Our International Partners and all of our partners, information sharing underpins almost everything that we do. Information sharing enables vast networks of partners within our department across the federal interagency within state, local, territorial, tribal, nongovernmental, the private sector to act on their own and in concert with each other and other partners to effectively address challenges. No organization be it federal cabinet department, local police department, nongovernmental organization, a publicsector entity can take on these challenges alone, and so we must work in concert with each other and the sharing of information underpins all of that. The last five and i think its a very good one and we highlight it and report on the review itself is that the aging nature of our infrastructure does cause concern i think nationally about its resilience. And it is why when the president issued the president ial post attracted 21, we evolved our approach, our National Approach that Critical Infrastructure protection, to think about Critical Infrastructure security and resilience. And not only resilience against human caused challenges, but recently and against the range of challenges. You mentioned earthquakes and other types of naturally occurring events, other types of vulnerabilities into thvulnerabe or abilities that come to try to think about how do we better design a security and resilience to our infrastructure as one of the key ways that we will achieve the type of Risk Management to achieve our Homeland Security goal. We will wrap up with the secretary cohn start over here. As you know during the cold war the public didnt have much role in the trends that you mentioned before the looming threat of the kind of technologies into the individual actors acting alone possibly sometime in the future deploying weapons of mass distraction. Have you looked at how to engage the public and what is the public role and it had to be international because its not enough so it goes back to the International Cooperation. Remember to get your nam give and affiliation. I am with the project. Over here. I teach at the catholic university. All of the presentations i didnt see any case about religion, and it certainly extremist fundamentalists will play a big role in this problem as it has developed. Does the department have a particular focus in this area both domestically and internationally . And one more right here. How has the nature changed this . And let me take those in order. Its interesting the statement that in the cold war the public didnt have much of a role in the turns. In a sense about the entire thoe Civil Defense mechanism in which the individuals were taught what to do and what to ask was both for a protective perspective but also to create something of a deterrent effect. And so there were efforts to engage the public in the Civil Defense efforts during the cold war. Today with the distributed nature of threats and challenges, the pervasiveness of Information CommunicationsTechnology Every person has a role about actions that can impact the resilience of the United States and so efforts like that if you see something Say Something campaign that originated in the Transit Administration that has been used by the department of homelandepartment ofhomeland seo a number of different partnerships with jurisdictions around the country are important ways that engage public on specific challenges. But the underlying point is the public must be engaged in all of these activities and one of the key ways that we do that is to share information to provide ways of acting and also to engage in activities like the review. One of the things we wanted to make sure that we did is not conducted a review in a vacuum for a small set of decisionmakers but rather, could we do a review of the strategic environment of the risk environment of challenges and strategies and then make that as public as we can, provided that information to people across the nation so that they can understand the challenges that we face, the opportunities that exist in the strategic environment into the way for individuals to be involved whether that is through organized volunteering, becoming a part of the civic organizations, nongovernmental organizations were in the actions we take each day in the structured process i guess we see something Say Something or just individually on their own and their communities. Theres a widthere is a widef motivations that motivate people to engage in violent acts. Obviously ideology is one of those and it is a focus not just for the department but for the u. S. Government as a whole. One of the things we do note in the review and it is an important finding into something that we want to help we want to learn from and help jurisdictions around the country learned from his there are certain aspects that depend on the ideology but in many ways the acts of Mass Violence present themselves in similar ways and challenges to the Emergency Response organizations and they present similar indicators and stressors so what can we learn from these events of Mass Violence and those motivated by particular ideologies and those that are not motivated by ideology that are motivated by other means or by nothing at all to look for common indicators, common intervention points in common ways we can prepare to most effectively respond. On the last question in terms of the cyber Threat Landscape and i wouldve brought him back to the site or Risk Landscape i think the changes have been dramatic since the last quarter well review into the are going to be traumatic between now and in the next quadrennial review. Going back to the pervasiveness of the Information Technology connecting people, the nature of that has changed remarkably over the last four years and the connection and the use of those technologies will drive the way we conduct our daily lives and we conduct business and we operate our infrastructure has created huge opportunities has led to increased threats and has led to increasing vulnerabilities see another on vulnerabilities that needs to be addressed into the nature of the population and infrastructure have increased consequences both direct consequences and the potential for the cascading consequences. As we continue to move to an tod industrial internet and to an area of things connected to things and machines connected to two machines doing work that will only increase. We continue to be a tough challenge and source of strategically significant risk going forward. I want to congratulate you on getting another quadrennial review out. I know the feeling. And i joked before and often when you finish one of the history reviews people say what are you going to work on now and i know very well all of the challenges that remain hea ahean the execution if it is a daunting challenge for the the department of Homeland Security so we appreciate your time. [applause] excuse the informality. Im going to introduce the Panel Moderator from my chair. We are very fortunate to have the former assistant secretary Paul Stockton who was also a Senior Adviser here at csis. Heres a moderate our panel, paul was the assistant secretary for Homeland Defense and American Security affairs and the department of defense. He also led in part plea in septembeto play inseptember 201y hagel to cochair the dvr to shooting. He began his career with senator Daniel Patrick moynihan which is one of my favorite facts about him into the policy accomplished in all of the government service, but also currently served as the imaging director of phone com llc. Please welcome paul. [applause] thank you for that generous introduction and for hosting this very important events. It is true that as assistant secretary of defense i had the privilege of bringing the dod capabilities to bear in support of the department of Homeland Security and many other occasions. We found sometimes the left hand didnt know what the right hand was doing. It reflected a broad lack of cohesion across every part of the federal government. Thats why the unity of effort and initiative is so vital and its historic, its transformational. Unity of effort is going to enable the