to give the security with the bilateral efforts to strengthen the stronger multilateral investments with the international funds with development which have completely not been funded in this bill. for example, the u.n. office humanitarian affairs accord needs the work of u.s. and others to win sure there are no gaps with lifesaving surface -- surfaces in extreme need and i will be bready to support to provide additional but with those plans you would not lose trading efforts it afghanistan are hoping the troops to withdraw while helping to maintain rule of law. but these investments leading to significant in greater impact than we can achieve on our own. for example, to the asian and african development take could reach $20 from other donors. . . >> i am dumbfounded by the exact opposite of what we all hope to achieve fewer unwanted pregnancies in fewer abortions in this is not an area where we can agree to disagree. although we do agree to disagree it is unambiguous and it is unconscionable there are more than 8000 more maternal deaths and 1.4 million more abortions compared to the fiscal year 12 levels. it is my sincere hope that working with this and that we will agree to a higher allocation to this bill that will allow us fix many of the problems. as you have heard from the chairwoman and myself, we have worked together in a very positive way and i know she is committed to be the very best that she can. i know that she will work with all of us together in a bipartisan way to improve this bill and is the process moves forward i thank you for your cooperation. thank you. >> thank you, madam, you are a pleasure to work with even though we have had some very hard work to do. i now yield to the chairman of the appropriations committee, mr. rogers, through his opening statement. >> thank you. i want to congratulate for a good bill and a bipartisan bill this is no question that this is a extremely big subcommittee confronted with issues. it is a situation facing our country that is part of economic security. it reduces funding by billions of dollars from current levels while meeting the most critical security priorities. the bill rest recognizes the security request at 4.8 billion and every president asked for is misspelled. funds the u.s. and israel memorandum of understanding and supports key hemispheres to help fight drug cramp trafficking in violent crime. it will also include global war on terror funding and afghanistan and pakistan arak and to counter instability in places and during this time of monumental deficits and skyrocketing debt, this will take several steps to focus on oversight and management for many countries and programs and funds are only made available after tough conditions have been met. the bill illuminates more than 20 programs resulting in more than $2 billion in savings in the chairwoman's emphasis on supporting national security and reducing spending and implementing reform, to me this is the right approach for addressing the national interest. i think the members of the subcommittee ranking member in the chairman has done a good job putting together a difficult sell in difficult times and in difficult financial circumstances. i fully support your work and i don't ask thank you. >> thank you, madam chair. i applaud you for the work you have done under the difficult circumstances. this has been mentioned by everybody that this is vital having visited a number of our facilities overseas particularly in the after benghazi tragedy and the understanding that it's critical and clearly those needs are great. we need to maintain robust funding as well as the anti-coaching initiatives and i want to say that we are working on it numbers in their a lot of programs that i think would've cut one than any of us would've preferred including an organization that stops such things and america's strategic interests. we are all granted her our best to try to restore funding for this practical and i just want to thank you for the good work you have done. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. mr. quayle. >> [inaudible] [inaudible] >> thank you, mr. quayle. are there any other members who would like to make remarks? >> all right. we now recognize the gentleman from ocean. >> thank you. >> all those in favor say yes. >> those opposing know. >> okay, the motion is agreed to. i ask you for unanimous consent that the following changes are made without objection, so ordered. he will be circulated before a full committee markup in the committee is adjourned. >> thank you. [inaudible conversations] >> coming up on c-span2 tonight, an overview of the nsa data collection and surveillance programs with the general counsel to the director of national intelligence. and the house judiciary committee hearing. after that come in a discussion with republican congressman dave camp and senator max baucus on tax policy. on the next "washington journal", we will sit down with authors to discuss stand your ground law's and states throughout the country. then the sec's ongoing court case against the former goldman sachs bond trader in the 2000 a financial meltdown. and josh rogan and the u.s. ambassador to cement their power . "washington journal" begins live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. now, an overview of the nsa's data collection and surveillance program with robert lived who serves on the director of national intelligence. from the brookings institution in washington dc, this is one hour. >> thank you. i want to thank you for hosting the speech and all of you for coming. i do just want to note that this is a perfect source of balanced commentary than it is something that i try to check on periodically. i want to apologize in advance for the length of the speech because of a law to cover. i hope i don't get into fidel castro territory. [laughter] >> i wish they were here in happier times the intelligence community. the last several weeks have seen reckless explosions and these disclosures that could cause long-lasting and perhaps reversible upon toroid ability to identify and respond to threats facing our nation. because the disclosures were made by people who did not fully understand what they were talking about, they were sensationalized and led to misleading oppression. i hope to be able to correct some of those impressions today. my speech today is prompted by disclosures that collect valuable intelligence is used to protect our nation and its allies and one of the so-called prison program. some people claim this was a form of whistleblowing and i want to be clear about this these programs were not illegal. they are authorized by congress and carefully overseen by the judiciary committee. they are connected with the approval of the foreign intelligence and under that court supervision. they are subject to extensive court oversight within the executive branch and ensuring all three branches of government knew about these programs and help to ensure that they operated in compliance with the law. only time will tell us the extent of the damage caused by the unlawful disclosure of the programs. i appreciate that it is not enough for me to stand here and assert that our activities are consistent with the letter of the law. the activity of our government must reflect and reinforce the core democratic values and those of us working in intelligence profession share these values including the importance