Schedules are in play by the members for the summit or notable. Senator warner and representative schiff both juggled their schedules to make this happen. Unfortunately their schedules didnt match up and we will be speaking with each of the sequentially. This afternoon, the white house codes is required and he wont be available and National Intelligence sue gordon will speak us to instead, and it will be one of sues first appearances in her new role. Let me reiterate the importance of your questions and particularly using intelsummit. Org for the first plenary. Due to the short period of time for each of the guests, you get the questions in early and nice and concise it will be much appreciated. Let me reemphasize to opportunity to interact with the sponsors of this event. I would like to introduce miss kelly. Miss kelly. Thank you very much. Appreciate being here. Welcome to everyone this morning. I hope youre all geared up for a great conversation. Congressman, thank you. Im delight to be in a situation where the house gets to go first. I want to compliment insa for recognizing the proper order of things. Well have to get to the bottom of that. Great to have you here. With so much going on and so much showing up on soundbytes back and forth. You take a deep breath and look at what were dealing with, security clearance reform and investigation into russia and 702 coming up for renewal later this year, how do you prioritize what you think is most important . It is an norms challenge this year in particular because also in addition to our daily oversight we have the Russian Investigation on top. Its not as if the other issues went away or went on hiatus. I think back and all of us must have felt the time distortion this year, not only have we done a good john with these responsibilities but also compartmentalizing our differences. To give you an example, the chairman and i have differences over the Russian Investigation and we decided where we will compartmentalize the oversight we have and not let our feelings on russia have anything to do with oversight and authorization responsibilities. We produced after numerous hearings and documents a very bipartisan authorization act that allocates the funding levels and authorizes protections we need in terms of privacy and passed it on the committee and house floor. That doesnt get the same attention as some of the twists and turns in the Russian Investigation but obviously is quite central to our responsibility. 702 will be another challenge. We have a pretty good track record when you look at how we accomplish the form of net ta data program how we passed the cyber sharing information session. We have a history to build on. Im confident that well get through the 702 debate, i hope, in a thoughtful way. Are you saying it works much better than it appears to on network and cable news everyday, behind the scene, theres more cooperation . We would have to by definition. It couldnt be worse than it appears. A lot of the work that gets done doesnt get the same attention and obviously of vital . I view our committee as having perhaps the most difficult oversight job in the congress because when you serve on one of the other committees doing oversight, if youre on the Transportation Committee and the athleticses come in and theyre talking about high speed rail and what a great project it is and how well its going and on budget and on time and the rest of that, there are any number of outside stakeholders who can hold the witnesses accountable and say, thats not true and this isnt right, you need to ask those questions. In our arena most of the questions are in closed session we dont have outside stakeholders to the same degree and give us insight to ask the right questions or know when were not getting a complete answer. Thats a very challenging oversight responsibility but i think were doing a pretty good job. That sounds like a very serious, maybe not flawed part of this system you have to overcome somehow because you do have such responsibility of oversight of these programs for the American People when they hear what is said and doesnt and important to get the right information out there. How do you personally handle that when you dont have the outside people to bring the level of expertise . One of the most important decisions we make when we hire our staff. We bring people often who have experience in the agencies and who do know the right questions to ask and expertise and background to help us with our oversight. We depend to a great deal to the professionals working in the ic, both on the government and contractors side to be candid with us, not just to the answer to our guess but bring us problems when they occur. That has by and lank happened. We benefit from the professional workforce we deal with. At the same time, human nature is human nature. People dont necessarily like to volunteer their faults or problems and people become vested in the way theyve approached issues or programs. We need to continue to challenge the agency, to do better and continue to demand the accountability in terms of what were paying for certain programs, whether something weve been doing the same way continues to be justice and getting the same results and setting the right metrics. We have to be demanding. I think we benefit from a very capable staff and the professionalism within the ic. You feel like youre getting the cooperation you need from the people you are overseeing . Yes. There have been very very few times ive felt like we were getting misinformation. Theres certainly times where i have disagreed with a briefer or their conclusion or opinion or questioned the underlying facts being presented, but its not a situation where i think people are deliberately trying to mislead us. There are times, i think, when we have a fresh perspective, not having become wedded to a certain approach. That can be very helpful and constructive. Im sure from the witness point of view, they may view it differently and think we dont have anywhere