ficyhtex ll youhat energy e il a year. we are easily saving $13 million a year. it is a significant number. >> mr. chamberlain? our experience -- the efficiency issue standard electric single pue ect c35%. standard boiler plant

approximately 80%. forest typical -- typical university producing your own heat and buying electricity, it ers er into a usable forms. there is a huge increase over that 35% -- there is a huge inease in ticy of fuoniosoms of national impact, the better off we are going to be. available energy sources will go further. e nt.% farmland 85% -sang what in your opinion is the biggest barrier to the use of energy savings performance contract in the federal government? >> the first time would say is a different way ofoing

nokeon he an architect or consulting engineer and go through normal construction chains. it uses design build energy performance criteria to justify the project. it is diffent w odo ec oe wve is a educating agencies how this process works. it is one of the things we should push it. shorten the amount of time. we can get a short amount of orouf t ait nd tapl >> how do you think the bill would help? how would the bill help? rk today status quo don't ta cur 47je $0 ll of projects and we know there are roughly a billion dollars of savings.

if it is a priority and to make it as the first method of reducing energy efficicy we now know the ageies have to oat and i ioi to drive innovation. by putting it as a priority we know it will drive the numbers. >> it takes the risk out of it foenans. ey not going to get paid and eat more -- there is risk involved and they are directed to use it as a priority to remove the risk and open the ow. how do you think this can benefit the domestic economy and create jobs? cost >> anything you can do to create efficien parcula ey, mo working capital to

other projects, reduce or increase savings, higher jobs andecrease profitability and increase sales and increase the economy. anything in light oc or anngse tth w only serve to improve reliability to the grid. it will serve to create jobs. >> last week, briefly can you aboronhy iia naer c a ct to our nation's manufacturing process? >> a simple way of saying i look at energy efficiency as i look at safe. ave to lt ula sfti asins and organizations look at safety in the workplace for their employees and factories we have to think in the same white and maintain the

same mentality when it comes to haetf spo f es the american chemistry council. national manufacturers and contractors association. i ask unanimous consent it be entered into the record and i thank the gentleman for his . hankfortang wit ppat >>t conclude today's hearing. thank you very much for your time and your commitment. i do apologize it has been so long but your testimony has been read. we have it in the record and wke spsehisrkg wiou nation's efficiency. the record will remain a open for ten days for additional material. that concludes today' hearing. thyo [iibonat]

>> this morning the center for udexames t cic itnational a at t t les 17,000 people. amnesty international adviser and foreign affairs analyst. live coverage begins at 10:30 eastern on c-span. >> this weekenn oktv in ihedo a crof r fts nuclear weapons facility from full body burden. kristin iverson looks at the effect on the environment and the people saturday at 7:00 eastern and sunday on afterwards

peter collr onheifof mcgovern with a magnolia accent and she saw the dominoes start to fall during this time. by 1979 she was a full-fledged opposition to carter andt speenand particularly crucial in this respect in 1979 she saw the fall of the shock and nicaragua and larating experiencesor her and people likeer. theitmae andar d sunday night at:00 and marine sniper and author ojar head on life since leaving the military. hotels, hospitals and jails. all parts of booktvhis weeke oxout radio historic supreme court

oral arguments focusing on election issues. >> throughout the brief they referred to as as normay independent and ofesonally n idwhowo inm w tse arlor f sinwe were affected. and because we are effective hour speech ought to be choked off. >>aturday from 1985 the federal election commissio naalseivti aniowagt d.c. on 90.1 f m nationwide on channel 119 and online at c-span radio.org. >> senate homeland sury committee h hang yedatancuty department. dhs was created as aabinet agency in 1982 with responsibility of corporate protecting u.s. borders, emergency response and counterterrorism.

foerouse i rmn, inspector general richard skinner and admiral fat alan --thad allen discuss emerging national security sie] ts. >> good morning. the hearing is convened. thank you all for being here. particularly thanks to the tnesses we will introduce in a mome eangs the committee is holding on the past, present and

future of homeland security and our country coincident with the tenth anniversary of the adtionf thhond ricter of 2002 after 9/11, but also senator columns has been gons has been g support my desire look back at ellen security and to look forward and anticipate some of the -- to discuss the unfinished business and anticipate how we cane evvithat iop toree ordch will be of help to this committee and its new leadership next year. we have very good hearing yesterday with a panel describinghe ehomend

setyt wll focus on the department itself, how it has done over the ten years--almost ten years now and what it should be doing in the yeas ahead. e ranmsaj f ohomend homeland security agencies. the dertment of state, defense, health and human services along with the key intelligence ancies of pot sn prtll play oume security and state and local partners as well as the private sector and as we discussed yesterday the american people themselveall have athnt ofelsety ide be lities but demef la security. was intended to be not only the center point but the

coordinating point of the agencieshat re bro wiac a lot e of other agencies over federal, state and local governments that had the responsibility and some opportunity to contribute to ou hond k ulay at the department has come an awful long way in its first decade. but this is a mission that in a sense has no final destination point. it has to ntueetng ethe evolving threats and weighs that there were some things that happened not as good as we wanted but as i go back to ten years ago, the vision that ngress h forhe dartm ofd curi

crd asha department that would be more than the sum of its rts, a department that would integrate key homeland securit functions pantt d help ss insure as we said over and over again after 9/11 that we would never again feel -- connect the dots so that we would prent th nexro thpantasad tremendous strides forward in good ten years since the passage of the homeland security act in achieving some of these broad goals we have talked about and that we had in mi t years ag aehie us on bseclaimed credit for 9/11, the attacks against america and its affiliates, have not carried out a successful attack.

certainly not one awhere near th castr -sie lyour offensive forces led by the u.s. military and intelligence communitiesbut also to the tremenus work of homeland security dertment has de. mea a thhaenigfint have a screening system now with points of entry into the u.s. that has integrated information from the intelligence community and otrs and itasec v rsino eer country. our aviation screening system is vastly improved from what we had before 9/11 we also now have much more argn teiathotinformaon rn bittatend local governments.

that is in large measure to the leadership of dhs and its support for state and local fusion centers. in a different aec of th ibieurnaon arss response efforts led by fema have improved significantly in the seven years since hurricane how inaduate theap wfema was at point and their response every national disaster sins than has been positi. evtsta we should not forget thein the occasional griping from people who don't like to take their gnoms airports.ough

let me mention ears more to be done and most of these have to do with the administration of the department. with pce iyouwill. department's operational components are still not adequately integrated with its headquarters and each other. the department of homeland security hasork force more out challenges as reflected in the derahucal suey done the e d erhe art he near the extent needed.