of privacy and we are all citizens of the united states as well. but security and privacy are not zero-sum. we have an obligation to give full meaning to both and to protect security while protecting privacy and other constitutional rights. although our values are enduring, the manner in which activities reflect those values necessarily have to change to a daft to the changing technology and norms. so we in the intelligence community we are evaluating a safeguard to protect privacy while ensuring that we can carry out our mission to national security. that is going to be the focus of my speech. first i want to discuss and layout very briefly the laws of the governance and government and then i want to talk about the changes in technology and how we adapt to protect privacy on those collection activities and third i want to bring these two together and explain how some of these laws and technology changes play out in practice and how we structure the intelligence community in a way that remains faithful to her democratic values. and i want to begin by discussing the legal framework that discusses this and it is a bedrock concept by the rule of law this is a topic that others have well addressed, including the general councils and the national security agency and so i'll make this brief. we begin with the constitution and article to ask the president commander in chief gives him extensive responsibility for the conduct of foreign affairs. the ability to collect foreign intelligence derives from the constitutional source. the first amendment protects freedom of speech and the fourth amendment text unreasonable searches and seizures and i want to specifically make a few points about the fourth amendment. first, under established supreme court ruling, a person has no legally recognized expectations of privacy with information that he or she gets a third party. soaking those records from that party is not a search. i returned this point in a moment. the fourth amendment generally does not apply to foreigners outside of the united states and third, the supreme court has said that the reasonableness of searches without a warrant depends upon balancing the intrusion of the fourth amendment interest against the governmental interest. that is the constitution. there are also a variety of statutes governing this. first, the national security act and a number of laws relating to this, such as the central intelligence agency and it limits to what can be done. we are also governed by laws and in particular for today, the foreign intelligence surveillance act or turn on. it was passed in 1970 and was amended significantly in 2001 and 2008 and regulates electronic surveillance and other activities for foreign intelligence purposes. one final source is executive order 120003. this was the founding agency and authority and in one particular provision, it is very significant. section 2.3, and to provide for the elements of the intelligence community, and i'm quoting here, elements are authorized to retain or disseminate information concerning the united states only in accordance with procedures approved by the attorney general after consultation with the director of national intelligence. these procedures must be consistent with lawful authority and it must also establish strict limits on collecting and retaining information unless that information is of foreign intelligence value or certain other circumstances spelled out to protect against the threat. rules are part of the intelligence community and it's one of the first things that our employees are trained on the core of our institutional culture. it is not surprising that our legal regime provides special rules. so far as i know, and i'm not an expert, but so far as i know, every nation in the world recognizes legal distinctions between citizens and noncitizens. it helped me clear this morning i intelligence provides protection for privacy rights of noncitizens and i want to turn to the impact of changing technology and privacy. prior to the end of the 19th century, we would find very little discussion about the right to privacy and the most serious invasions of privacy have been generally the result of gossip or peeping toms in the 1890 article that first articulated this idea of a right to privacy, it was asked those that we grounded and i will read a quote from the article. this is 1890, remember. inventions call attention to the next step which must be taken for the protection of the person and for securing the individual what the judge calls the right to be left alone. instantaneous photographs and newspaper enterprise have invaded the precincts of private and domestic life and numerous mechanical devices threaten to make of the predictions of what is whispered shall be proclaimed from the house top. 120 plus years later, as a result of the way digital technology has developed, each of us shares massive amounts with third-party and this is always the times with transmitting information online. all in all, there is little doubt that the amount of data that each of us provide to strangers every day what a astonish. this is what key question. why is that people are willing to expose large quantities of information to private parties, but do not want the government to have that same information. why don't we care very much, but we feel very differently about the same information? is not a very difficult question to answer, we are here because of what the government can do with the information. unlike the phone company, government has the power to audit tax returns, prosecute, prisoners, grant or license us to do business and many other things. there is an entirely understandable concern that the government might abuse its power. i don't mean to say that private companies don't also have a lot of power over us. the growth of private policy and the strong reaction to the commercial use of personal information by those companies reinforces my belief that our primary privacy concern is focused on who has information on what they do with it. on the other hand, just as consumers around the world make use of modern technology, so do potential hostile foreign governments and others and indeed we know the terrorists are using global information to conduct research and communicate and plan attacks. information that can help us identify and present was often hiding in plain sight with the information around the globe in the new technology means that the intelligence community must continue to find new ways to locate and analyze foreign intelligence information and we need to be able to do more than just connect the dots when we find them. we need to be able to find what's right in the first place. one approach to protecting privacy would be to limit the intelligence community to targeted queries looking for specific information based on probable cause. but from a national security perspective, this would not be sufficient. the business of foreign intelligence has always been different to the business of criminal investigation. rather than attempting to solve crimes that have happened, we are trying to find out what is going to happen before it happens and we may only have fragmentary information about someone who is plotting a terrorist attack and we could get more information to find and stop it. we may get information that is useless to us without data to match it, such as when we get a telephone