decisions on the best way to decide our networks and infrastructure to be secure. in a general way, how would you -- i don't want to put you on the spot -- i guess it is hard for you to say in this environment with all of the different ideas and the different agencies involved, but is there a particular area you think is essential for us to agree on as we move forward in trying to determine how we get to the goal of securing our ever structure? >> let me start by indicating how i perceive the allocation of responsibilities in the cyber arena. on one the one hand, you have the protection of the infrastructure. protection of.gov. that falls to the department of homeland security. on the other hand you have the -- not just a possibility, but the actuality of foreign countries seeking to extract information, and with a possibility down the road of cyber attacks. that clause would be intelligence community overseas and the cia and the like. in the middle comes domestic intrusions and determination whether the mystic intrusion is from criminal and organized crime groups. or a teenage hacker. we have 56 field offices around the country. fifty-six cyber squads. the first indication of other intrusion will come to us as it is our responsibly to determine who was behind the computer. and to stop them. too often the discussion is how we protect against foreign countries, but part of that has to be disrupting these individuals and putting them behind bars. the legislation that is currently pending is important to us is so important today as when what's you point she went on disability experience and expertise in the and the private sector. this is where it is different from addressing terrorism because the private sector has to play a substantial role. private sector rather critical infrastructure and how you execute that come whether through the statute or not is really up to others. my concern is the sharing of information whether we can determine who is really responsible for this and let them out. and perhaps, the third area is necessity of building up the expertise and the federal government amongst all of the agents. and they have reached to the private side you're not only building of the expertise, but also the outreach to the private businesses so that we become partners in ways that we have not in any other criminal arena. >> well, you have really highlighted an area that makes this whole intelligence, security holding, and accused come a terrorist without charges being filed. we are not dealing with an enemy that is a nationstate. like we have in the past. so if you pick up a purse and that was in the german army or in the intelligence arm of the german government, you would know in world war ii the u.s. side to hold that person in the military sense. but when it is organizations, like al qaeda and others that have attacked our country, but yet are not -- they are not under the rules of -- of war as we expected. the geneva conventions don't accept them. it makes it very difficult to deal with any kind of the intelligence areas when you're dealing the enemy of our country, but not a nationstate. so that is something that we are going to have to deal with and i think -- i mean, i hope a realistic way because i am a senator graham on this. i think we need guantánamo bay. i think we need the ability to old people that are suspected terrorists, that have associations with al qaeda and other networks that deal with al qaeda. and i don't want us to give up our capability to protect our country from another attack from one of these entities that may not even be in an organization yet. but i know you're wrestling with it. we are to. we are, too. i will come down on the side of protecting our people with an asymmetric war. that is what we are given to deal with them that got to do it in a way that protects america. thank you. >> thank you very much, director mueller. colleagues, abstract your mueller has said, 60% of the fbi request is in the area of national security. many of these are real defensive issues that the fbi has engaged in a many to make sure we get our resources right while we are working on a very complex policy. therefore, this is why we will move to a closed session. if there are no further questions you may submit further questions for the record. we request the fbi's response in the usual 30 days. the subcommittee will temporarily recess then reconvene in a closed session in room 217 at the visitor center. before i close this public part. i look at the director to know us is said to the attorney general, on issues related to public integrity and the issues related to the stevenson under, this is a bipartisan set of requests because we feel that both the justice department, those involved in enforcing the law, if we are going to pursue public integrity issues, which we must and should, that then those who are pursuing it have to have the highest public integrity themselves. we know the fbi high standards. you've insisted on that standard and we thank you. but just know that it is not just for men because they are republican and stevens is on this committee. it is larger than that. so we look forward to working with you and we look forward to meeting and the other room we can go into the national security budget in more detail. the committees temperately recessed until he reconvene. next week we'll also take the hearing -- the testimony secretary bryson of commerce. shall we proceed? [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> they would wear garments made of hudson cloth and the cloth would be much more rock textured, much less find them the kinds of good that they could enforce or great britain but by wearing this caught, women were visibly and physically displaying their political sentiments. >> now, a senate hearing on normalizing trade relations with russia. the committee is looking at the cold war era restriction with the soviet union to the ability of and other religious minorities to immigrate freely. supporter takes full advantage of russia's growing economy by increasing exports to the country. this is about an hour 45 minute. >> catherine the great ones that , there is nothing so difficult as to escape from that which is essentially agreeable. russia joined the world trade organization presents a lucrative opportunity to the united states economy is an american jobs. we can all agree on that. we cannot escape this opportunity. russia's largest economy outside the wg out. it is the sixth largest economy in the world. to allow american businesses, workers families and ranches to the represents congress must