Will vote to disapprove. How does ben cardins opposition, or does it, change the nature of the debate in the senate . Laura i think senator cardins opposition and bodies embodies how difficult this issue has been for all the senators, all the congress members, every single person, whether they come out before or against it. , a lot of us didnt know where he was going to go, and now hes bitter democrat on top of senator schumer and senator bob menendez to say hes going to vote against the deal. When it comes down to the numbers and the process, i dont think that the administration is going to be sweating it too much because of the fact that they know they have the votes in the senate to sustain a veto. Lets take a look at the house. Democratic leader nancy pelosi sent out a colleagues letter about getting everybody on board to support the iran deal, to vote against the resolution of disapproval. The rules Committee Takes it out in the house tuesday evening, floor debate beginning midweek. What does the debate look like in the house, and who will some of the leaders be . Laura the house is a bit more fluid. Minority leader pelosi did say they have well over 100 democrats that have come out in support of the deal, but they again,6 in order to, sustain a president ial veto your they arent quite there yet. She has been very aggressive over the august recess, as well as the administration has been, to make sure that they are trying to get the support that they need. Its going to be very interesting next week. Lets go back to the senate. There had been talk about the potential for democrats to be able to filibuster and be able to prevent this from coming to a final vote. The number they were talking about was 41. With 38 in favor of the deal against the resolution of disapproval, they just did a couple more. Our Democratic Leaders indicating they might have the ability to stop that from coming to a final vote . Laura because they are so close to the 41 number, which, as you said, it will be interesting to see if they decide to do that. People can senator durbins office have said that democrats are not planning to filibuster, and senator joe manchin who is one of the undecideds still left has said he would not support a filibuster. The rest on undecided because it is such an intense debate. They may not get the votes. Lauren durham lopez covers congress for the huffington post. Follow her reporting on twitter lbarronlopez. Our coverage of the iran agreement continues tomorrow at former Vice President dick cheney who has said the agreement will result in iran getting nuclear weapons. Who speaks at the American Enterprise institute tomorrow morning at 9 00 a. M. Eastern. We have it live on cspan two. 10 00 a. M. Tomorrow, Senate Minority leader harry reid explains why he supports the hel and talks about why thinks it will prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon. He is speaking at thcarnegie endowment for international peace. At 1 00 p. M. Eastern, a senator on the other side of the issue, republican Lindsey Graham who is running for president , he speaks at the National Press club about why he opposes the deal. See that on cspan at 1 00 p. M. At 5 00 p. M. , the House Rules Committee begins consideration of house joint resolution 64. That is the resolution that disapproves ofss the international agreement. The rules committee will set the rules for debate. That is live on cspan3. He was a nazi. Camps a concentration commandant. He was responsible for the murder of thousands of jews. This sunday night on q a, jennifer tiga on her life altering discovery that her grandfather was a nazi concentration camp commandant. He was a tremendously cruel he wasperson capable he had two dogs. To tear humans apart. I think this sums it up. He was a person there was a when he that he felt killed people. This is something that, when you are normal, if you dont have this aspect of your personality, it is very difficult to grasp. At 8 00 p. M. Ht eastern and pacific on cspans q a. Up next on cspan, a conversation about online Data Collection and civil liberties. From town hall, seattle, we would hear from officials from the department of homeland security, the Justice Department , amazon, and academia. This is 90 minutes. [applause] it is my pleasure to welcome you to tonights event. It is how Technology Impact civil liberties. A topic that i tackle in my own work at Nyu Law School and cdt. In a recent book entitled intellectual privacy, our most basic privacy is the freedom of thought. To ponder, right, talk about new ideas, including ideas that are unpopular or controversial. It is at the core of our civil liberties. Without it there is little substance to other cherished liberties. Freedom of speech, but also the right to vote, assemble, protest, freedom of speech, and government decisionmaking influence. Technology has an obvious influence impact on the freedom of thought. When we once relied on a small circle of friends and a click uses to try out ideas, we are now hard rest to imagine intellectual activities of any kind that do not depend on the internet, search engines, large databases, the list goes on. In light of these and other new technologies we clearly need Public Discourse about how Technology Impacts our daily lives in civil liberties. I would like to thank townhall, seattle for this expansive slate of civil issues. A model i would hope to see in more cities across america. This is a perfect partner for townhall in this endeavor. Cdt, in my completely unbiased opinion as a board member, is the american leader nonprofit translating Democratic Values for the digital age. You will get a chance to hear from the cdt president , Nuala Oconnor. What most impresses me is her ability to find her way through the issues in this combative landscape in washington, d. C. This is genuine sieve and discourse that must include citizens, the government and business sectors. Before i