number of a terrorist and we won't find out more. or we may learn about a plot that we were previously unaware of, causing us to revisit information that we didn't realize before, connections we would never know about if we had not kept the information for some time. we worry about what we are missing in our daily efforts to project the nation and our allies. on one hand you have vast amounts of data that contain intelligence needed to protect us, not only from terrorism, but from threats such as cyberattacks and good old-fashioned espionage and on the other hand giving intelligence community access to obvious privacy infringers. we achieve this by a framework that establishes appropriate controls over what the government can do with the information that we collect and an appropriate oversight to ensure that respects those controls. these protections depend on a variety of factors, such as the type of information we collect, where we collect it from the scope of the collection, and use the government intends to make the information. in this way, we can allow the intelligence community to acquire necessary foreign intelligence while providing privacy protections directed at the use of that information and taking account of modern technologies. in showing that this approach is the way our system deals with this, i will use this as an example. it is an important mechanism and it covers a wide range of activities and involves all three sources of constitutional and statutory an executive and several previously classified examples -- and i know people want to learn more about this, i don't mean to suggest this is the only way to collect foreign intelligence. but it's important to note that by virtue of executive order all of the collection activities of our intelligence agency have to be put towards counterintelligence and intelligence priorities are put towards the process. leaders of the country tell the community what information they need and we collect information in support of his priorities. i would like to emphasize that the united states is a democratic nation and we have a valid intelligence purpose. we do not use foreign intelligence capabilities to steal from other companies. we do not talk about the citizenry of any country, we do not lose our intelligence capability because of their political or religious or other beliefs and we do collect metadata, information about communication, more broadly than we collect the crisis of mutations. that is because it is less intrusive and can provide us information and help us focus the collection of foreign intelligence. but it is not true that the united states government is listening to everything said. so let me now turn. i'm going to talk about the provisions of the law or the traditional orders and business records provision in section 702. this is related to the acquisition of different kinds of information and provides limits on how it can be collected and require procedures restricting what we can do and impose oversight. protections are afforded in the middle when that information is reviewed and all working together to protect security and privacy in the rules vary such as the type of information being collected and whether or not we are collecting the nature of the person being targeted and how we are talking about this. i hope to persuade you that they are reasonable and appropriate and i hope to talk about the traditional fisa collection. prior to the passage in 1978, the collection of foreign intelligence was unregulated by statutory law to the core function of the executive branch. when the criminal wiretap provisions were originally enacted in 1968, congress put a boot in turn provision stating that these did not include the constitutional power to the same intelligence agency. however, 10 years later, congress did impose a judicial act for foreign intelligence purposes. this is what is now codified in title one of fisa. it is sometimes referred to as traditional fisa. it establishes a special court to conduct electronic surveillance. the traditional surveillance involves content of communications that includes recognized privacy and because it can be directed at individuals inside the united states, including american cities, directly implicates the fourth amendment in congress required that you get a traditional surveillance order, the government must establish probable cause to believe that the target is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power. it is derived from the standard used for wiretapping and here she cannot be deemed an agent of a foreign power based solely on activities protected by the first amendment. moreover by law, the use of information must be subject to minimization procedures and that is a concept in which it is procedures that are approved by the court and reasonably designed in light of the purpose and the technique to minimize the acquisition and prohibit the dissemination of non-publicly available information consistent with the need of the united states to obtain and disseminate foreign intelligence information. minimization procedures generally prohibit the identity of any u.s. person with the identity itself is necessary to understand the foreign intelligence or the evidence of the crime. referencing ms. is important. imitation procedures do differ depending on the purpose of the surveillance. these minimization procedures that are tailored are an important way in which we do provide appropriate protection and so let me explain in general terms how this works in practice. let's say that we were going to collect surveillance. there are some exceptions spelled out in the law and as a general rule they have to present a case to the fisa court with a reason to believe that this is a statutory definition and application is reviewed within the fbi and the department of justice. if the surveillance is approved, it may have nothing to do with foreign intelligence surveillance for talking to a neighbor. under the minimization procedures, an analyst who listens to a conversation has no intelligence value generally cannot share or disseminate it unless it is a intelligence of the crime. even if it does have foreign intelligence value, that information may only be disseminated to 1% to his or her authorization. in other words, electronic surveillance implements the well private interests and subject to correspondents and protection of that privacy in terms of the requirement and have stancil base is approved by the court and in terms of the limitation. let me turn to the second activity, which is the collection of business records and after it was passed, it became apparent that the collection jubilees were very important, in particular while the government has the criminal investigation records of the grand jury subpoena blacking for intelligence. provision was added in 1998 to provide such authority by section 215 of the petri attack was passed after 9/11. that is why this is referred to section 215. it allows documents or other tangible things when they are relevant to a security investigation and records can be obtained only when they are pursuant to a grand jury subpoena were others. in other words where there are no statutory or other protections that would prevent the use of the grand jury to obtain them. sometimes this is more restrictive than a grand jury and it can be issued by prosecutor or is under the fisa business