near the experience in time and task that they do which is certainly correct. It seems to work the end of the day. Obviously, an era where were dealing with new challenges in the forms of terrorism and asymmetric warfare. Also, now information wars, with very capable adversaries in a burgeoning cyber field we have to Work Together to make sure we have the capabilities to defend the country. What do you think the Biggest Challenges are right now . You wake up and read the same newspapers and websites the rest of us do and see whats happening with north korea and preparing for the next election and dealing with state level and federal level and how do you prioritize these things . Its very difficult because, you know, our tendency, i think, like most institution is to focus on the most immediate problem, which is not necessarily the biggest problem or most long term problem or the problem that requires you to be able to allocate resources in the way that builds over time. Im astounded just with the crush of things going on, for example, that so little attention is bag paid to the fact that rocca is going to fall soon. Soon, we hope. But we have the successful retaking of mosul. Rocca is going to fall. The last major urban holdings of the socalled caliphate are about to disappear. S which an important success on the battlefield. But its gotten almost no attention just because of Everything Else going on. That doesnt mean by any means the war against isis is over or nearing conclusion. Or no long ear threat. Or no longer a threat. We always worry how will it impact us here at home. We need to see that thread drawn and that connection made, do you think thats happening enough in the news . Sure, on certain things. On north korea people have a vivid sense of the threat they look at these missiles can reach anywhere in the United States and maybe carry a payload. On the isis threat, maybe the physical caliphate is disappearing but what about the virtual caliphate. Its dangerous to mention in their terms of people being radicalized. Here in this country. Here in this country. I think in terms of the two threats most in the news these days, the throat from aeronautic and the threat from russia, people are quite vividly aware of the nature and dimension of those threats. How were going to confront them, though, we still have a lot of work to do. Let me ask you, too, and get to questions from audience members, we already have some coming in here. Lets talk quickly about 702, because i think thats helpful and another one with the ability of the United States to collect information and private citizen, both are at stake. What happens the day after if it is not reauthorized . First of all, i dont think thats going to happen, the failure to reauthorize 702. The only question is what form it will take. I hope im not being overly optimistic about that. I think it would be irresponsible for us and weve done a lot of irresponsible things in congress. That doesnt preclude that. Could you say that one more time . Weve done more irresponsible things by omission than comission. I think we will reauthorize it just a question of what kind of reforms we make to it. It wont surprise people the old adage of where you stand depends on where you sit has resonance in the sense that members of the Judiciary Committee have an important oversight role have one perspective and Judiciary Committee have a different perspective. Not that we dont appreciate the Civil Liberties and civil rig s rights, we certainly do and not that the judiciary doesnt understand but we live daytoday how important that is to our national security. Also, i think having a vivid understanding how the Program Works is important and evidence in terms of have there been problems wex cushion and have there been any intentional abuses of it. Also, with respect to proposed reform, whats the real down stream consequence of that . Does the criminal justice model of seeking Court Approval of the search of the 702 database, is that really the right model . Does that work here . What happens if the persons identity youre seeking is a perpetrator or a place not a person or an address. Having an intimate understanding of the Program Helps in terms of what we think is a viable reform and what may not be. Abuse of power is a big question, right, for people who dont understand how the Program Works and theyre hearing headlines abuse of power, thats where the congressional oversight comes into play. Are you confident with the way the system is running right now with your ability to oversee when there are cases of someone using certain access they may or may not have . I do feel pretty confident about our ability to oversee this. I hope thats not wishful thinking. I dont think it is. Its not just because of the work were doing or just because of the fact that the agencies do come in and selfreport when they have problems but also that we have the tremendous valueadded by the pfizer court, by the fact that the pfizer court itself does a very rigorous review of these programs. Where they find problems they often will suspend an effort until they get the results they want or change what a program can do until they get the result this is a want. We will have access to those opinions and concerns raised by the pfizer court. I think the combination of what the courts do in their oversight, what we do in our oversight and whatses do in selfreporting is pretty comprehensive. And working . And working. Let me get to some of these questions. A lot of what the audience is thinking about oversight resources, 702 reauthorization and questions about election security. Do you believe the United States government is doing enough to prepare for another cyberattack for our elections, given the elections are principally a state responsibility, what role does the federal play . I dont think were doing enough with the powerful industry, when i talk to those involved with the machinery of these elections, when i talk to them they say these systems are