department of homeland security struggles with setting requirements and effectively carrying them out for major quioog sonnsurg th e department of homeland security is not unique among federal agencies in this problem, but this is the hovhtpoile helped create ga has not been adequate. in the years ahead the department in a different way will nee to take actions to anticipate and respond to e olng homeland secitreatininntng increase its improving capabilities with respect to cybersecurity in response to btas onurcotr

grr leis rtnt of homeland security along with every other federal agency plans to do this in a period of flat or declining budgets. in a budget environme like the one we are in today the natural ens fus prvi ain current capabilities but the risk of doing only that is we will be underinvesting in system an n ttsmoow meet the evolving tsonca of the department of homeland security will need to be as agile as our enemies. that may mean the department noraditional areas of responsibility. if they seem was relevant to the

threat andless relevant to d st iprms tet hon new threats. congresswoman harman, admiral allen and mr. skinner are prepared with experience and capability to contribute to our discussion and build ehe kif r cmiee will build to hand over to leadership in the next system. i can't thank you enough for being with us this morning and look forward to your testimony. senator colns. thyo ea ohe department of homeland security brought together 22 fferent agencies into a single department that focuselike a laser o teg crynd its

citizens. yesterday as the chairman indicated we explored the emerging surity threats our nation is likely to confront. ategisbettk.nt l today we will examine whether dhs is well positioned to address these emerging threats as wel as other longer standing e gihrlaap at home and abroad requires the department to be nimble and imaginative, effective and soed wh rge lities notft the aomen of dhs can take pride in the absence of a successful large-scale attack on our country during the past

decade and in the departnt rionong roerst plots. there have been successes and failures over the last ten years. information sharing has improved but remains very much a work in gr d be a clearing house for intelligence. although incidents like a failed underwear bomber make clear the rfformation sharing isn nuusli and classified counterterrorism successes since 9/11 demonstrate information sharing has indeed improved. this is also true withesct tooronriet

dhs and the private-sector and any central partner in the protection of our country since 85% of our critical infrastructure is pritely-owned. e intwf st a lousns also presents opportunities not only for the improved dissemination of information but also for the collection and analysis of intelligence at the local level. w disssed y vehersav achieve their full value. they have yet to truly become successful aggregate ears and anale local threat informion in my dh agency most familiar to the public has strengthened airline passenger risk analysis but it still troubles many

americans to see scrners putting the veryoung man elyountve and in most cases unnecessary at downs. tsa is making progress toward implemting more intelligence focused risk-based reening througsuchffor as ree ks myhaen remain for tsa. dhs has bolstered the security of our borrs and identification documents yet fugees aociaith edra we en kentucky last year when a bombmaker whose fingerprints we have had for some time is ae to enterur c o s aunrsnt to say

that work remains as dhs's of assessment stage. in order to meet and overcome current anfuture threats and th11ustpo i coenen w stronger management. since 2003 the g a o has designated the department as high risk. nantndone so because of the lls ren large undertaking. what people often don't realize is the hh risk that this nation refers not just to being at risk for waste, fraund failure and the consequences of being on the high risk list are serious indeed. dhs must implement changes that deme i lr udthe day when the

on s ghk list. the role of the department's components have evolved over time. if as a positive example, the adaptability and can do attide heua i don't believe there's another agency within dhs that has done a better job of adapting to the missn in t/1wod.nd expanding this was never more clear than after hurricane katrin as this committee noted in its report the coast guard demonstrated strength, flexibility and dedication to rfanorthfwaas ofhe 60,000 survivors stranded by this terrible storm.

many experts have edicted a disaster in the cyberrealm that would compare to katra. coedteea a t cyberthreat has grown exponentially. clearly this requires the department's mission to secure critical sysms controlling criticalnfrastctsu clpor ys ectric grid the leader in our financial system. a goal we hope to accomplish through the enactment of legislation that chairman lieberman and i have champied dee ftdhs has made conderable strides it ha a long wayo go. rt icindhahe

changes are needed and prioritize our limited resources, we must learn from the department's past mistake and be ab to better measure what has worked and what ht. o so requires metrics and accountability in the area where the department has been challeng. i very much appreate that we have such outstanding expert here with us today hp n uag deme progress and its future direction. >> thank you, senator collins. our first witness is congresswomene haan romarnd mel have three -- the gang of 4. the big 4. much better.

the final four. wh afegis inside conversation we were privileged to constitute a bipartisan bicameral leadership on the adoption of the 9/11 slatn whct department of homeland security and really i got to know her well greatly and admire her and even like her. akeitrids to w. c tssde of the woodrow wilson center. her tenure in the house include a service share of the house committee on homeland security subcomttee on intelligce inrmatn shin d anngem of ent

house permanence select committee on intelligence. i am delighted you could make it and we welcome your testimony now. >> thank you, mr. chairman and ranking mberolli and iendfor the portuny joouo o capitol hill to testify on a topic i am passionate about which is the security of our homeland. i am honored to be testifying with admiral allen ws re innised thavr hands-on experience with this topic than i do. our collaborati which you just lie s biips over many years i ib wee odig going during my nine terms in the house and legislative efforts yielded

significant results and many special times. we ove years meie ioi a hearty band of legislators who fought a homand security function who thought it made sense in the aftermath of 9/11 but we had in mind something less ambitious routes envision the cross agency joined -- similar to the concept we were able tonact into law dere ig fr but i would point out that two of the big four happen to be female so we did 90% of the work which is why the bill ss. >> wtoe hi pee tomn th room laughed at that.

>> i thought senator car for lahed. >> the feminine side of the coming through. i thougashe >> back to the homeland bill, i remember once the white house proposal had been announced we all decided to embrace it because that would ensur estiup.

would acquire scientific a technological skills, mostly from the private sector is the iq to secure the homelad. allearned if we didn't know before that merging government functions is difficult into threats against us are evolving. and so e our eemies. so it is important we take this look today that you av ged. suceheavson at i would call pickups and significant growing pains.

it's serving up first department to run into prblems. but my bottom line is that to fix those problems should no are th hi ga clofwhat works and what doesn't. here are some of the functions that execute well la year as you said, mr. chairman, customs and border protection stop more than 3100 boaift ls from boarding u. oran was able to process more than 15 million travelers at 15 preclearance locations in the same year. that's like taking needles from a haysta. tsa now fully implement seure igthprm ceell en oigs , inobon for the u.s. against government terror watch list. by using real-time, threat-based intelligence in addition to multiple layers is working

e dearentxad hf u soinay th tzef states, cities, transit systems, federal buildings, et cetera. local residents are the first line of defense against terror pls in this country, becse they know what looks suspicious in their neihborhoods. that w t fn ere p. str codofson center helped identify an attempted bombing suspect. and fusion centers un the country work together to share tips and leads necessary to arre an convict faisal shahzad, the 2010 times sqre mb the disbt oe terrific. finally, the office of infrastructure protection conducted more than 1900 security surveys, 2500 vulnerability assessments on the nation's most significant critical infstructure to identify potentialgps. t cenar ift i t o e im here so i will rush through them. first, the intel fution has never fully developed.