department decisionmaking to be much more transparent and much more can he save cohesive on the budgeting and budget execution and the department of Homeland Security. As a vital enterprise and the quadrennial Homeland Security review is going to provide the analytic and strategic foundations thats going to help turn the vision of the unity of effort and initiative into reality. Although secretary john sends unity of effort and initiative is absolutely vital into just what the Department Needs at this moment is also is insufficient. Let me talk about the distinction between the committee of effort and what we really need in the department. If in the disaster response. Governors dont work for the president. How do you think asian together to end the state capabilities and federal capabilities and state guard forces under the command of governors under the command of the president. You do it through the unity of effort. Its what the department of Homeland Security needs today. When the cohesion is lacking and such opportunities for progress on now underway thanks to the leadership of secretary johnson. Ultimately, one person really is in charge of the department of Homeland Security. That is the secretary of the department. And i look forward to the day when the unity of effort has been successfully accomplished and when thanks to the q. H. S. R. Qhsr i look forward to the day and engaging all of you in helping to make this happen. Someday they will be the unity of command in the department of Homeland Security and the secretary of the department will exercise the kind of authority that routinely the secretary of defense an and the secretary of state and the heads of other federal departments routinely exercise. Now let me turn to the introduction of the panel. First, David Berteau its wonderful to see you again. David is a Senior Vice President and vvictor of the csis National Security program on industry and resources. He is also an adjunct professor at Georgetown University and lyndon b. Johnson school of Public Affairs and served in the department of defense under for secretaries. You would think that he would wise up at some point. Anyway, david, its an honor to sit on a panel together with you. Thank you, paul, for that very kind introduction. He gets to serve unde under a lw that secretaries and choose those that run over rapidly in the cycles if you will. I want to look at the three things in my comment this morning. One is how this qhsr is a step or whether it is a step in the right direction in strengthening the departments Risk Assessment and Planning Capabilities if you will in looking at the resources that are aligned with that. I want to compare a little bit to other quadrennia quadrennials because they seem to have a lot of them these days. Since its inception, the department has had challenges that included a lot of what i would refer to as boundary strugglestruggles into pieces ar issues, this is bureaucratic boundaries. Its useful to remember that between a fork in the third of the department of Homeland Security spending is not on Homeland Security that government functions that existed before dhs existed within those entities whe will e moved into the dhs so there is an automatic contingency on the boundary inside itself. In addition roughly a third, sometimes more than a third of the total u. S. Government spending is not on the department of Homeland Security. Theres other agencies across the federal government and finally of course as it has been mentioned both by the secretary large parts of Homeland Security dont belong to the federal government at all. That is the First Responder part of it if you will for getting the real First Responders are in the public who happened to be first on the scene. Each of those were on boundary issues if you will and its in the particular program or support for the resources or funding of the personnel in or out of the hs inside of where it fits. Its even the unity command in the department of Homeland Security is still going to leave you with a host of boundary condition issues for which you have to deal. And i think it has to fit inside of that. We look at the hhs spending and the spending grants i would refer you to report that we released a couple of weeks ago. Somewhere around 40 to 45 of all of the department of Homeland Security spending is on the contract grants of it penetrates into those conditions if you will. So i think this qhsr does a reasonably good job of thinking in spite of those contexts if you will. When the Administration Proposed creating the department of congress of course proposed at first but the administration had a better idea so they put their own proposals on the table and it was compared to the Defense Department, the largest reorganization since the creation of dod. It took 11 years between the National Security act of 1947 and the Defense Department evil thing into the structure that it basically has to date with the forces and military forces in training and equipping and providing the forces. In the Goldwater Nichols act of 1986 was passed and took root so its useful when you are reviewing to keep that kind of a timeframe in mind if you will in terms of assessments. Income pairing this one and the other went to other quadrennial review is coming into there have been five inside of the dod and six if you count the one that wasnt cold the qdr and others are picking up the idea that it is useful to do this. One of the tensions that in place is how much attention do you pay to the funding constraints. The Defense Department policy that the qdr was informed by the budgetary constraints but not constrained by the budgetary numbers and this becomes difficult. One of my favorite quote is a wall street analyst that said i cant read this report referring to the 2014 qhsr. It doesnt have any numbers in it. Im an english major, i used to reading things. If it doesnt connect to the budget, then you have to ask what is the impact if you will. But the important question is not whether the revie review ore report is constrained by the budget. But in fact what is the important the question is how do the budgets and programs and resources take the tradeoffs that are either explicit or implicit inside of the qhsr and reflect those in the budget. And for that i think that we would have to wait until the budget is submitted next february or march. Its whether by design or the result of inertia. They are assembling that the budget and some knittin submittt and the president will submit it. That i would point out by the way is the only one that the secretary johnson in his tenure as the secretary of Homeland Security assuming that it only goes to the end of this administration january 20 at 2,017th, it is the only budget that he will build and defend in the congress an and then actualy gets to execute. Its the only one. If hes there for the full two or three years of the term that is the only budget he will get to do and to end so the timing is perfect and the capability that they provide is a useful input to that so the value is how this will help to shape the tradeoffs in the range priorities in those budgets. And maybe potential even in the fy 15 appropriations in the house thats marked up there in the Homeland Security appropriations bill that senate is marking bears up as well and there will be an agreement that will have an appropriation if you will so it is possible that some of the priority tradeoffs implicit or explicit will be reflected in the 15 budget but the place where the department has to bring to bear is in the 16 budget. I would note that it is not enough guidance. You can read this and it doesnt tell you all you need to do to make those tradeoffs. There will be Additional Guidance required inside in order to reflect that in the budgets. I would also note that one of the things i look for in this and didnt find much of this its testing those priorities and the tradeoffs and all of the risks that were highlighted in the secretarys remarks against the real world through exercises and through what we call in the military wargames although they are not much more of a game. There wasnt much attention to that i would hope a