University addressing high profile cyberattacks, including the hack on Sony Pictures. [video clip] the cyber threat is becoming more diverse, more sophisticated, and more dangerous. That is why we are here. We were at a transformational moment in the evolution of the cyber threat area the actions we take today, those that we fail to take, will determine whether cyberspace remains a realm of opportunity and assets or one that facilitates bold new ideas or whether it becomes a vulnerability. Unless we take action to strengthen our partnerships, most importantly between the government and the private sector, and unless we develop a resilient set of defenses, i worry that a tax like the ones against Sony Pictures entertainment could become the norm. It is not all doom and gloom. You will hear later today from president obama. There is a light at the end of the tunnel. We have ideas and a pass and a plan to address these threats. There is a framework to get this right. We know what we need to do, both within the government and in partnership with many of you. We know what you need to do to overcome the many challenges we are going to talk about today. It is a shared risk and responsibility, to get Cyber Security right. We can take lessons from the fight we have waged against terrorism, to work across government better and to do a better job with all of you to up our defenses and our responses. Since 9 11, the government has developed an agile and effective approach to identifying and disrupting terrorist threats. Host if you missed the event you can go to our website cspan. Org, to watch in there. Now, joining us, daniel newshauser to talk about the next fight against isis. The president has sent his proposal for new authority to fight this group. What was the reaction from capitol hill . Guest tepid at best. Among republicans, they do not trust the president on National Security issues or anything, lets face it. He sent over this draft language, but almost immediately, there were a course of voices saying it is not enough, it is too much, and a lot of my sources on the hill, some being highranking members privy to these discussions think there are no languages that can tow the middle line where you can get votes in the house and senate to pass anything at this point. Host will there be an effort made to do so . Guest certainly. They are having hearings already. They are going to take a hard look at this. It is their constitutional duty. It is their duty to debate it. They can say no. If they think the president has not laid out a strategy that they agree with, they will not vote for one. The biggest problem is that the president is asking for authority to continue doing what he is already doing over in the middle east. If he distracted the authority from congress, it is the administrations view that they have the authority to continue doing it anyway. Theres not a pressing need to pass it, it is more of a gesture , or a show of national unity. That scuttles the chances for this passing. Host what about the democrats reaction . Guest it is not so much this proposal as it is the one from 2001 after the 9 11 attacks on the world trade center. Many are trying to turn this into a referendum on the 2001, that granted the executive very balanced power to attack terrorists around the world. Anyone who was deemed to be affiliated with al qaeda or the groups who funded or helped carry out the attacks on 9 11. There are some that want to rescind the order. The president says he wants to too, but not now. He says we need to start having the discussion, but theres not a political will to get rid of it. Host the New York Times put together some language, looking at the different authorizations for military force. 2001 put together by georges b bush put together by george w. Bush. A granted all necessary and appropriate force against anyone who committed or aided the attacks of september 11 or harbored such organizations or persons. Guest isis and al qaeda are in a power war. Isis used to be al qaeda in the iraqsyria area. Host what limitations does the president put on himself in the 2015 . Host it is guest it is vague, intentionally. The biggest thing is the ground war aspect. We are dealing with a warweary country. Congress is unlikely to authorize any kind of fullscale ground war. The language of the a umf limits in during ground offensive. It is up to interpretation as to what that means. Interpretation is we do not want to be embroidered in a ground war. Host to ensure that does not happen, he has put in a limitation of three years. This authorization for the use of military force shall terminate three years after the date of enactment of this joint resolution, unless reauthorized. Guest whoever is president next would have to have this discussion again. It has been said what he is trying to do is set up a National Conversation about what is the appropriate role of the United States and targeting these terrorist groups. Democrats counter with the 2001 aumf, the point is muoot. Jack goldsmith wrote a blog post over the weekend, noting that in his interpretation, they could send as many Ground Troops as they want. While it is not politically feasible, if you look at the letter of the aumf, they could. Host it does not limit the president geographically, the 2001, neither does the 2015 language that the president sent up capitol hill. Egypt would like the u. S. To leave this coalition against isis into northern africa. Guest i read news reports that egypt has started an Obama Campaign against isis in libya. Republicans that i talked to that is one of their problems with the aumf. Democrats want to have some sort of geographic limitations confine this battle to iraq and syria, but republicans think the threat of racquetball of radical jihadist them has spread beyond africa and other places and they want to target other groups as well. Host we are talking to daniel newshauser. Why obamas aumf faces trouble. He writes it has been on capitol hill for less than one day and it already was in trouble. Robert, listen through your phone. Caller my