record records division we must get court approval. moreover, records are subject to court approval with dissension of u.s. persons and while there others in the subpoena information, this one does not apply. of course, the business records division has been in news because of one particular use. it has repeatedly proved orders directing several telecommunications companies to produce certain categories of telephone metadata in the time and date of the call. it is important to emphasize that under this program do not have the content of any conversation that is cheap. we do not police identity and we do not get any gps location information. the limited scope of what we could left has important legal consequences. if you have voluntarily provided this kindes. if you have voluntarily provided this kind of information to third parties, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy. all of the metadata that we get is information that the company has obtained and keep for their own purpose. as a result, the government can get this information without a difference between% there's a difference between getting it in bulk and from legal points of view, it only allows as to get this from a privacy perspective, and we worry -- the people worry that they could apply data mining techniques. even when this is not subject to the reasonable expectations. i do want to make clear that we are not allowed to do that sort of analysis of these records and we do not do it. on the other hand, this this information is useful for mclachlan's perspective and it can help us identify links between terrorists overseas and the united states and it's important to understand the problems that this program has intended us all. one of the criticisms made by the 9/11 commission so we were unable to locate the connection between hijacker that was in california and al qaeda operative in yemen although they had collected the conversations, they have no way to determine that the other end of those communications was in the united states to identify the connection. this program is designed to help us find those connections. in order to do that, we need to be able to access the record of telephone calls possibly going back many years. and we don't know in advance which causes will be. however, telephone companies have no ability to keep this information. the different telephone companies have separate different formats that make analysis involving several providers more cumbersome and i could be a significant problem in a fast-moving investigation where speed and agility are critical. and the way we fill this gap illustrates the approach that i outlined earlier. the difference between a telephone company keeping records in the intelligence community keeping these records is what the government does with the records and that is entirely legitimate for concern and we deal with it by limiting what the intelligence committee has a lot to do. first, we put this information in a secure database and the only information for which this can be used, it is counterterrorism and we only allow a limited number to search these databases. even though they are allowed to search the database and have a reasonable suspicion, it is associated with nuclear terrorist organizations and it has to be documented in writing and approved by a supervisor. they're allowed to use this only in a limited way to mask them calling other telephone numbers and because this contains only metadata, all she can do is disseminate the telephone number and she doesn't even know who's dumber days. any further investigation has to be done pursuant to other lawful means in any collection of the content relating to that would have to be done using another legal authority such as fisa title i. finally the information is to short after five years. and although we collect large volumes under this program of metadata, we only look at a tiny fraction of it but only for a carefully circumscribed perfects help us find links between people in the united states and the collection has to be brought forward to be operationally effective. but it doesn't even identify those. only other uses are prohibited and we do protect privacy and security. some question how this metadata could comply with the requirement that business records obtained investigations. we are working to see what additional information we have about the program including the court papers and i can give a broad summary today. first, it is important to remember that the authorized investigation and intelligence investigation and not a criminal investigation. it has to be one that is conducted pursuant in accordance with guidelines approved by the attorney general and those guidelines allow this into a foreign terrorist entity if there is a factual basis that reasonably indicate that this may have engaged in international terrorism a threat to security were planning or supporting us. in other words, we can investigate an organization if there is factual base to believe that that organization is involved. in this case from the government application to the fisa court has identified terrorist entities that are subject to investigation. second, the standard of relevance is not what we think other than a similar criminal trial and the courts have recognized the term relevance can include an extremely broad standard. the supreme court has held that the grand jury subpoena is proper and there is no reasonable possibility that the category of myth aerials will produce the information relevant . again it is construed broadly compassed any matter that reasonably could lead to other matters in an issue that may be the case. so the meaning of relevance is sufficiently broad to allow requests for information and compassed large volumes of information to locate a smaller subdivision that will be directly pertinent to our actual use and investigation were the case. in other words, it is not limited to what he or she can identify as liability. because in order to identify this, it is often collecting a broader set of records with material that can be on the issue. when it passes the business records, congress made clear that he had in mind broad context such as these and it meets this broad relevance. as i explained earlier, effectiveness allowed, the effectiveness depends upon collecting and maintaining the data against the narrowly focused queries are made. as in the grand jury context, it is relevant and broad enough to allow for the collection of information beyond that which turns out to be part of a terrorist investigation. the scope is broader than a civil discovery requests and it is similar. information is relevant because you need to have a broader set of records in order to include what is important to a terrorism investigation when you make that query. this is reinforced by all the limitations that i described above that the court imposes unapproved purpose. i want to repeat that the conclusion is not that of the intelligence community alone. applications have been improved by numerous judges on the court, each of who is determined with legal requirements in congress reauthorized in 2009 in 2001 after the intelligence judiciary committee had been briefed on the program and after information describing the program had been made available to all members. all three branches of government have been deemed lawful and reasonable in large part because of the