not impregnable, they are vulnerable. I felt for quite some time any state or voting jurisdiction that doesnt maintain a paper trail is negligent in this day and age. I think theres a lot more we need do, a lot more that we need to understand. I think the vendors of the Voting Machines need to be more transparent with the government about their systems and software to analyze vulnerabilities. The states have to be willing to accept the government help being offered. The government and the ic has to be more transparent with the states. The states still dont know if they were victims of russian hacking. We have not shared that information with the states. I think thats crazy. I know my colleague, mark warner, has been very outspoken on this and properly so. I hope we will have a hearing on our committee, an open hearing where we can talk about the vulnerability they feel in terms of their infrastructure and need for us to be more forthcoming with them. We learn each and every day, today, there was a report by symantec within the last 24 hours about the vulnerability of our power grid, the fact that outside hackers have been able to get into the operational parts of those systems, not just probe some outlying parts of those systems. We find those systems are far more vulnerable than people may have expected. Weve been talking about it for years but havent done a lot to protect critical infrastructure. A lot of studies, a lot of meetings and a lot of talking. The big thing that fell out of the cyber information sharing bill was critical infrastructure. That was the one area there was too wide a gulf between the party is in terms of whats the federal governments role protecting critical infrastructure. It is largely set by private industry. There are incentives for private industry to improve their security. Whether it is enough is an open question. I will say the fact there are still vulnerabilities doesnt mean nothing is being done. What it does mean in some cases, this is a very asymmetric field where the advantages are all on the offensive. Those on offense only need to find one open door and those on defense need to borrow every window and lock every door. Thats inherently challenges and a big field for adversary, theres always going to be deniability. We have gotten good attribution but they know they will always have deniability areas. We have Great Questions here on russian influence. I know were running out of time and you have another appointment you need to get to this morning. Let me ask one more question. What is congress doing to build the federal Cyber Workforce . How can the ic compete with these to attract the right personnel with training pained them enough with the state youre coming from and is the cyber military corps possible in the future and might that bring benefits . First of all we cant compete financially with Silicon Valley. Some of the bright capable people start in the Silicon Valley with salaries higher than yours or mine, certainly higher than mine and a lot of people in the audience. Probably mine, too. Im sure thats true. Were benefitted by the fact a lot of People Choose to work in the ic because they feel a sense of patriotism and calling. It drives them to that. A lot of patriotic people feel the same call to work within the private sector that are serving the ic. Thats tremendously beneficial. We do need to continually work to recruit people and continue work to diversify the ic work force. We do need to explore creative ways to bring people into the industry for a period of years, then have them go back into industry. Yeah. I heard that a lot. A real benefit for that. There are great models for that. Look at arthur e. For example, great people going into next Generation Energy technologies and bring the knowledge they have from the private sector and add value to the government and go back to the private sector. There are obviously difficulties and computations in the ic environment but nothing that cant be overcome. We do need to look to these models as well as interesting partnerships that already exist in terms of Venture Capital with the Silicon Valley. Absolutely. Know we need a seamless congressional transition this morning. I will thank you very much for taking the time to come here. I know youre very busy. We should all come to your office and talk to a highly qualified staffer. Thank you for submitting them. If we could have senator warner, i think he was supposed to be here about now . A few more minutes . Hes late. We get to talk. I think we should talk more about the russia question. Wait. I think i see senator warner. Im kidding. I believed you. What does the scope entail of russian influence in the United States, a small little question we canned by time with. Thats really what were aiming to find out. Were looking at each of the modalities russians have used elsewhere some we know with great certainty they employed here in the election and others where we still need to find out where these tactics that the russians used. I do want to make one point. I know we have limited time but getting to an earlier question of yours implicated in terms of what do we do about all of this. There is no Software Patch for what happened last year. There is no Cyber Defense capable enough. If the russians want to get into the dnc in 2020 theyll get in. If they want to get into the rnc they will get in. The best protection that we can have is somehow forging the consensus we didnt have last year, that no matter who it may help or hurt, if any foreign power intervene is in our affairs let alone our elections, they will be repudiated. Any one who tries to take advantage of it will be repudiated. More than anything else thats what i think why need to defend ourselves. What has been unleashed is not going be put back in the bottle and not just an issue with russia. It will be an issue with any country that wants to influence our affairs and moreover an issue with lots of other countries and their relationship with each other. What w