part of the reason is that president bush, 43, said of the terrorist threat integration center, which is now the national counterterrist erside of the department of homeland security. so a significant portion of its jurisdiction moved out. intelligence ports, many of those entities consider what dhs ovow ioescuti csaw enforcement still reports that state fusion centers provide better information. the new d strategic plan for fiscal years 12-16 aid that intelligence is an area needing enem wi d ifyu >> excuse me for a second. if you want to take a few extra minutes, you should go ahead and do that. >> thank you. one of the enhancements necessary, in my view, israel reports that are actually uful to loc laworntd w h oietin

ennges tt assessment and coordinating group, the itacg, which i understand may suffer some funding problems, and want to thank you, mr. chairman, just as a citizen out there f igh ta wyfn ay b the homeland mission is so large that the department must assess where it can be most effective and what it can't. for example, i believe that dhs will never be the lder in preventing cyberattacks. thmission that you and your legislation such as, and i think it is absolutely crucial that the legislation congress enacts include parts that protect criticalinfrastrucre. so iuppo oui erh coer and i hope that congress will move forward on legislation promptly. third, i think that ongress has

inispoeveyiantp hailo ga its committee structure and homeland jurisdiction here, but more significant in the house is anemic. the department still has to report to more than 80 coittees andsbommte to sif a oatno ou and the one recommendation, the 9/11 commission that remains basically i'm implemented is the recommdation to we rganize congss wt arthe es rtie t,lehe department should be praised for overhauling its privacy and civil liberties office, which i know you care about, it shouldn't stop there. you and i all urged ti hoeoihebep h vers b w i

mandated in the 2004 law. in the bush administration that board barely function but i think that would be fair. aninthis administration lly all the meers have beennin. come we don't have that function yet. second, dhs should do much more to reduce auto classification of intelligence. your committee worked for a year to help pass the reducing bury litehhaedoionct of2010, emit d insoe high priority. and, finally, the secretary must continue to be the face of homeland security. janet napolitano happens to be an old friend of mine, nd before she took office i suggested that she be te trd smg crusader.rgs and, frankly, this reminds me of a kind of silly thing. once there was a color-coded system for homeland security

warnings. i remember the deparent saying th wwereig rle lloa e him and i commented that the homeland secretary shouldn't be an interior designer, that prompted a hilarious call from tm ridge, but the point of this is the are se melandunctns tt ou n fth bnr the respected voice to one the rest of us of the threats we face and to prepares. in conclusion, as you said, mr. chairman, no major attack on u.s. sl has occurred since 9/11. dhs desvomalcredit, buso ds mi th ran of what i would call policy wonks and grandparents, like me, who work outside of congress, and just this week, i think has happened already, the ri'sorerlireal ay

5000. can we all applaud you? [applause] and next month you will taste detiotk.i strongly doubt that yw rules will diminish ur passion, and mine remains as strong as eve. i really salute you, dear friends. thank you, m chairmanor the rty es. >>nk mfour itngv the day cal ripken broke the previous record, and it was onef many occasions where my wife is befuddled by my behavior because as ripken circled tfed ceg adio h owbe t cry. she didn't understand that, but i'm going to ty to control my tears today. you know, jeanne, you said

something that just nto draw atntioto. prmstfisw dhs has. you cited some statistics that i didn't cite about border security and counterterrorism prevention, an almost noody in the country knowthisut people ought ohvea e ofde, eywhthey tn a plane. last year cbp, customs and border protection, stop more than 3100 individuals from foren airports for nationaft at serityas. tht of 15 million travelers, 15 preclearance locations that they clear. so it's a very ophisticated data systems and implentatn heemmaeh ppbu eaeae a re of the. thank you very much for your very thoughtful testimony. next, admiral thad allen,

retired. as we allme te raee espse to hurrane katrina, in the deepwater horizon oil spil, and in both really distinguish himself. in katrina he was the singular source of reassurance to the re wna wasptady effectively coordinating response efforts in aid to te people who suffered, which really was a grat moment for ou country. adra alenil congresswoman harman suggested you might be undercover as a result of your facial hair, but i know better that you are now the senior vice president at bo allen hamilton incorporated. anksery ch f bei w ushisng.

>> mr. chairman, ranking member collins, members of the committe i am taught to be here. this morni i really mean it. t ab aheer s? >> and it's an honor to be here with jane harman, richard skinner, my colleagues. she's been a tremendous leader in the past, and richard i worked very closely the at 10 ars thevoono the perspective i'm trng to bring this morning, mr. chairman, is one of somebody that is kind of work this problem from the inide out, from the onset. i was the land command on 9/11 when we close boston harbor yoh.r the plac -- we close n eendo cenf by putting people off of lower manhattan and we close the potomac river north of the woodrow wilson bridge.

marked a sea change for the coast guard and how we addre that, into the fall of 201 and e wierf 200 a abho ogrga e types of functions and increased security for the united states. i consulted with the commandant, james loy, and for some kind of feeling to be some kin of an liisun02 a sthalao hill proposing the creation of a new department. i know you're right and no of all that include a robust discussion on work rules. i want to sell a context for my hat he eod.oanounting someo ers itpve is bill passed by the first anniversary of 9/11. that did not happen for a lot of reasons and you are familiar that. when the bill fally passed the president was in position with the bill had to beigned right away. noer02 sigd on th 5th

ere deartment be established in 60 days, and then by one march the components move over. so that means from the time the bill went on until the department wasreated was basicallabout a year. from the meof theenament wali othmot we were all astounded when government operates at light speed, but when you do that faster kind like the elements of deliberate planning and analysis oalternatives on how you want to do ito actually exece the legiation ec. veker e th conditions under which the department reform are some of the issues we've had to deal with. the legislation was passed between sessions of congress. there was no ability for the senate to be in paneled and confirmed. riwaon a dab was required to become the secretary. we move people over it already been confirmed because what to do that. it tooup to your to get some of the other senr leaders

confirmed that we're in the middle of a fiscal year, no apopriio wamvovr,smo the new entities we had to basically reprogram funds pick it was a fairly chaotic time to try and and up the organic organization of the department and put togeher a headqut as elemac ha, e tiha ti exists. because of that, what happned wawherth miat22 cicy priasue legacy internal support structure, different shared services and different mission support structures in the departments where they came from. and because of the a lot of the resources associated with how you runt compentsr e coenanil t toalk out things like human

resource management, i.t., property management and so forth, the blocking and tackling of how you have to run and agency in government. over the pt 10ears there'v demeo to tcoattemp in he rbem e mo noteworthy are consolidation of financial management systems and ability to create a core accounting system. the other one would be atempts to create a stndardized h.r. system for perl across the department. thesare blemic in myvi ofhe iul encounter when you try to do these things when they're not preplanned and thought that. when the legislation went to the hill they establish a transiti planning officunder an thah't te order. e 'taybtomk handoff and that caused duplicate work or i won't dwell on the path but when i talk to folks about how department was when i think we need to understand that figure for difficult time and we still carry the legacy of that moving

rwd. that sd, awe ok f i arcontgrreto nst chnges to way we think about department missions. i don't think we can look at them as a collection of components with individual authorities and jurisdictions. we have to be more systems to i k th'she cenfminrwar bee yoatou tati th you need to have a discussion and that we can talk abouthe mission support function which is not matured where it needs to be. if i cold give a couple ampl. there's en a lot ot b reorsertti bos n anggour bos. we really think about our borders are not a model, a line drawn in the land but it is a combination from some of which have physical and geographical dimension, some of which are bandof aurity lie t n chenom itl ou t mif emi ad. we also do many of our sovereign

