Today, its not just democracy integrity andlection but in the 2020 election. So we have a time horizon of 14 months. I think i can put it very well, what is the scenario, its sort of a butterfly balance on steroids. If we have a postelection and if we have a contested result, and even just a couple of counties, and there is a been a Disinformation Campaign that is exposed that may have skewed the results. But i worry about is i dont know how we quite survived the second election here in this country. A second president ial election that comes into serious question. We come at this from a slightly different angle. We are Free Speech Organization but we also see ourselves as guardians of open discourse and of truth. We are not digital specialists and we are not election specialists we are an organization of writers and journalists and editors and publishers and people who are invested in the quality of our discourse and her ability to get facts from falsehood. All of that, we see is very much at stake in this debate. We are delighted to be partnering with the fec and alan wyckoff the stanford center. As we move forward, for us, one other. The International Context weighs very heavily. Our Traditional Market is on behalf of imperiled writers and freedom of expression around the world. So to see and recognize these dangers, here in our own country and the kind of alienation from the truth sort of sense of designation in her early quotes this morning. Even contemplate the idea that its here in our own country. This is the new loophole of alarm. And a new loophole of introspection and a sense of urgency for us as an organization. In the first session, there is no silver bullet. Theres not thats obvious. The hurdle to solutions, weve already begun to explicate and i think there is a series of things that make it even more complicated. What is the time horizon that we face, our team is away. So many of the things weve heard about this morning, are longterm endeavors both of it is News Literacy are getting past or political impasse. Never really talked about the political and the fact that we do talk about platforms, taking them contents. That comes highly politicized weve seen that in just the last week on the issue of abortion. Questions of principle. And freeze each viewpoint neutrality. I trust her in the precept in this country. Really comes into play here. These decisions ultimately our discussion. So for the algorithms, we are in the midst of the collective growth on how to draw these lines. And how do we recognize reconcile these principle yet we do it with a ticking clock. And more waters said these tactics are not necessarily technologically sophisticated and thats true. I think culturally and socially they are deeply sophisticated. There are things we never imagined that russians and would target a Small Community of people in texas and get them to show up to our rally and figure out what to amplify and what to turn down. Micro targeting and the invisibility of these tactics and the fact that abbas solution that made him outlawed is compelling. About how much of this goes on and messaging platforms that do not see the light of day. Nobody may be equipped to identify what is going on. The commercial pressures, where are the media companies. There are some representatives covering this if it. We invited quite a lot of media representatives. As a group, we didnt get many responses. Its a difficult issue. When weve had conversations about this question of the Mainstream Media modifying stories. Are they prepared. To deal with Something Like wikileaks data in the email dumps. This was during the 2060 elections and what will be different, we havent gotten a very compelling answer. I dont think that thinking is very far so long. Amy reinhardt would talk about some of the work that she is doing. Many hurdles to mounting an Effective Response particularly in the next 14 months, but i am glad to say that we have a terrific flannel talk about this. Im going to try to keep everybody types we have a chance or all of you to come in with your questions and comments and will hear first from representative 70 murphy of florida who is the leader on this issue. Utspoken voice about the thought leader in the legislative leader. Jenny, microsoft, democracy program. Spencer boyer, director of the Washington Office of the center for justice and former National Intelligence officer. Amy who is in new york Bureau Editor for first draft. In background, aclu press club. Rosen berger, securing democracy. Which is working with can reference my effort russia to undermine our emphatic brent institution. And right large and producer of the rico decoder bought podcast. An immediate representative. So we look forward to her remarks. Im going to turn it over first two representative murphy and the rest of our panel. Thank you. Good morning and thank you suzanne. Thank you to the host of this if it. Im really honored to be here. To offer some of my perspective from congress. There are roughly about 40 elections, pending in congress right now. During the panel conversation, id love to talk more about it. Talk about a pit of the prospects for success of the some some of these bills and hopefully surprise and pleasantly some of the more pessimistic of you in the audience today. I like to open today with some broader things right now. I really tried to take those leading role in it comes to protecting our democratic processes from foreign. Im a National Security background working on george w. Bush. At that time, the main threat that our country was facing from other nations was the potential use of connecticut traditional weapons of war. But as technology