protections that we provide for every person whose telephone number is collected. the third is section 702. again, by way of background. generally speaking, traditional fisa governs this within in foreign foreign intelligence purposes and was passed in 1978, congress did not intend that would regulate the targeting outside of the united states for foreign intelligence purposes in this surveillance was generally carved out by the way congress defined electronic surveillance. most communications took place via satellite. so congress excluded international radio communications and even when this was intercepted this was a person in the united states. over time, that technology differentiated fell apart and most international vacations travel over fiber-optic cables and were no longer international radio communications outside the reach. at the same time there was a dramatic increase in the use of the internet for communications including by terrorists and as a result the original intention was frustrating and we were increasingly required to go to the court to get individual ones to conduct this of foreigners overseas for foreign intelligence purposes. after 9/11, it began to degrade our ability to collect this and it created a more streamlined procedure. section 702 is not, as some have suggested, part of this traditional authority and it extended the oversight of a that kind of surveillance that congress had originally placed outside of the oversight including overseas in this american regime imposes judicial supervision was directed at citizens of other countries and includes unique limitation that goes beyond what other countries have required with their intelligence services when those are not their own citizens. the privacy implicated under 702 is part of the metadata collection on one hand we are collecting the communications and on the other hand we are not collecting that information in bulk and we are only targeting non-us persons outside of the united states for foreign purposes. the information involved is unquestionably a great concerned. so here again the statutory scheme and easily implement them are designed to allow us to collect intelligence and under the statute, it does not require individual authorization against each target. instead it approves annual certification cemented by the attorney general and director of national intelligence to identify categories of foreign intelligence that can be collected and subject to targeting procedures and minimization procedures. the targeting procedures are designed to ensure that we only target those reasonably believed to be outside the united states that we do not intercept medication that we do not target any person outside of the united states as a backdoor means of targeting someone inside the united states. these procedures must be reviewed by the court to include this as part of the statute and it is consistent with the amendment and it is a way of minimizing the privacy impact with americans and non-americans by limiting a question to its intended purpose and it should be familiar. there is a procedure of information about u.s. persons and in the course of this collection, we may incidentally require communications, even though we are not targeting him we are not targeting them, for example if they talk to non-us persons outside of united states were properly targeted for foreign intelligence collection. some of these medications may be pertinent and some of them of them may not think that the collection is hardly unique. it is common whether via a criminal wiretap with a cart and then target for the friends and family may be intercepted or when we see neither of which is likely to contain information. congress recognizes this reality required us to minimize the impact on the privacy. so how does this work? as of today there are certifications for several different categories of foreign intelligence. this includes the intelligence community is using a particular e-mail address and they take this and they look at the available data access whether this will be a valid target. whether the e-mail address wants someone who is not a u.s. person orders outside of the united states and whether targeting that e-mail address can be relevant certification. only if all three are met and validated will it be proved. we don't randomly target the e-mail address is collect all four. we target specific accounts because we are looking for foreign intelligence information and even after he target is approved, the court approved procedure require the nsa to verify the targeting decision is valid based on any new information. any communication displaced to cure databases and train analysts are allowed to use the data and it is required that they require the u.s. person or information about a u.s. person and they determined that has no foreign intelligence value and communication must be destroyed. and in any case, conversations that are not relevant after maximum of five years. so under this section, we have a regime that requires approval procedures that are designed to narrow the focus of this surveillance and the use of the data. i have outlined three different election programs with fisa and i think they all reflect the same that i have described. in each case to protect privacy with a system of control not only on what we collect, but on how we use what we collect based on the nature and intrusiveness of the collection to take into account the ways in which that is used to protect national security and we do not hope that people will follow them. this financial safeguards in place to help ensure that these rules are followed. they operate at several levels. the same technological revolution that has enabled this and made it so valuable and allows it to have relatively stringent controls. intelligence agencies can work with providers so that one may provide us information that we are allowed to acquire, they don't provide additional information as well. insecure databases which only trained personnel have access and modern information street techniques allows to audit fees is that databases in houston we have a record that will enable us. there is no indication that anyone has defeated the controls and improperly gained access containing medication. documents are kept on other databases do not contain this kind of information in many other databases and if they have compliance officer to ensure that they comply with the law. in addition, decisions about what telephone numbers to use as a basis for reviewed within the nsa and then by the department of justice and decisions are reviewed and then by the department of justice and my office, the office of the director of national intelligence which is actively overseas. for the traditional collection we ensure the information collected is disseminated and coordinated with the procedure. and finally independent inspector generals also review the operation of the program and the point is not that any of these individuals is perfect. it is that you have more overseeing the operation of the program and it becomes less and less likely that unintentional errors will go unnoticed or anyone will be able to misuse information. but there is so much more. in addition to this oversight, there is considerable oversight of the congress. they have to review and approve the procedures by which we collect intelligence to ensure that these procedures