border functions through analysis of data that facilitates tre and is targeting to understand based on mathis and so forth wther or not there's a that coming into the country i thik aswe ve oar eduntthe ake ectht enronmt outher and look at the consolidated authorities and jurisdictions of the department and was not that is a match. we've had the first quadrennial homeland security review. that basically vaidated the buet porits wstshhee nitiam i20, which focus on terrorism, the border, disasters and so forth. i think after 10 years we need to probably take a look at the weather not without the legislation right to begin with to some of the conforming leslatn t thle authitth o vr auitof jurisdictions of the cmponents that have not significantly changed since the department was created in aggregate produce the right legislative base for the department to met these emerging threats aa lok to

fu. tot e t ec sr. that was my council when i was, don't of the coast guard. i know the department is working on that but think we need to take a look at things like the cyberthreat, thefact that resiliencyinvovesoy tu dteut he ennmwiheld -cintu vironment. take a new strategic view on how we approach the missions of the department of homeland security. securi. i see my time is a. i thank you for having me this morning. i would be happy to take any questions you may have for e. >>nk.centtrpl ch kn, lc ac m t's ysbeen a pleasure for you to testify before the committee. richard skinner served as inspector general of the department of homeland security from 2005-2011, and w e foheart,m partnt's inception in 2003 to his confirmation as ig in

2005. and then both of those capacities, mr. skinner was enormoly hpful to ths ovghspbies c taya an independent consultant, and we welcome him. >> thank you. [inaudible] it igood to be back, good to see a through and again. mes t cmmttcolns a toy ono hr i man, i was excited about the opportunity to testify today, and especially honored to be with such a distinguished panel here. i have worked with admiral alan igedmoheyrn ih adane dprent that i've always admired and respected, and i condemn them for service at the coast guard and all he's done for the coast guard. when we talk about homeland security, in its failings or its this, our border security,

our transportation security, our intelligence capabilities. and what i think is often threpog of,iste funti hihe sees so does become and that is the management support functions,particularly financial management, acquisition management, i.t. management and grants management. thonutelaforons wih which the department's programs must operate and are critical for successful accomplishment for the department's mission. some of these challenges that were inherite ta l n un s w to up. the management support function were, in fact, shortchanged. we bught over all the operational aspects of 20

different agencies but we did not bring the managementsupport opiosth asr weve ggouveotf aol ever since but now it's continue to you think we would have made more progress than we should have, and then, and we hve. there's a varetyof reasons for th. a loof iis call f t t bdetisend cbt the department is not what it should be as far as maintaining an effective management support operation, support its real mission in protecting, prteing r me. ncmames od exame. this has been a problem since we stood up in 2003. in 2011, the department has made some progrs. i mean, for the vey first time were able toetquie inoniranshet ed o aant

ne i nkfr somewhere from 18 the true weaknesses to five. that's significant, significant accomplishment. bee re cnug invest in taking our financial management systems, the next up for work. and if we don't do that and if we don't invest in the building an itegrated financial system, it's unlikely that e prog 'vhi oths thros ll n continue. the department in 2011 decided to change its strategy for financial management, or if financial system modernization progra rather than iplement a twan failed, now they're taking a more disciplined and i think a very wise approach to

hor,auf ooze its fnn e 20 budget, you will see that these initiatives have been curtailed. and as a result of their been put on hld idfinily. i o eawa epenllums rnioraeg is a clear whether this new decentralized approach will ensure that the components financial management systems can generate reliable useful and imecis t irtion tomae mi resources. secondly, with regards to i.t. modernizations, dhs and its components are still stggling to this day tougde or anonoresedt. frucoalyand enterprisewide. there has been progress.

i remember when we first stood up back in 2003 we had come we di't even know how many i.t. systems we have. took us 12 months just to do an inetory weoundwt er 0. ote archaic, outdated, and actually useless. within two new -- within two years, i think we reduce our systems down to 700. and it's beenreduce ev fuher. thas enrgsbte teine emd ornd capabilities to form a single infrastructure for effective communications i think some of it up on the early today as how important it is that we can communicate on it eal-time sttos res ofeforti artms es challenges. program and field offices continue to develop i.t. systems inpendently of the cio. and they have been slow to adopt the agency standard information

i.t. devepment approach. as a resulyste areot information technology capability of agency personnel, and its external partners need to carry out critical operations in a time efficient and effectivmanner. r example, just earlier this week bve omo theoag pohaeit niron eng. within cpp does not fully support cd peace missions. according to the ig report, interoperability and functionality of thetechnology sci tpporth bs not ben ioctier as result, cbp employees often feel that great workarounds or import alternatives solutions which could hinder cbp's abily of congress to mission. agen ifruurth s ic o upt david i.t. strategic plans to guide

investment decisions and a stove pipesystem development have and continue to impede the department efforts to modernize and integratits i.t. sys. acitmame a l t wreun you 2003, we inherited such a large organization with close to 40 billion-dollar budget, but we have a skeleton staff. we're spending about 40% of our budget at thttim r, ry mexlanto t we had a skeleton staff to provide oversight to manage those context and, of course, those a lot of things went south on us. as we know by sbinet, theta, rg,cardat pamhi s e corrected. but the department has recognized this, and over the years, and while i was the ig i like to oinout tha t

cry,re olit and deputy secretary blue both showed a genuine commitment to improve the department's acquisition management function and has been workingvery hard to do that but however much work remai to fulylnt ese chngttly department needs to identify and acquire the resources needed to implement and, in fact, position policy. the complexity of the department's mission will continue to demand rapid pursuit of major investment progms, alk demeilnt t lyvin t personnel to accomplish its multifaceted mission and will continue to improve or pursue high-risk complex acquisition programs. to effectively manage these complex and large dollar procurements. thdepameil new a sustained commitment to improving its acquisition function, increased resources to

manage the complex contracts and engaging marter processes to admister and oversee the fiy,i anthin on grants management because this is something that we've been billions of dollars on your income europe. i believe to date since the departments stan up in -2 fhastte over $18 billion through the homeland security grant program. however, according to an oig report that began was just released this past monday, fema still does not have a system in pl tderm txt th hancu rn ndhathat capability, prevent, deter, respond to and recover from a terrorist attacks, jor disaers and other emergencies. according to the ig, and the rert was released earlier this we, fmadse

pren eg ge, rm measures and oversight. many of the states can demonsate what progress they have made, what improvements have actually occurred as a result of these grant programs. fema or thepant me sitnn nse we ar y l of spending billions and billions of dolls over the years. that needs to change. i thk that the depatment has dvlafro icd t inat coe. ou bona fide management system it is impossible to determine whether our annual investment our actual improving our nation's homeland security posture. furthermore, without a clear sarfensloce the tools necessary to make informed funding decisions. in today's economic climate, it is critical that fema concentrate its limited resources on those threats tht

se the greatest risk to our countrytdy. i vdntthtmt oragt wewa t cen are attempting to fix them. and have actually made some headway. the question is, however, does the department has resolve and wherewithal to sustain these ets.thbl othpme o bee e early stage of the development that initiatives are in, but also because of the government budget constraints and the current lack of resources to implement planned in's envienoctions. buct,ew chl will be to sustain the progress already made and at the same time continue to make the necessary improvements. unless the department and congress stay focused on these challenges, it will be harder anr ite lus trthhe pantit emnt

functions and ultimately to ensure the success of homeland security. that is my statement. i will be happy to ed to any questions you may have. >> thanks, mr. skinner. vey cto arvrlfad westwi a seven minute round of questions for each senator. it's striking,of course and not surprising i supse that each of you in different ways has focused ontufhewok, e ciesth nantras he department. there is a natural tendency as one of you said o focus on operations, and operations have go pretty well but unless the management functions are carried opio tepen ougoto suffer. and i thought you were both, admiral allen and mr. skinner, were helpful, and congresswan harman, and remind u f

circumcewhth pantosewhwe e ieot bse the sins of threat but remain very much in the air after 9/11, but also just because time it took uto gett gng. sa tthis was the most significant change in our national security apparatus agency since the end of the second word war. chs heigeer with the /1 veuilywe i so, let me give you a chance just to give a quick answer on what you think, as this committee and the department go forward, what arethe most rttng ime memfunctions of the department?