has evolved, the nature of conflict has evolved as well. So today, our adversaries are more likely to use malware the middle missiles to advance their interests and undermine ours. The security challenges we confront will only become more complex for example, soon our foes are probably going to be able to spread this information disinformation through hyper realistic but forged video and audio known as deep stakes. Were just beginning to understand that threat. Today, one of the favored tactics of our autocratic governments is due cyber tools to chisel away at the foundations of our democracy. The free and Fair Election. I seek to help their preferred candidate, or simply undermine voters confidence in the legitimacy of the election process. In the winter it produces. Democracy is the best forum of government. We know that in the runoff to our 2016 election, the russians conducted a social Media Campaign so confusion and display votes. They have candidates and campaigns and publish stolen information. Again just with the goal of influencing the books. They proved in some cases that Computer Networks and state and local election visit officials. They were in a position to be able to alter Voter Registration bases and perhaps even vote tabulation systems. That leads to the second reason i am passionate about this issue. I represent the swing part of the swings date of florida. Florida was the focus of russias efforts in the 2016 election. The state will likely continue to be central to any foreign efforts to intervene in 2020. Our country has a target on his back. Florida election for officials and voters are ovals like. So for me this is an issue that literally hits him. After all florida is the state of the hanging chads and misprinted balance and other very challenging situations when that state has always been narrowly captured. Finally, i believe that politics is the art of the possible. As a pragmatic democrat from a moderate district, with National Security credentials, im hopeful that my voice will resonate in the lobby weld position to be able to work with republicans towards legislative response to the threat in addition to working with my democratic colleagues. I think goal should be can act into law the best of the bipartisan Election Security bills that are pending in congress. Some stuff we should take our self. Congress must provide federal state and local agencies with the resources to harden infrastructure. Agency should hire cyber tech t defend against the threat. Congress must also ensure agencies share rather than silo intelligence about specific threats. The assault on our democracy in 2016, not unlike the 911 attacks, have gaps in her exploited. Its a difference between home and the way again. They use the differences in authority and set up for how we defend our country and use exploited those craftsmen systems. So we have some work to do there. In addition, i think congress has to reduce the barriers to make it harder for information to flow between federal government and state and local officials responsible for election infrastructure. One challenge is that these officials often lack the required security clearance. We need to streamline that confidence. There are bus resources and proper personnel that are information sharing, a crossed Government Agencies is necessary. But that is not sufficient. To produce the kind of comprehensive american strategy that we are looking for. I believe we need a whole Society Approach which the private sector and regular citizens, not just Public Officials, comprehend the threats and commit to do their part in combat it. Protect companies, their platforms have become the battlefield in this bloodless conflict. I spent years in the private sector and believe the Corporate Social Responsibility should include a sense of corporate patriotism. These firms can do more to mitigate the problems that went out congressional mandate. And that went out compromising american values. The need to help us enforce the laws that exist in our laws prohibit foreign dollars in election. If that means modestly to our bottom line, its a small sacrifice for a larger purpose. And ultimately, we need to recognize when it comes to Information Warfare, and is the 250 million eligible voters in this country that on the frontlines of the fight. Its their vote the foreign powers are seeking to in fluids through false contents and stolen data dumps. It is their ability to vote or to have their votes accurately accounted thats at risk. If foreign actors come in. Therefore i think it key component of a strategy should be to arm voters with knowledge of the nature and severity of the threats that they face. The best defense against disinformation is accurate information. When our enemy seek to show confusion, we should speak to our citizens with clarity and candor so that they know what they are up against and have mystified that. I think there are two reasons why Civic Education hasnt occurred to the extent it should. Both are within our power to fix. The first is our National Security establishment sort of pension for secrecy. His cultural classification. The false position of not sharing detailed threat information with the american people. In the context of other National Security challenges when you are talking about kinetic warfare, kinetic action, this approach might make sense. But in the case of Information Warfare to keep things hushhush is really selfdefeating. How can we expect our citizens to take these threats serious when we dont release detailed information about what russia did in 2016 until three years after the fact. And then only in a heavily redacted report. Ill stop by