introduce your moderator for tonight and turn the program over to our incredibly distinguished group of panelists, i briefly want to address one issue that i believe is among the most important as we consider the impact of technology on our core civil liberties, the issue of voter privacy. The now commonplace for political campaigns to assemble and maintain extraordinarily detailed dossiers on every american voter. These could these contain hundreds, even thousands of Political Data points. Not surprisingly, some of this information is derived from Voter Registration records. But it also brings data from commercial databases. They use cookies and other commercial tracking methods to profile their supporters. Did you know that in the last president ial election both campaigns hired marketing firms to help them match cookie pools . A database of active and targetable cookies with political dossiers to identify the most sway double voters and send them targeted ads anywhere they might show up on the web . Or that the obama Technical Team developed a targeted sharing Outreach Team that matched Political Data with facebook profile so that obama supporters could persuade their friends to vote for obama. The jury is still out on whether these techniques are effective, but Many Americans might be shocked to learn how candidates target them without their knowledge or consent. In my own work i have raised two fundamental questions about these practices. First, does this relentless profiling and microtargeting of American Voters invade their personal privacy . Second, how do these new practices affect democracy . Many have observed how privacy, understood as a legally protected zone or preserve in which individuals can think their own thoughts, have their own secrets, live their own lives and reveal only what they want to the outside world is vital to the working of the democratic process. So, what happens to democracy when campaigns routinely invade this zone by subjecting voters to a form of surveillance in which their preferences are tracked . This is just one of many profound questions we need to address when thinking about the indications of new technologies. Other things to consider, ranging from discriminatory practices and the surreptitious collection of data and use of Data Analytics to socalled predictive policing with avowed towards Police Departments identifying and stopping suspects based less on specific information on an individual conduct time and place and the war on algorithms that reveal an imminent or future will future criminal conduct. I believe it to the panel to take this discussion forward. It is my pleasure to introduce tonights moderator, jenny durkan. And the rest of the panel, who will be seated as i complete introductions. Jenny durkan, washington native and graduate of gw law school, served as the western attorney of the district of washington through 2014. In this role she was the chief federal Law Enforcement officer for western washington, responsible for criminal prosecutions and coordination of various federal investigative agencies. She also shared Key Department of justice committees and workgroups charged with crafting strategies for cybercrime, intellectual property enforcement, and Consumer Privacy. Her leadership for the doj on these fronts include testifying before congress on National Cyber issues. She has continued to practice law as a partner in the washington, d. C. Office of quinn emanuel. Please join me in welcoming jenny durkan. [applause] ms. Durkan thank you very much. Thank you for that great introduction, but mostly for your leadership in this space. You have been a True National leader on many of these issues. And we will not be tracking you all night. [laughter] just most of the night. What a great pleasure it is to be here at town hall. This is one of the best forms we have in seattle to talk about these things. I could not have been more honored to moderate these forums on what is one of the most Critical Issues that we face as a society. I think that the intersection of technology in all parts of our lives will raise fundamental questions about the role the privacy plays in our lives and what is important to protect. I cannot give a better panel to do this with. To my immediate right is ryan calo. He comes by way of stamford and is probably one of the leading people in the areas of privacy and robotics. Just an exceptional phot thinker. When i was u. S. Attorney and i wanted to turn to the people i looked to in academia to figure out those complicated questions, i would regularly have him on my speed dial. Thank you for being here. [applause] and we are really lucky to have raquel russell, not just on this panel but also a recent relocate her from the other washington to washington. She really focused on urban issues. When i had the good fortune to travel back and forth between seattle, d, and doj, whenever there was a issue related to this people would say there is this woman in the white house who can really help you. She relocated to seattle and is now at zillow. She can really look at the policy imprecations around these issues and we are fortunate to have her. [applause] and the woman who we could spend a lot of time introducing, Nuala Oconnor has accomplished so much, you would think she has got to be 80. [laughter] she is the president of cdt and is taking it to the next natural iteration to be a thought leader in one of those places where all people can sit at the table to decide the right policy initiatives to undertake in these areas. She has got great experience at one of our Great Companies here. She took her experience from that sector and applied it to homeland security. She has seen the range of issues. Cbt is one of those places where i was on a number of interagency panels in washington and they were trying to decide how to broker these tough issues in terms of what technology should have government to intercept