adversarial -- without arguments on both sides, only the government argues in fisa. that's not the way you can determine what is and what is not constitutional. >> if they add a public advocate to that fisa court system, is that going to satisfy you? >> it's better. and my reform that i'm doing with senator wyden does have a public advocate in there. but ultimately, i think what legal scholars will tell you is that to find truth, we have this adversarial process where someone actually literally works for you on the government side of the question and it goes back and forth and it's our way of trying to find truth in our courts. and i don't think you can truly find it if the public advocate still works for the government. you know, we have an irs advocate right now, and i haven't seen hide nor hair of our irs advocate during these scandals when they were investigating tea party groups. so i don't think it works, necessarily, if they're appointed by the government to truly have an adversarial