comply with the statute and the fourth amendment. any compliance violation of matter how large or small has to be reported to the court. and properly collected information must be deleted subject only to what is set forth in the court order and corrective measures are taken until the court is satisfied that i want to correct once again erroneous claim and some people assume that if the court approves every application, it does not give these a fair amount. the exact opposite is true. the judges will review every application carefully and they also have extensive questions and seek additional information request changes before they have an application that is ultimately approved and it does approve the great majority of the application of end of this process. but before it does so, questions and comments ensure that it does comply with the law. finally, i love we are required to keep the intelligence of these programs including detailed reports about the operation and compliance patterns. we engage with the congress to discuss these authorities to provide information with oversight responsibility and congress reauthorize this section 702, information was made available to every member of congress describing these programs in detail. in short, or in summary, it is a sensible means of the changing nature that allows the intelligence community to collect information while protecting privacy and appropriate limits. much is collected but much is subject to stringent controls and procedures making the controls over the use of information. depending upon this which is applied throughout our intelligence collection. it has helped protect both our nation and its allies from a variety of threats. we have robust intelligence relationships in these go in both directions and it is important to understand that we cannot use foreign intelligence services to get around the limitations imposed by the laws leasing that other countries expect operating complaints of their own laws and by working closely with these other countries we have helped to ensure a common security. for example when many of the details are classified, we have provided the bulk metadata section 702 has provided us information to help us understand potential terrorist activities and even to disrupt it. forty-one of the 60 this involves threats, including 25 in europe alone and we want to alert officials to discuss and help them to fill their mission because of the intelligence capabilities that we have. i believe that our approach to achieving this is effective and appropriate that has been reviewed and approved by all three branches of government and it is, however, not the only way that we can regulate this collection. even before this occurred, the president said that we welcome this type of discussion about privacy and national security and we are currently working to declassify more information complete a discussion is an independent body charged with overseas counterterrorism and it has announced that it intends to include a public report including the collection of metadata and matt reis president committed to providing what they will need to fill advisory functions do we keep doing that and we look forward to continuing our on the discussion of the can and should, which is published detailing the extensive operation on a classified basis and in particular with the committee that was set up to oversee intelligence operations and the level of the debate certainly reflects the pressure of the sensitive nature of intelligence operations demanded with a limited discussion and it is now a moot point. but as the debate better surveillance goes for my hope that my that my remarks today have helped to provide information about the everton have been made and will continue to be made to ensure that all of our intelligence complies with our laws and our values and i thank you very much no be glad to take questions now and i do want to caution that much of this remains classified for good reasons and it won't i won't be able to talk much about that. what about some of the details of activities that we have disclosed. we are working to declassify additional information and until that is made, we will be restricted. thank you very much. hart. [applause] >> i'm going to ask a question or two about, returning to the audience beyond the classified open forum, it is just offering one more parameter and if you ask bob whether this is part of this, i may not be supplied that he will. [laughter] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> i have just a few quick questions before we turn it over to the audience and both of them are part of the activities that you mentioned. .. >> if you are not changing the of what i suppose in every ready agrees there must be as much as possible but you mentioned that the house judiciary committee that fis said -- a the fisa court des genesee feature of the judicial opinions be connected but that may -- meets up with the ada and will be hard put to give a clearer sense" end quote. we may see in the future so i am curious and how much progress can only be made in that regard. >> one of the hurdles earlier is a program is classified it is very hard to think about the opinion that if a zero pages is it is legal if you will dispose of it. now we're looking back and i personally hope we can release a court documents that will provide a greater visibility. >> that will be more in terms of all of these activities. >> i think we look across the entire spectrum. the general speaking there is considerably less with the metadata we looked of what can be declassified. >> are there any other questions of the fisa court which is not subject to review? also spies in intelligence people understand their phone calls are being monitors sold is there any harm of national security? >> i will take the first one. it is important to go back this is not the court that exist to adjudicate between individuals but to oversee the executive branch acquisition of foreign intelligence it is unprecedented in that sense with the necessary consequence of the fact it oversees the secret activities. there are plenty of court proceedings that take place particularly with national-security and your second point the fact of the matter is we have very valuable information and the fact also is that going into a lot of detail of our adversaries have not been able to tell yet but they would stand up to take notice with the impact that it has steve and just before a call another person to have any other affiliations please identify yourself. i know your affiliations you can go ahead and ask the question. >> the queue for coming and i want to talk about from the policy perspective as it did this reported accurately or not we are forced to compel data looking at the trade relationships and on the international trade discussion with the broader impact i wonder if there has been a discussion tear expedient and new ways of intelligence which you understand these we don't generally discuss them but to have the opportunity to be heard this is this program sufficient a valuable? and we're doing that again right now. >> figure very much. the question of the use of the information of the outside of that intelligence area in terms of the scpa and force mckeon did doj ask if there is the idea to oversee bribery kidney use some of these powers to gather that information and if the surface comes