in other words, isn't money? is a personnel? isn't for some reason a lack of will to focus on management? what needs tobdn. . neo wao start first? >> its a variety of issues. i think that are holding us back. of course, one of them is resource issue, bu the resources, i mean, there's a lot we cou have done a lot better job with resources wer give opuns ae s wen' t advantage of them, and we more or less were spinning our wheels, particularly in areas of financial management. but it's also a cultural issue. the department and its compones need to oe ge,adalize that we need, for the good of the department and the good of the country and for the good of the nation, that they've been entrusted to perform, that wog ergegoing to havetosa

ey g tveie om of their turf, so to speak, and work in a more collaborative, cooperative, integrated fashion. and i think that's o of the big things that is really holding everyone back. of ms.oitgrlaevt no one wants to -- everyone agrees at the highest level it needs to be done, but when it gets down into the grassroots that it will affect my operation, there iswere we start seeing pushback and the tendency, i don't want to give upyo ti. e overcome that. >> andot surprising, we watched that happened over the decades really in the integration of the department of defense, for instance. that what you're saying is a lot of the component agenes, 22, mayball the ti ined mc of an independent management structure, including something

as critical as i.t.? >> yes. and the cao when we talk bout, and i've issued reports think i have testied pviously on istne t g the authority to ensure mpliance and that people are entering into the department weul legislatively? >> that's i think something that the department needs to do internally. >> internally. >> so i thin admiralalen stat ieimonth on ,oo, bottom up, or three, release feasible would become external driven and through legislatio but unless they do something, because now we are 10 years l rena.

ria 'sw, and so unless we start doing something to ensure that we're going to be moving in a righ direction so we can support our operations, then maybe external forces w aalent ri u t bseyo prepared remarks you focus on the need for improved unity effort and operational coordination within the department. there's no question that was a youllk bit about what you think, if anything, we in congress should be doing to promote or facilitate those oti cinn n the years ahead? ut t's been several attempts to establish a robust plan an education passionate execution system on behalf of

the secretary. one of the prolems is it was kind of a come as you are epenndotle atte -- stadium facilities where there at the a lot of command centers, fusion centers around town that are independent of the department. fema a national response thers a mmancnet i't osgo a joint structure like we have in a military that is far too organized for the rest of the government to handle, quite frankly. but you great unity of effort you have at a minimum wage of you planning and coordinated anvehahe eartm the promise, not only in the department but as you sitin your opening remarkso basically kind of help get that process across the federal government. at thapoint comes down to o reenvemalkut toeate a, intelligence

picture, but all this needs to come together in a fuse operations center where all the agencies are represented to create the kind of energy of effort. and there was intent tomake a thwaaaye t of 2008, but i think that needs to move forward and it's going to require the components to have to participate in that to put some skin in the game if you will, to people out there who are working prb unofefocraethk >> i appreciate the answer. congresswoman harman, my time is running out what you want to add anything? >> yes. i think the key is sustained leadership b thescrynd euty crety. by ntoarticulate what the focus of the department is, and presumably congress should support that articulation or

participate in making it, but th department can do everything equally el thunnssolbstt o narrowed, including the intel function. i think there's a huge role to collect information from all the agencies inside the department and use that information together but i don't think the intel function at homeland needs to competeith thci etih inencartt able to do what they do, and that's part of the other structural to set up, joint command over 16 agencies, the homeland function in a more targeted way i think would be dog a much more effective way. >> could. thank you. spin if i could add a comment to her statement. i think the strengt between the depament director of national intelligence has ben an ing dicuion r fiedomc llceagt ti s n n the deny to great

that link and i think of something that needs to be put in place. >> but it would be in the dni. it wouldn't be in homeand. it would be a coordinating nction. >> and again, at's possible to do witut statutoaty t stay >> thank you. senator collins. >> thank you, mr. chairman. congresswoman harman, you've got extensive experience no just on the homeland security comittee and the house, but on h an o untinued your interest in homeland and national security at the wilson center. our committee over the past decade has hd a variety of polevlbiesh tryto ihigt c has, and how we should respond to them. in your testimony you pointed out that dhs has evolved, and so have our nmes

one of h remhti beeve dhs has is the going out what is the greatest threat and what resources should be dect, my going to the threts. cargo container coming into ou seaports? is it an act of bioterrorism? is it cargo security? is it homegrown erri h th g dofro, youti m add your is it a cyberattack? if you were secretary of the department, what would be your priority? demechfosobelie t be? >> that's a very hard question,

and my first answer is it shouldt just be the department's responsibility. it's a governmentwide responsibility. have coordinated our of oe ctfagncieun t t your question has to come from there, dhs has a role but not an exclusive role. noin the prevention busess, is rtaiy ebr mufond the consequence management business. so i think we have to keep in mind that our enemies, at least in this era of terror, are attacking us asymmetrically. ly are okng owaes meg 'sre focusing on three things, they will attack us in the fourth area. so i don't thi that's a great idea. i think we just have to keep at you and keep looking. certainly ar the tp or at the top of my list now, andi "wngpoha aleg

tcyber risks. and there are these new gizmos to integrate everybody's information, and that just makes cherargets out of all of us, so this article says, ad that tu belve it. hond eatm iou giiopasses, should beef up its intelligence and prevention and consequence management cpability. there is one. i think lone wolves are the growing threat,pole th n orho adizn inet meg y or on, on, when i was in the house, and still care about. i think the bigger attacks are harder to pull off because we have been quite effective, and we've also decimated, at le ee utdo miha been using ingredients inside our country. it's not always a border

question. so for example, something i've always worried about some of the raion matci sps,chld pred made into dirty bombs. we have to keep agile, and understand how the people are coming at us. why described make gains made by the department as fragile. and i think that's a good cautionary note to us. when i thinkack over the past decade ohe, ca me o m head with numerous examples of failures in procurements. the fbi net program, the tougher missionsat s, hom

patsn thwake of hurricane katrina which approach a billion dollars in your office did so much work on. i.t. projects throughout the department and the departments haal.quen hs re,t d ed about some of those management failures and the importance of having a robust acquisition stat but another important safeguard is having an efeive ig. efivtc who brought to light a lot of those problems. right now the department is without in ig just enacting ig. cod yoarewtuwh alsyui the administration and this committee should be looking for in a new inspector general? and if you could also describe

for us the scope of the office. ima,ya,i o a u eame this is the office of the ig one of the biggest in the federal government? >> yesterday's. i think it's probably somewhere between third or fourth or fifth largt ignd fedal rn. y i t exig is someone that's going to require extensive executive experience with a demonstrated leadership skills. this is not a place for aini, a ad aly estrat leadership abilities, and preferably someone that would have some type of background or appreciation for audits and investigations and inspections at c ovthlaip a isfoe office.