opinion was that obama has always had enough authority to do these, but the problem is, what are we going to hope to accomplish and all of this. It has been going on for years. We have not got any accomplished happenings in the middle east. How far are we going to take this war . Are we just going to hurt them a little bit . If we are going all the way, are we dropping Nuclear Bombs on them . Guest i dont think the Nuclear Bombs issue is an option but the caller brings up a valid question, one that is being brought up a lot. How do you define success . Is our mission to hurt isis, to destroy isis, these are a lot of the questions that congressmen and women want the administration to answer before they authorize a use of military force. Host what about republicans that say we need to show force because every time there is a batting, it is propaganda for them to look strong and to help them recruit. Guest the counterweight is that the more we fight people over there, the more we send troops or drones or any kind of military force, the more we encourage people to deflect the United States. There is a lot of consideration that has to be taken into account. Host james, mississippi, independent caller. Caller i went to war in vietnam. When we came home, nobody recognized the veterans of vietnam. We have been fighting wars and we will be fighting wars. It does not matter who the president is, democrats republican, independent. God puts a person in theirre. People once prayed for god, oh god, ive got a sickness. Ive been through seven heart catheters. I asked god what i could do for him. I kept telling the doctors what was wrong. They semime to birmingham alabama, to cut my chest open. I said it is not my valves, what is wrong with me. Busy eight to me on medicine. I quit taking my medicine six months last june and i told my Church Members to pray for me. I was not taking my medicine anymore. I said i will not die. Host okay, we will go on to jeannie. Caller high. How are you hi. How are you doing . I am 77 years old. Each of our president s has always had thsiis problem of other countries wanting to destroy us and we elected him. Congress and the senate and all of those men and women should set down with the president and understand his powers and give him host that sentiment was good by the white house chief of staff on sunday show. He was on cbss face the nation. Heres what he had to say about the white houses proposal. [video clip] well put together what we think is the likeliest outcome to get a strong bipartisan showing. We have given them a good place to start. I will say this, bob. What they shouldnt do this time is what they did in 2013, they took a pass on this issue. The president has given them a roadmap to follow, they can take that or come up with something else. They should not take a pass on this issue. Host daniel newhauser, he says the president has given them a place to start. Guest like my story says, with the 2013 request, my sources on the hill do not see any kind of language that could thread that needle and get the aumf pass. That could be proven wrong, anything could happen the next few months. You remember after james foley was beheaded, there is a Huge National outcry, if an aumf word to come out that, it would have been hard to turn away. Right now things being where they are, i do not see them being able to craft language that satisfies everybody. Host we will go to collins, mississippi, james you are next. Caller good morning. How are yall doing . Host good morning. Go ahead with your question or comment. Caller i just went asked the guests, what is it about this new congress that the president not only with the war on isis, and all the wars, but why is it so Much Division and attitude when it comes to all americans . And the soldiers in the military, why is it like we act so afraid . They put these threats out. If america is so strong and positive, why are we attacking each other . Host about this partisan divide. Guest this is something that has been going on pretty intensely over the last couple of years. It is not clear where it started. We have divided government. Americans are extremely divided about how we move forward on a number of issues. Domestically and internationally. I guess the eastern time with matters of international policy, Foreign Policy, were not necessarily dividing in a political debate, but the that does not seems to be the case anymore. Host lets talk a low more about that. A cnn poll came out showing 57 of those surveyed disapprove of the way the president is handling this threat of isis. Then, i want to show our viewers what the Top Republican on the Senate ForeignRelations Committee had to say when he was on face the nation. [video clip] it is our goal to have a process the number one determines the threat to our homeland. Number two, and this will be extensively looked at, what is this president s strategy especially in syria . I think theres a lot of skepticism as to the administrations commitment to dealing with isis, or whatever you want to call them. That creates a lot of concern. We have an opportunity to look at that, what is happening in iraq, and hopefully shortly thereafter create language that can in fact pass through both houses of congress. Host what you make of what he had to say . Guest the republican line now is that they do not trust the president and they just think he has laid out an adequate strategy. Speaker boehner said so much last week. On the other side, youre the ministration mind that is it is congress is elected duty they cannot pass up football if they are given one. Its basically the starting point for this. One of the big reasons why a lot of people say they will not find a place in the middle. Host who should we be watching on capitol hill who may draw something and get it to the present death question mark who may draft something and get to the president s desk . Guest kroger, nancy pelosi, they are the ones who have to get things to the floor and sell it to their members. I know the matters of war and Foreign Policy are different than the