our federal agencies but by the special counsel which is the one off if it. As in the Senate Committee report. Those were the two system sources of this information. It continues to be difficult to get that information out to the public. While taking caution not to jeopardize intelligent forces, are government should err on the side of telling citizens more, not less. When foreign powers interfere with our democracy. Our citizens can then counter the effect threat by scrutinizing the information they view online, by checking their Voter Registration data, to confirm it wasnt tampered with, and by Holding Accountable state and local officials who failed to protect collections infrastructure. That leads me to the second reason why Civic Education is falling short. Also a key factor to explain why congress hasnt passed board Election Security bills. This will be my final. The problem is that the topic of Election Security, basically the problem is the topic of Election Security have spin poisoned by partisan politics. Those of us in this room, might agree that theres an ironclad proof that russia interfered in the 2016 election. But this is the bad thing. But significant percentage of republican voters, doubly pressure interfered at all. Of those who do, some dont seem particularly upset about it. As other commenters have pointed out, the u. S. Will never muster a whole society response. In a whole society doesnt acknowledge the problem. In order to close the partisan divide, the republicans and department afterward together to refrain Election Security is the nonpartisan issue. For republican leaders, what this means is that they have to publicly endorse our Intelligence Community conclusions the moscow meddled in our elections in 2016. And so again they will do it in 2020. It means clearly stating the u. S. Elections should be contacted between common candidate ideas and values decided by our citizens in accordance to our laws. Hes putting out that american patriots of every political stripe should be an attempt by foreign powers to manipulate our democratic process on attack on us. As for democratic leaders, we have to stop relitigating the results of the 2016 election, and publicly accept the donald trump one. I am hopeful that this will give republicans the political state space that they need to accept that russia interfered in the election that went out fear that it will be gleefully counted upon bipartisan determine the question the president his legitimacy. If leaders of the two parties fulfill these respective responsibilities, i think it will facilitate the bipartisan Election Security and that has to be the overriding full. I think we have a narrow window of opportunity to create space to do so. I think working together can safeguard the greatest democracy the world has ever seen. So thank you. [applause] subject thank you so much representative murphy. The so logical with your comments incoherent to make so much sense ill put in the discussion we will come back exactly how you think that can be operationalized and sequenced and which pieces of that we might be able to accomplish in the months ahead. Spencer boyer, rto. Thank you to all of the cosponsors for having me. Discussing Lessons Learned in the Intelligence Community or the icy, or the might be applicable for an instant organizations and social media platforms try to figure out how to get a handle on this information as we head towards 2020. I think its a great question because actually no one has ever asked me this before. Images do three things that im allotted in my five minutes. One is described what intelligence analysts actually do compared to policy analysts and gives all the same page. To discuss how intel analysis is impacted for good or ill by political policy issues leaders. How this relates to traditional and media organizations are grappling with today. So given that i was a Deputy Assistant secretary estate. Right before becoming the National Intelligence officer for europe. I space the policy versus intel role in the same substantive area firsthand. The bottom line is this, if your policy official, and get some of you may know this but just get everyone together here, your job is to figure out what needs to be done in a regional or functional context and then to have a minute. We do are in intelligence official, your job is to report the best analysis of the facts that you have some senior policymakers can make informed decisions and hopefully the best decisions on particular issue. None of the words, your job is to report the most relevant information either in written or oral forum, in addition to area which is very hard to do. I have learned. My senior policy measures, about to make a terrible mistake. But its not your job in the Intelligence Community to say for god sake, stop. Dont do that. There might be clear from the intelligence, that option a is the best option available, but everyone in the situation room is coalescing around option b, you are not being paid is nicely official, to try to convince them otherwise. Also in theationa Intelligence Council which is like the think tank of the Intelligence Community committee your job is to integrate the analysis of the entire Intelligence Community in your particular area. So a rough analogy might be an Intelligence Officer should be like an impartial newsroom veteran theyre just trying to give trusted information so that others can make informed decisions for themselves. The policy official is more like a commentator who is also trying to figure out what this information is. And then figure outowo digest it andow to make use of it. How to get it out there and often have a specific a