across that information, a kennedy shared with zedillo jay with enforcement of the scpa. >> generally speaking, we cannot pass the collection of information. the department of justice cannot ask us to collect evidence. terrorism is one paying but scpa for ordinary criminal activities we cannot be asked to collect data if they uncover evidence of any crime ranging from abuse into the scpa they can turnover. >>. >> at the foreign policy magazine you said trying to determine if they could target particular e-mail address if it is valid target looking at is this bid to buy a person can you explain a untypically have to do that because despite looking at the e-mail address is difficult. how did they do that? >> it is ethically challenging and but to talk about the variety of our if information there may be other ways you can learn that e-mail address is associated with u.s. person that the rules require them to check a variety of databases based on the aircraft to. >> it depends on the content i know every one of the database. >> seamanship and with regard to business records you don't think they have the legitimacy so so many have with the rate of what they provide a and would you consider that meaningful consent to a third-party? >> i guess if i would rather course would a and the seminal case that we need to have of bank account we disclosed of paying records then telephone companies use to be a monopoly in telephone calling records were subject to the illegal expectation. >> release one extraordinary assertion i want to make sure end of stare and their right to but the process is chaired to look at these programs to see if they violated the encourage -- internal controls so they have never found a had instance where they have reached beyond those authorities one of the skepticism that dave malic as hard as they should but i thank you could tell us for example, and reform one negative reaffirmed the fact of any of these authorities. >> i don't think that is what i said i think it does have to be reported in the promises it has been that if i said something that led you to that conclusion there has never been a violation and is not what i've said. you use the term but we have different on the regime's for different programs. there is the audit regime for a the 702 program and so on. i cannot sit here to give you exact statistics. i don't know them but i do know that last year issued a report in connection with the reauthorization of the up 702 program there has never been a willful violation there has been occasions where people make mistakes in technological errors but not to willfully do so. >> i am wondering if you can tell us information on how many times that some of the providers have a challenge to the court orders to turn over the of the data or the internet record. >> i can't there is one court proceeding that has recently been in the dunes where we have been ordered to to review and are in the process of doing that but those are still classified. there is a lot that we are looking to declassify and we try to get that but i cannot answer it. >> but are they typewrite bond negative priority? >> i think to the us are in extent but what program is already out. >> thank you very much. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] expected in morning of the judiciary committee will come to order the shares authorized to clear recess in the timely welcome everyone to the hearing this morning on oversight of the industry should use of the fisa authority and will begin by recognizing myself for the opening statement. this statutory authority that governs certain programs under the foreign intelligence surveillance act or to 12th many members of congress and their constituents have expressed concern how these programs are operated and if they pose a threat to american civil liberties and privacy we have assembled to panels of witnesses to help explore these important issues for the last month edward snowden a former it is a contractor and california employees release classified material on top secret collection programs on june 5th "the guardian" released to the order from fisa court requested by the fbi to have the ongoing production of a three month period of karl -- called detail of metadata the numbers of both parties of the call unique identifiers in the time and duration. on june 6 classified information of the second program the prism program was cut from "the washington post" in the news reports described the program to allow the nsa to obtain data from service providers from customers that reside outside denies states including e-mail, chat e-mail, chat, videos, foote rose and file transfers both of these are operated pursuant to statutory provisions with the fisa amendment tacked to have procedures for the domestic collection of foreign intelligence when it was enacted in 1978 america was largely concerned was collecting intelligence from foreign nations such as the soviet union or terrorist groups like the fork in colombia. it set forth procedures how the government can gather intelligence inside united states from foreign powers and the agents the intelligence landscape has changed dramatically over the last 30 years. today we are confronted with ongoing threats some of which are well structured but those that are loosely organized as those who have certain believes but do not believe in to a specific terrorist group the vetting provision often referred to as section 215 of the petri fact allows them to have tangible items korn intelligence international terrorism in clandestine intelligence investigation i'd like the grand jury or the administrative subpoena which can simply be interests -- injured by a prosecutor the records must first be approved by a federal judge. similar to a grandeur neat one negative injury they find it cannot be used to search a person's home to require the content of the mills are listened to telephone calls but only to obtain third party records critics object to maybe the ongoing collection of all metadata if it conforms to the congress in town -- intent of section 215 of the page redacted hope to hear from today's witnesses how the collection is relevant to a foreign intelligence and whether a program of this size is valuable and cost-effective to prevent terrorist plots. in the 40 years since the enactment communication technology has changed dramatically with international communications the shift from wireless to fiber-optic wire walters the matter in which foreign communications are transmitted the use of wire technology inside the united states to transmit a telephone call that takes place overseas has the unintended results required to give me to obtain the individualized fisa court order to monitor conversations with non groups and they reauthorize the bipartisan fisa back to update the law and the permits the attorney general and a director national intelligence to target foreign persons reasonably believed to be located outside the united states and require intelligence information it requires for the first time in u.s. history prior court approval of all government surveillance using these authorities including the minimization procedures in the present program derives its authority from section 702 of the fake with the collection of foreign intelligence information of dawn u.s. people located outside the united states and to the extent it captures information pertaining