and the like. No one even talks to each other sometimes on these issues and cdt plays a Critical Role in letting people broker those things and having this real vision of the importance of technology, so thank you for being here. [applause] hopefully this will be a kind of conversation style, but when we kick it off i want to ask different questions bouncing back and fourth. We will reserve some time to take questions from the audience. Thank you for being here. We know it is warm. One of the first things, this is not jeopardy. I dont get to have the music. But first we will do a lightning round. I am going to ask each of the panelist to name what they think is one of the most exciting new technologies and then also to say whether they think of the biggest threat to privacy is coming from government or from private enterprise. So, ryan, lets start with the most exciting new technology. Prof calo you will not be surprised if here that i think that robotics is the most exciting new technology. [laughter] i will give you my thinking on that. If you think about our time now on the internet and you think about how the internet came to be so dominant, think of its history. There was the arpanet, a u. S. Military initiative that wound up funding the initial internet and then it was a Public Private partnership and that very same group of people have moved over to darpa and are investigating robotics heavily. I think we were on this initial curve. Im fascinated by the quick advancement of social media, generally. Facebook started one year ago, in the blink of an eye, and now we have snapped chat, periscope, the way that the newer generations are using these social media platforms to connect is a fascinating thing. It is so hard to keep track of. At cdt we are interested in technology and your daily life. I will pick not only technology, but a device. As a single working mother, my hands are literally and figuratively fold. I wanted to set a timer for what i was cooking. I thought i needed my amazon echo. Who has one . Thank you. In my completely unbiased opinion, i have a little bit of bias having worked on the product when i was there. It is the kernel of your star trek computer for your health. If anyone is a big star trek fan, as i am, my vision for technology is a pot is positive one. We will move towards integration and tolerance, fueled and supported by technology that supports Democratic Values, but on a more literal level, i love this device. It has a great home manager. It talks to me. At least there is someone at home that will listen to me now. It has never happened before, right . I commend to you the privacy policies that had something to do with those. I will say that the thing that has changed my life the most recently is the starbucks app. It is critical for survival. Im going to skip it. I said i would talk about the government, but lets first talk what is, in your mind, the biggest single thing you can do more later what has the biggest potential to erode our privacy without us knowing it . Anything . The creeping intrusion or presumption that all of your data should be easily accessible by your government. State, local, federal, this sense i have worked on this issue of the digital self, that one has boundaries between you and the other, you and your institutions, religious, educational, governmental. And i believe that we have gone too far in the balance of power between the self and the state. My biggest concern yes, there are real concerns about governments, companies, we can talk all about them, but this erosion of the sense of a clear boundary around my digital self in relationship to my government is very concerning to me. If you look at the history of list making and governments knowing who you are and what you are thinking i love that reference to richards work, i need to have a safe and sacred space a place where i can express myself without assuming that that will end up in the hands of the government. Raquel, what do you think . Ms. Russell it is the culture of what is ok to be shared and not ok to be shared. It is constantly shifting and shifting at a high rate at this point. To me i think that as that baseline shifts, will policy be able to keep up with the cultural shift . Prof calo mine is much more pedestrian. I think that facial recognition changes everything. I dont know if you guys noticed, i took a flash photo of you, i apologize that and i am going to tweeted later and im going to say that it went well at town hall. If you think about the fact that facebook has technology that can recognize your face, even if it is obscured, suddenly the government can now scour the entire internet and private databases and just find you. Find you where you are. Even if you yourself did not upload anything. Even if you took pains to of secure your face. I think that facial recognition is a big, big deal. I know it is something that cdt has worked on quite a lot. Good segue. One thing that is really important about the surrender of yourself to government and what is on balance, i was at a panel once with brad smith and i said look, brad, you want us to just have to buy it from you. So, what is the bigger threat to personal privacy . The information that government is collecting . Or the information that every device that you collect that gets aggregated is the larger threat right now . Prof calo the classic arguments are two of them. One, the government has a monopoly on violence. No matter what facebook does to you, turns out they cannot kill you or throw you in jail. But i wonder if that is at the end of the day really not just disingenuous buffet it is a full enough answer. Corporations can make decisions that affect your lives in short and wide ways. It is conceivable. The second argument that you always hear is that from corporations you understand their incentives, they just want to make money, where is the government has this mercurial, mixed incen