mastic when it comes to politicizing them. Not an awful lot has passed. Pass congress over the past several years. The first six weeks of this new congress has been incredibly rocky. It does not instill a great amount confidence that all us anything of any importance can pass right now. I guess we will see. Theres also a possibility, but does not look very good right now. Host a proposal to give the president knew authority to fight isis. Do we know when committees will take this up . Guest no. They have had hearings. Just last week there are hearings in foreign affairs, Armed Services about the threat of isis. When it will specifically take up this language, and start marking up, and amendments intriguing the language, we have not seen it yet. The house is out this week. They will be back next week. They have to deal with this issue of department of Homeland Security funding. Until that is done, i do not see this today getting started. March at the earliest. Host cap a, florida. Tampa, florida. Caller there are two things i want to say. We have not done enough with isis. I will not be happy until their faces are in the stand, to be honest. I do not trust the president. He wants to use a pen and a phone to pass an amnesty bill. To me, he is breaking the law. If he is giving drivers license to undocumented i called them illegals, call them what you want have their children in our hospitals host im going to move on so that we can stick to our topic here, which is the debate in washington over giving the president knew authority to fight isis. We will move on to a democratic caller in virginia. Good morning. Caller first of all, i want to say that im a veteran of the afghan war. Russia and china will have enough of this and stamp out islam altogether. Why say 5 when it is 95 who are terrorists. Host daniel newhauser. Your shake your head. Guest i dont think there is any room for talk like that. This debate is not about stamping out antireligion and to conflate the actions of some jihadist, however many there may be, with an entire religion. It is wrongheaded. Host you heard from the previous caller saying that she wants congress, lawmakers the Defense Department to do everything they can to step out isis. To put she said, put their head in the sand. What are the military expert saying about what needs to be done . What are they telling capitol hill . Guest it is tough. Short of a ground war, which is no appetite for. A lot of you will tell me that you will not be able to completely destroy isis. There are several options bombing, air strikes they only go so far. There is army different farming different sectarian groups around the region to are also fighting isis, but that comes with geopolitical implications and obviously risks. A lot of groups that we arm, it goes back to the 80s and before, they have come back to harm us. Theyre sending troops in an advisory role, we have about 3000 or more on the ground already. There is idea of sending even more than that in. In a larger ground war. None of those on its own seem to be enough. Its a very difficult situation. Host will go to frank from new york. An independent caller. Hi, frank. Caller thing for taking my call. I do watching this for a long time and ive heard both sides of it. Especially recent article that said the ideology going on a Building Radical islamic beliefs, especially in countries like saudi arabia, which is supposed your friend. When you type but ideology taught in the schools, you cannot just target isis as the only entity that is causing all the violence and bloodshed. You have to target the ideology from all these countries that are donating, organ to being, as far as the belief that we are the bad guys. The United States and our culture is the bad guys. Host let me just jump in at this point. Does the latest language from the president , the 2015 aumf, talk about our partners . And having some sort of coalition that goes after guest . It does not adjusted to much. It is very vague. When the white house secretary was asked about it last week, he said it was fuzzy and intentionally so. They were to give the hell a blueprint to start with. A have been clear that they want to work with coalition partners. Egypt is getting involved now and jordan, after this horrific execution of one of their citizens. They said for early on, one of the biggest things they can do is try to instill some stability in the region. They would like to work with the Iraqi Government to setup an inclusive government. To try to like a set but some stability in the region and not allow for a power vacuum like this to must us to size. That would be part of the solution to. Host because of the headings in libya, does that put more pressure on europes get involved . Guest it is possible. The very idea that is brought up about a more inclusive Iraqi Government was one proposed by David Cameron and barack obama in london several months ago. Again, i would have to venture to say that the european government is just as weary as us. Very skeptical about getting into any kind of largescale ground war. It would lend some legitimacy to what we are doing over there for dinner with coalition partners. Host pleasantville, new jersey tony, democratic caller. Caller good morning. Im just calling in reference to the authorization. Why the republicans will not give obama the authorization. Yet, they say that he is muslim. Hes this, hes that. Giving him authorization cause his bluff to see what he will do. Thats what i would do if i were a republican. Call his bluff, give him authorization and see if he will go in their white these people out. They are cutting peoples heads off over there. Common sense to me. You have intelligent people up there on the hill. If you really want to do something, why dont you put his feet to the fire. Guest back when we had this debate in 2013 authorizing military force in syria one republican was quoted in then times as saying, if we authorize this, then we are in it too, if we do not authorize it, and things go wrong, we can say, we told you so. There is a lot of that sent