just like the department was multi-missions, the ig within itself, although just -- does have multi-miions with regards to policy evaluations,ith ol days, act in the '50s and '60s when,hate to say, when i entered the government, was strictly financial, but now we've learned tt you have to beble to recadoti pe that are common in doing policy violations, people that have engineeri backgrounds, people that have public administration backgrounds. anfiiananth uit t idval who leads this organization should have demonstrated a management skills, and should have i think

thyor.ire executive experie >> thanks, senator collins rick senator carper. >> again let me just reiterate our thanks to each of you for, not just being with today but a anr yo wilngss ts as we ntin to rveonryn fe ws. i just want to follow up if i could briefly on points that senator collins was making. we wh i call executive branch is a swiscse fr mirati to mira. gngset tr. re he anto this administration. we have gaping holes in major leadership roles because we couldn't agree on, or because of administratio couldn't agree on a nome. theyout hr t naress,nw n up with big problems, and a

number of departments but one of ose is the acquisitionside. in the budget mr. risch ande saw. we saw it again and this administration. when you seemjens ad t $400 million, $400 billion not have to 18 months, agency and te top watchdog position and the department of defense issues i think unthinkable. but i wantto ome back to poont oc l arolns wa rf admirably. i don't know that the mr. shea is going to come back to us as a this is who we think ought to be the person or the right ind of pers to ll tsl oyu h--ctainly make sese. but this is got to be a priority and i know it's something you care a lot about. and it's something we just need to work together with the adminiration to make sure we

t itone. weit serof those deals election. we had a fair amount of discussion. these are good hearings to integrate into the i think it's unfortunate more of our colleagues argue but i just want to thank you, thank you for providing these for us and for daao four or five panelists, there's a fair amount of focus on cybersecurity and looking o do on cybersecurity but what we're looking for was common ground. john mccain siting to yft chan o u naru collins, to try to see if the pen couldn't give us some ideas of what we could do to find 80% orthe subject of which we agree on and do that. this year not was more time. so ireally would like tak tiotlyor mr. skinner but also for congresswoman harman and admiral allen, interns when you take

different approaches between the two major bills are in the senate, bipartisan bill and the wo owhr inndh trh gis omdve on how to meld these together in ways that make sense and get that done this year. >> well, bring back the big four. that would be my first answer. t,ortei k uphis debate that we keep having about the role of government. i think the argument that the better bill sponsors make is that infraructure hato ei th biif eeteg r atai rcafruc wen otng country. i'm there. i think that's right. i don't think it's a republican or demratic argument. i think it is a proper role of government to provide fothe common defense. it in th osittion.

'so t a y a iltk. i e'rng o provide for the common defense we have to protect our critical infrastructure. so i start there. i suppose if i were doing it i would find any possible way keep that in theill, then theyouldegotteth r ufho foio sd. owta'sone of the issues that some of the outside groups are concerned about is violation of privacy. but, of course, again if we had a privacy and civil liberties board that was functioning that could help us, or hel the gernmtdve apritip h r , but with no cyber bill as keith alexander has said, just recently our country is extremely vulnerable, and those of us have been briefed in classifiedettings on both ofnsive and esier dend ali f this tool now. and just one final point. 10 years ago, or whatever, all

the time ago wn we're setting up his department of defense any of us was talng about tis but whwh cilexdifi a cenlers r i k we were in sort of some sort of prehistoric age, that is, about my age. and as this thread evolves we have to evolve. andtiia rqi i in or tan pant d is overdue that some strong legislation should pass. >> thankyou. admiraallen, help us out spent i think representative harman said right off the bat. th is esti wi lyert,t'e o onm. we always had this question. under the same questions that were raised when the nuclear industry came about, and much of the priate industry be oing, which the vernnt b di a oeofh sa ob ahageloi

port city rebecca nalepa. we used the agency one port you have seen one port. if you've seen one sector you've seen one secto there's a different during prtterets.d the markets tocear and other cases there's not a market-driven reason to do that and is probably a valid role for government. i think what would probably need to do is understand whether the standards, the performance are trying to aceve to the securitynfrastructur nd eaecou to different outcome in each one but least there's a standard way to think about it and move ahead. in some cases where there's not a market solution, there's inevitably a role for government it is visiblefogvernment ere'alre sad rt igatie datanb aatr of execution and proper oversight regarding private citizen and personal information. we need a bill. i can't urge you more strongly to get a bill out this year.

exactly where that line is on the role of th goenm fm e gg ti qu sov assets covered in your bill, or information sharing or industry led organizations, i think of something that needs to be worked in the congress as a bill moves through but i think it goes necessary. it's a valid rol fo the gornme if e vrents ath han weulil ws adene.og we've seen to datehas not been as significant as we think that we should move to pass a bill. >> that's very helpful. there's some convergence your, the views we just hea an also th anlha re nostause for currency but just, it strengthens my belief that we've got to move. mr. chairmani don't kn if you'reeeping a buca list of ingsout toheff fohe oeya, eawethin t

on that, the house of representatives connues to delay, delay, delay. we passed very good bipartisan legislation, not erfect. ano e that's one certainly want to get done. senator collins does and i may not be back next year. you never know. but i hope to have a chance to serve with her and my cleagues foa lo. eer o tiju y i cyber. it's crying out to get them. my hope is will to do. if i cou, just one concluding thought. a lot of times at a hearing like this, focus on the stuff we ga l a integration on the high list for waste and fraud and so forth but a lot of it, a lot of it like thousand, mae tens of thousands of people in this country that are still

alive,uhrmedm li ey a ie, oai and so forth because of the protections that were put in place to no small part because of work has been done by the department that you all stood up and at 10 years ago. i think that's important to keep mind. the other ing, like some of u,rt cinouyi cossn anid what works, if you make sure that we're spending our taxpayer money as cost effectively as again. we are looking at this cliff the end of the ear. we have to fiureowtor venu, hoto snd mey on tosgehi for me, the creation of cfo said all federal agencies have to have, have to be ableto have auditable financials but and lo and bhold as secretary thouybatstea annued wa hle real leadership. that's i think you can't manage

what you can't measure, and i think we are making progress. so there's some very good work that has been done in the last 10 yrs we needotosetota. carper.sor i will just respond to question. i do have a bucket list, and as a matter of fact, try to engage, i think i've engage senator kyl at least the formatio of a bucke list caucus, and iill elu th he ott ser is working veryhard now with senator whitehouse in a bipartisan effort to reach a meaningful compromise on the cybersecurity built. but the priorities for the committee i thinkinclude cybersurityad ol. thale eskn it'tsatoo much, just reflecting on your historic statements about the need to have a cybersecurity bill adopted this year, it's noteworthy that hs

rtel s t whf ranvion qstion here in congress. among those who have had responsibility for our national and homelan security across the last two adminisations, bush is rllnatyo minatio t w go a bill, and i think i'm not stretching to say that they support a bill like thenehat came out of our committee, so it's not just ople in the current administration and the prident, but secrery bee cagadl allen, and stewart baker. so i hope that will have an impact helping us get over 60 votes in the senate. ..