act. we must pass permanent normal trade relations or access the growing russian markets. u.s. exports to russia have rejected to double within five years. if congress doesn't pass they would join a debate show anyways and they lose out to their chinese competitors. these competitors will expand their experts at our expense. they benefit american workers and businesses that requires them to give up nothing in return. am i to free trade agreement the u.s. will not further open it to russia or other terrorists to trade less. it's a one-way street. rush on the other hand will lower its tariffs to u.s. exports. u.s. service providers looking access to communications, banking and other key markets. u.s. meat producers will secure greater access to the russian market including a generous u.s. beef quota of 60,000 empty tons. in the united states will get new tools to hold bush accountable to its obligation. these include a legal person and transparency measures. but in order for u.s. businesses and workers to benefit from russia's joining the wto, congress must pass and repeal the checks jackson-vanik amendments. the jackson-vanik communist countries unless the president determines the countries permits free and unrestricted immigration assistance. congress originally passed a law in response to soviet unions immigration restrictions, particular with respect to the jewish insistence. jackson-vanik help the services and help jewish and is now a relic of the past. every president regardless of political party has waived such as requirements for russia for the past 20 years. when i went to russia last month i met with russian and american business leaders, including don pollett here with us today. i also attack this working to improve democracy, human rights and corruption in the country and i met with leaders of the jewish community. the message from all the this is clear. the united states should repeal jackson-vanik and pass russia ptnr. earlier this week leading russian democracy and human rights activists were two letters calling on congress to repeal jackson-vanik. i'm entering both letters into the record as part of the statement. one letter from the today's states that the day after the jackson-vanik amendment quote only hinders the interaction of the economy and the people of the two countries at war since the human rights situation in russia, and quote. repealing jackson-vanik weakens the ability of the hardliners of russia to relic anti-american forces. the act do this on the other letter explained that jackson-vanik is a very useful anti-american propaganda tool and they state it provides a tool that helps to depict the united states is hostile to russia using outdated cold war tools to undermine russia's international competitiveness, and quote. repealing jackson-vanik takes away this tool and opens russia to u.s. competition, to ideas and transparency. these that this so-called raise serious questions about russia's human rights and democracy record. i share these questions. but like the activist, i believe that ptnr should not be in question. we owe it to american businesses, ranchers and farmers working to decrease export to the growing russian market. we ought to u.s. workers whose jobs depend on this export and we owe it to the russian activists who are asking for our help in their fight for democracy. so let us embrace this opportunity for economy and for american jobs. in the spirit, let us move forward with that which we can all agree. let us work together to pass rush a ptnr. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think that i understand the message this hearing is intended to convey. american businesses want access to russian markets and we should repeal the jackson-vanik and grant without delay it's a slamdunk. but it isn't a slam dunk. let's stipulate that american businesses, farmers and ranchers should be able to sell products to russia and free trade is important and beneficial to the united states. we still need to determine whether america is getting a good deal to russia's wto accession of other more should be done to protect their interests. for example, russia has never ratified the bilateral investment treaty that the senate ratified years ago. that treaty would prevent russia from expropriating businesses and admittedly big problem in russia. this is a very basic economic rate that isn't being protected. in addition, one of our witnesses will discuss bush's failure to remit loyalties, which is also not strictly covered by the tvt agreements. and i submit the administration is missing the point on the repeal of jackson-vanik, which is freedom of emigration. we'll immigration may longer be an issue, russia's blatant disregard for human rights and the rule of what is every bit as relevant today as it was decades ago. human rights cannot be divorced from the discussion of our economic relationship with russia, particular since some of the most egregious cases of abuse and all citizens exercising their economic and commercial rate. and consider the case of surrogate magnets p., vienna where he was imprisoned, tortured and died in prison because he sought to expose economic corruption at the highest levels of russian government. several of us have joined senator cardin in cosponsoring legislation to send a clear message to those who commit gross violations of human rights committee will not have the privilege of visiting or accessing financial network of the united states. and mr. chairman would like to submit for the record at the push to my statement two letters -- one letter to "the new york times" editor and op-ed in "the wall street journal," march 15 by garry kasparov on this issue. when the u.s. a master of russia, michael mcfaul suggests that there is no association between a country perspective for individual liberties and it business environment, he simply denying reality. when two parties enter into a contract, is essential both parties operate in good faith. there is scant evidence the russian state operates in good faith. as a troubling pattern of intimidation and disregard for the human lot, fraudulent elections coming human rights abuses in government sanctioned anti-americanism. contrary to the administration's assertion, russia is moving further away from international norms and values. in recent months, moscow has on the block u.n. security council action in syria, but continue to sell arms to assess regime responsible for the slaughter is innocent citizens. this is not a government can be trusted or commitments or get a fair shake to american businesses. looking only at the wto context, russia has not lived up to the commitments authority made on intellectual property rights, for example as a condition joining debbie t. o. resch remains of u.s. trade representative special 301 priority watch list for ip violations. what makes us think it was about to its commitments after being allowed to join the pto? yes we should have access to a wto dispute settlement process if we grant russia pnt are, but what has that gotten us in our trade relationship with china? 