to u.s. citizens such a deception can only be incidental as the handling of affirmation by eight minimization procedures pilot for to hearing from our witnesses today in greater detail how the different elements it's targeting under 702 to non-u.s. people outside the u.s. and the oversight performed by the frustration of this program and including the effectiveness of the current auditing a section 702 the terrorist threat is real and on going and the boston bombing reminded as all of that i am confident everyone in this room wishes it could have been prevented the cannot prevent them as we can first identified than intercept the terrorist but congress must ensure the laws we have enacted are executed in a manner consistent with congressional intent that protects both national security and civil liberties and must insure america's intelligence gathering system has the trust of the american people. is now my pleasure to you recognize the ranking member from michigan for his opening statement. >> thank you. members of the committee, we on judiciary, and that of primary jurisdiction for both of the authorities that we're here to discuss today, the section 215 of the patriot act and section 702 of the fisa amendment act. over the past decade of the members of this committee had vigorously debated the proper balance between the safety and the constitutional right to privacy so i joined to welcome the two panels for each fairly made up to this discussion today but we at any point of this deploy debate have approved sweeping surveillance that united states is isin's employed by our government in the name of fighting a war on terrorism. section 215 authorizes the government to obtain certain business records only if it can show to the fire is a court -- fisa court that there is ongoing national security investigation. if the government cannot have a clear public explanation how it is consistent with the statute venomous stop to collect this information immediately. so this metadata problem is out of hand even given the seriousness of the problems that surround it and created it. i have another concern that pertains to steve track record of responding to the criticisms of these programs we know of the directors' statement and others of the national security agency said director keith alexander to had to make retractions. the fbi director robert mueller is not empowered to reread history. with our conversation and requires focusing on improving both more public scrutiny with congressional oversight of these programs. the administration has asserted its conduct of the surveillance here with congressional support with some in the past that is not sufficient but in a classified briefing and we cannot discuss it publicly. believe we've skipped the briefing we risk to be an informed and unprepared the one solution and would be to publicly release significant fisa court opinions are at the very least unclassified sunrays so this has the added benefit of subjecting the government's legal claims to the much needed public scrutiny. over the past decade with the development the -- of the law that instructs the government would it may do with the information that it collects. there is no reason to keep this from public interest. and if we strike the balance of these authorities which i think is important of the hearing today then we must bring the public into the conversation as soon as it is appropriate without delay and i am not talking releasing any classified information. instead i am simply asking our constituents to trust us as i am asking you with the executive branch to trust them and the need for more declassification a think is very dominant in my opinion as to how we should move today. i think the chair. >> i think that a ranking member for his comments and i share his concern about some classified information that does not need to be and also because of the nature of the questions we would like to ask some of that cannot be asked or answered in the open hearing we will definitely be planning a second hearing on the subjects where we can ask those questions in the classifieds sending to assure ourselves of the answers that we need. before a pre-pekin without objections of opening statements are made a part of the record. but i must dress it remains classified and that a suspect those of the first panel would have as much cantor as possible but i also wish to caution members of the committee to be cognizant of a dynamic with raising the question. the fact that certain programs have been leaked doesn't mean they have been declassified in we would be violating the law if they would disclose that information during the hearing also we will hold the subsequent classified briefing to have an opportunity to more closely examine those programs that pose questions that are not appropriate deal been setting so with a first panel today please rise we will swear in the witnesses. reduce where the test we about to give is the truth come of the whole truth truth, nothing but the truth so help you god? thank you very much but the record reflect all witnesses and answered in the affirmative and will now proceed to introduce our witnesses. first the deputy attorney general of the united state3 first the deputy attorney general of the united states at the department of justice. he first joined the agency in 1979 as part of the honors program serves the department for 13 years as a trial lawyer in the criminal division and enter private practice 1982 and a partner bright and cabo old peace through 2010 to specialize in white-collar defense he is also served as chair of the american bar association , a white-collar crime committee and the ada criminal-justice section he received his bachelor's degree from university of colorado and from the university of california at hastings in real fortunate to have him and his expertise with us today. or second guest is from the director of national intelligence a partner at arnold and porter a.m. served as a member of the fisa of the standing committee of law in security at the american bar association 1994 through 99 served as attorney and a deputy attorney general to work braddish is of national security including the fisa applications. . .

Soul Plates: BTB's Bar and Grill's Autumn Harvest Salad

Galaxy midfielder Diego Fagundez approaching his 350th career appearance

The midfielder, who once had dreams of making an impact in MLS, debuted as a 16-year-old with New England in 2011

Galaxy midfielder Diego Fagundez approaching his 350th career appearance

The midfielder, who once had dreams of making an impact in MLS, debuted as a 16-year-old with New England in 2011.

Galaxy midfielder Diego Fagundez approaching his 350th career appearance

The midfielder, who once had dreams of making an impact in MLS, debuted as a 16-year-old with New England in 2011.

Galaxy midfielder Diego Fagundez approaching his 350th career appearance

The midfielder, who once had dreams of making an impact in MLS, debuted as a 16-year-old with New England in 2011.

Galaxy midfielder Diego Fagundez approaching his 350th career appearance

The midfielder, who once had dreams of making an impact in MLS, debuted as a 16-year-old with New England in 2011.

Galaxy midfielder Diego Fagundez approaching his 350th career appearance

The midfielder, who once had dreams of making an impact in MLS, debuted as a 16-year-old with New England in 2011.