>> as somebody be isn oueroure d e of you, what was the primary rationale or reason for establishing the department? i wanto go down the list. and if a previous answer is your answer, you can tellme the secondne,ut alwantou awl tthas

on llrth you, congresswoman harman, and by the way, for the record, i want to say imiled when you said 90 percent of the work was done by the women on the fab four,o -- [laughter] >> i appreciatth reerme vly ere l h 9nd was then a very senior member on the house intelligence committee walking to the dome of the capitol which most people think was the targ of theintended rgf fthplh so n evacuation plan here. we, unfortunately, closed these builngs. huge mistake. reopened them later in the day, but nonetheless, it wasser terrifying which is the point of a terror attack. limad oure, i feltnd i tnk government organization was completely inadequate to the new set of threats, and we needed something different.

we h missed clues, obviousl two of the hijackers were living inlaig sgond f 'tlkhe internally and, of course, didn't talk to the cia, or we ght have been able to find them and unravel the plot. so the goal was to somehow find beer way to put government asenedmysty,he ny uouthwa mpwa dis t we embraced what president bush proposed because we knew he would support that, and we would get something done. >> okay. admiralllen? >> senator, the concept of a th wdisifsurityncy pte r iheix administration regarding border control, so the concept itself is not novel. as a former commandant of the coast ard and somebody who has worked with these agencies for nearly 40 a years before ben coara,ps grnus h

ver been better. fema is a better organization because they are in a department with the coast guard, and i testified to that after hurricane katrina. i think, d i was also asked by wae ngut lngne twh dot, at the time i said we got our appropriations on time. i'm not sure anybody can say that anymore. [laughter] there was an all-out bureaucratic war between the coast guardnd ct andit s . d n hnnyre, and while there are overlaps and things to talk about how we can coordinate and create unity of effort, some of the bureaucratic struggles that i saw throughout my career have gone away. >> how manyages? t fi thyo talng ouateral inou t original border security, that's been a discussion that's gone on for years, sometimes -- >> but of th 22, how many of those? >> i think originally talking about immigratn, customs,

coast d. the orgazatis ha ic pnc ti nd smar borders. but it's been discussed for quite a while. >> okay. mr. skinner? >> i agree with admiral allen, as a matter of fact, i thin cledou s gotillhat was itas brought out and dusted off, and i think that started the ball rolling for getting the bill that we now have through the congress so paris. so fast. quite frankly, i thk the whole concept was ve uty fortto bri tgethhe eruon within government so that they can work better together to not only protect or prevent another terrorist attack, b alsoo depilendn aby span ve a terrorist attack should

one occur. so it brought together these different elements that would sit under one roof, one leadership with one common prt ed,ov a is to peven mitigate against natural -- terrorist attack, but also natural disasters. here's my concern. yo know, my bias having been part of a small company that got bought by a larger conglomerate thh mngceged, i'go faalral understand that. but i also understand when you go into the larger organization, so much of your effort is directed toward, basically, feeding the beast. you know, trying to do all thes inatgs we're trng wi d est uen, wat something that's simply too big to manage? we've got a department now that's 200,000 people, it's got $6.5 billion worth of overhead, and should we be taking a look at maybe splitting out some of

the, shod ma dge mehntfe s,e look at -- i guess i thought it was kind of breaking down the silos, information sharing, maybe take thatack to the national intelligence level for that sharing. is there a more intelligent way of potentially taking a look at th, have wread -- ese energ bureaucracies to start with, and now we've made it larger, and have we made it less effective? >> well, on the front end, i think we bit off too much. but made a tactical litil cisi thangloit si'spoae es est to get something to happen. there have been huge growing pains. it's been ten years and still some fctions aren't done well. yes, i would recomme narrowin wodin-wniunions but view -- rearranging the deck chairs again because i think

that is an extremely painful exercise, and this one is finally becoming a cohese orza. sounnst ti gr w bgo sustained leadership in the next administration would be excellent. but i think it's come a long way, and it really has served the function by and large of protecting our country along with oversight ofongress. if i had to pi aneato orzehts te ulng. i think this committee should have a lot more jurisdiction than it does, and that's true on the house side too. >> okay, thank you. >> sir, i thinkit's hardo disaggregate the condis deriche drt w ed tueou t t, sanan of control and so fort. we're going to have to get over the first part. it's been ten years. the country expects the department igoing to start functioning better, and i think that's mandate for depament thths a lrs

gemti h that hasn't been exhausted, and i would support representative harman's comments. i think we have an opportuny as we move to a continuity of the current administration to have a leadership management agenda that is fosed the dertme, th taf blng tint and i think until we have done that, we haven't exhausted the potential for the department >> senator, i'd like to add i agree whole hearted by with congresswoman harma this inot a time rrrange th dir thea oe rtry han security, you have to understand the environment in which it was created. it was a very emotional environment. this country was very, very upset with what happened many 9/11 and what happened in new york, the ptago andls envani veve quickly at a historic pace, and it wasn't -- we weren't given the opportunity t

think it through so that we can prepe ourselv. we saw thi at tsahen ood scer ico time and as a result we had to go back and redo a lot of that. but that environment which we stood up created a lot of our problems. when we didn't think it all the way throh,e d not,or sut tiwh we stood up. we brought in all the operations without the support. the management support to back these operations. >> ok. let me just close with entering article that i ieresng tith ie sw w w ca sta gas talking about when he came in, secretary rumsfeld said there were 17 layersetween his command decision and implementationf the military, w thpant red-

layers. because when it was originally stood up, the department had the opportunity, the secretary had the opportunity and the president with congressional approval to reorganize, which they did. and theye actually roved rs i k ayer t paully in a management support arena. the progress that we've made to date, i think, is substantial. i don't think the department does a very good j of rkg itsf. thggth i theng waytoo. pant f it success right now is the budget constraints, the ability to sustain what they've already started and the ability to make the improvements they need to move forward and to address evolving threats. ok. thksot. ank y mir th wrely constructive exchange. senator akaka, welcome. senator akaka's another member of our retiring class who is

characteristicallynvolved in a ve conructe wa o arhe csety bill and the postal reform bill. thank you for that, senator akaka, and it's your turn f questioning. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. and also iha stor in or on this committee and for holding this hearing to examine what has happened here to dhs and also to re t c improveo efficiency and delivery of services this department for our country. so i want tthank youery much for this oportity, and i so e e time to thank

the federal workers. as you know, i've always been concerned about our hman pi a here it is, one of those situations where our federal workers have responded, and i thank them for their response, call service s emh, . soer are -- september 11th, 2001. so here we are now examining what has happened and how we can improve it. i'd like to ask congresswoman harman, yrttsty te ives he dhs privacy office and urgent need to stand up to privacy and civil liberties oversight board.