12 years ago, congress repealed jackson-vanik and if a ptnr and how did that work out? while compliance with debbie see how commitments, the most recent report is 127 pages long, filled with problems. the u.s. has used the formal dispute settlement process to address these issues only in a handful of cases. one case has remained open since 2007. even in the rare cases that we get justice, it is not speedy justice. despite all the structures of the wto china gets away with it. this is what we get from china which ranked 75th among all countries on transparency international corruption sandbags, what can we expect from russia, which ranks abysmal 143rd on the scene last? china was not granted subtree without delay he takes on a couple pages of legislated tax to repeal jackson-vanik, but it has six subtitles to the u.s.-china relationship. given the current problems at the trade relationship with china, it probably wasn't enough. it's simply unreasonable to believe that ptnr can have a thorough examination of abuse. so we should have free trade coming as russia should be part of the community. the question is whether the proposed agreement and repeal of jackson-vanik gets a spare. i hope this is not our last hearing on the subject. >> thank you, senator very much. first we have mr. samuel allen, chairman and ceo of the dear company. i must tell you is ready now as an aggression on go in a visited one of your plants they are of the assembly operations just outside of moscow is very impressed with the people and the products that you are to russians and helping russian agriculture and i very much appreciate that opportunity. next we have mr. braun pollett. i was in moscow not long ago. mr. pollett is president and ceo of ge russia/cis. next mr. watty taylor. he is one of our guys from montana. he is a president of montana stat growth association, second-generation family rancher friend kirby, montana. thank you free much for coming to join us. next we have mr. paul williams, president and chairman of the board of the american society of composers, authors and publishers. thank you very much, mr. williams. senator hatch senses special regards. he could not be here but wanted to tell you how much he appreciates working with you at various matters and it's meant a lot to him and he deeply regrets he could not be here. >> i appreciate it. it's been very kind. >> and finally, mr. alan larson, transparency and u.s.a. i must tell you mr. larson enjoyed many with the director transparency of national russia in moscow last month. very, very impressive, intelligent lady and very compelling same story to tell why she's back in russia and didn't stay over in brussels. the thank you and didn't stay over in brussels. the thank you. the usual practices ensure brussels. the thank you. the usual practices ensure you are where i'll speak about five minutes then urge you to be very direct, forthcoming, candid. mr. allen, you are first. >> thank you and the chairman baucus, senator kyl come in to see which members of the committee. chairman and ceo deere & company on behalf of john deere in the business roundtable, thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony from establishing trade relations with russia to john deere and the u.s. business community. granting ptnr is crucial for manufacturers, service providers and agricultural producers to receive the full benefits of russia's wpo session. it is essential to enable us to compete on a level playing field for russian customers. the reasons are clear. first, ptnr launcher he was trimmer for customers doing business in russia. it is a concrete sample. russia has committed upon a session to significantly reduce the tariffs on imported agricultural equipment from 15% to 5%. however, it is likely that russia would not extend the lower terror for its two us-made products until it is stranded ptnr. companies like john deere would be a competitive disadvantage relative to foreign competitors and would have no recourse to the wto should it arise. this would negatively affect our u.s. operations because many of the products we sell and russia utilize components closely connected to jobs in our facilities and the american midwest. second, ptnr will strengthen commercial ties between the two countries. jackson-vanik will a subject u.s.-russia trade to the wto adjudication process and also will promote transparency and certainty through wto rules, ranging from service regulations to agricultural standards to intellectual property rights. third, granting jackson-vanik will directly -- jackson-vanik ptnr will maintain and create good jobs here in the united states. russia's large and growing economy coupled with ptnr presents significant opportunities for u.s. companies to serve customers across many such errors. russia's already one of the worlds largest markets with nearly $2 trillion economy and a rapidly growing, well educated middle class. john deere has had a presence in russia for over 100 years. this has greatly expanded in recent years with investments into factories including their newest facility just outside moscow, which chairman baucus did recently visited. these facilities use components produced and exported from john deere facilities in iowa, illinois, north dakota and other states to produce agriculture, forestry and construction equipment for the russian market. this activity directly affects jobs in factories supported by almost 2000 suppliers located in 45 states. in fact, we recently announced $70 million investment into waterloo, iowa facility to expand for large tractors for which russia is a living export market. we are also exporting deere business values and standards. our russian operations apply the same high standards for compliance, integrity, safety for workers and customers, and environmental stewardship that we have in our facility here in the united states and around the world. our interest and investment reflect the enormous potential for the russian economy in the segments which are significant for business. russia can become a nature creation for the growing demand for food and forestry product is a global po