i strongly agree. ou krichn advances in the past decade allowed dhs to obtain and use americans' personal information n ws syst you is what are the key privacy challenges that dhs will face in the future? and is e department rlly eqpporehe >>l,nk at question, senate akaka. and by the way, life outside of congress is quite sweet, i want to assure you and senator liebern that i'm really okay. [laughter] and enjong mlife. ts watched carefully as

the department developed, and i have seen progress and good effort i the pracyotecon ea whot mral general matter is the absence of peoplenside the executive branch as policy is formulated there, as regulations are developed or new actionsare contemplated oay wt th a , tre more things to think about it. because as i've often said, in fact, ben franklin said it fit -- i'm sure better than sety lty n a - yothet mor of both or less of both. you have to factor them both in on the front end. if you think of them as a zero sum game and we have threats against us, we're going to basically shred our constition. an u anaivtno that

punts then after we're attacked we're definitely going to shred our constitution. bad idea. my basicoint is we need advocates all over, in the right rooms,t e righti ashe setya,pl ats is doing inside of dhs is pretty good, although i have seen some problems. they relate to what information is collected, h long it can stay there, who hceo , ustuik t t n, i think that -- and i think the others here, maybe skinner morehan any of us, can answer whether the systems are working. but i saw a couple things there thas eteafble toopne of, but it was going to task satellites.

basically, our defense satellites to accomish certain homeland security missions over thentintal itedtate anharieec i 'tnk elre ec eh. and what ended up happening was it was called the national applications office, the nao. that office, i thin was discontinued which i thought was a very good outcome. >> thank youcossn an national journal poll released infortion that almost two-thirds of respondents said that ventnd siesouotll to share cybersecurity information because it would hurt privacy d civil liberties. you also note in your testimo that the needote

on rmn e en ayb attack. will you, please, discuss the importance of including robust privy and civiliberes safeardsnny cybersecurity legislation considered on the senate floor? >> i think it's very important. what the final version of the legiation shld look at, should look le i n'tno th security and liberty are not a zero sum game. and we have to think about how to protect information as we so aloges by either business interests that are stealing information or government interests that pose a, i think, a grave threat to

all the dot.mil t dovnd et.sp these are serious tools. the point of cybersecurity legislation, obviously, is to protect o personal information, but also our government secrets. so that is point of the legislation. but indidualshou tbe shdaatnsstoistion be shared. so it's complicated. i just have to look at the specific language, but i think the bill authored by senator lieberman and senator collins is keur tradihild otou cca astu. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thanks very much, senator akaka. if the witnesses have time, i have just one more rhine - o lof qio l dre

focused on, and it builds on yesterday's question when we discussed with the experts an interestin in some ways unsettling range of potential future heland security threats. inted ou w sentsf the current capabilities within dhs to assess and identify future threats and the obviously, to take actions to addressthem d is not adequate, what we might do about it. i want to go down the line. admiral allen, as you well know, the coast gud has an internal futures planning initiave lledrojeveend d yo a tt ho gh relate, if it does, to dhs overall. congresswoman harman, do you want to begin that? is there within d the

capability to accurately or adeqte arenyyntat facing threats and respond? >> i think i'm least qualified on this panel to answer that because i haven't been in the operating mechanism of the departme. bewet's unen, wld inoea tt understood than others, and as i mentioned in my answer to senator collins, there is -- if we give a pat answer to that sow ad , thenhe bad guyil an d tt. we have to be ever agile and reassessing that all the time. but i don't think most of the planning mechanisms are that good. the ones i'veeen that i like the best have to do with rpla ad aiort security an authored legislation,

senator collins and i, on port security which involve -- and, obvious, admiral allen knows all about that. but pushing borders out and layers of protection. ani thk that oork budoknowo er it threat across the whole range -- >> good enough. admiral? >> yes, sir. to answer your first question, um, about ten years ago the -- about 12 year ago t coast ard itiated a ojll lvijed tro strategically into our future using an alternative scenario planning which is a planning method of the royal dutch shell company mutt in about 20 years ago leadingonsultative method to try to figure outhatou ouo lar toma, geo senior leaders together, you look at the trends out there, and you develop alternative worlds you might see, and then you reduce that to the four or five highest risk or

te-seamal,nd ty a you compare what they all said, and if you have five different worlds, of the ten strategies, three or four of them the same, you know those are r bows, apply to a variety of treats, something you ouldry t lk calindomnc the coast guard is on its third or fourth iteration. our goal was to regenerate it about every four years. it's been extremely helpf to us. when i became chief of staff of gr ornce with what we thought was going to happen when we didn't know the events in new york were going to occur. the three we didn't do would have helped us had we done them. and my response is from that old manamentook,hat woulu weugt vt id siul. regarding the large larger question, what i saidn my

written testimony and i'll try and summarize it succinctly here, you can't stand at a port of entry andview homeland secuty and sayhat ist i ld li er hent or in dublin and say what shld i do regarding airline passengers. i think we need to understand we have both a physical and a virtual dimension of our border a lot of -- where we need to carry out sovereign sponbilies d fo seof ann, aiand, sea and actually a space domain, and they're all surrounded by cyber. and through those domains we have flows of things we need to be concerned about, we need to inrrupt the supply chain of ouement and the things tha flow thughhos dnsre op, c, eys, it's also weather, germs, electrons and money. and i think what we need to start understanding is notwithstanding the components and their individual authoriti and jurisdictions as i alluded to earlier, at the departmental level in planning and policy a

operioplng th dns a e environment? what are peacing through them, what represents the threats in those domains, and you can almostook at a portfolio, you can start making trade-offs based on risks of where you ne reoy mimfo,cclg hehtening, you know, threat levels in advance of a national security event and so forth. it requires, in my view, a step back and view the homeland security sewer prize radically diffent than thejuriictis of tepos. t yor gis ot hi about. mr. skinner, do you have a reaction to the question? >> it would be hard to add to -- >> that was a pretty good answer. >> it certainly was. [laughter] as the i i do recall doing some reviews th depament, partul ia . 'rwaoo emerging threats because they knew if theyutt down one -- shut down one lane, they would

find be other avenues to smuggle contraband orllegaltems onto airplanes or through our pect twelw fm s p oktow to -- what are they going to do next now that we've identified this technique? as far as strategic planning and strategic assessments of what our threats are, i'm notware of thatcin wn thoe n tit is not occurring. finally, i'd just like to make the point that we ta about evolving threats. this is not just a dhs responsibility. thiss aovernment-wide responsibility, and we have to rely heavily, i mean, within th deme wsinn tsvent d in rallen put it very well, it's -- the intellence that we gner, the dealing with what's going through our systems or what's haening inside that cyber circle exat sg he the

dhs responsibility, sole responsibility, i think it would be misleading or a big mistake just to focus on dhs. >> yeah, i agree. i just want to come back and ask wehr wthasouqstion,dmilal ar suou were looking at a lot of factors that might not to the immediate observer seem like they were relevant to the coast guard function. in other wor, it see to me ho- i dopathe this you'd s o worldwide demographic trends or, of course, with regard to natural disasters environmental or teorological trends. but the thing about the terrorism threat, what's happening out in the wor tt th thsul o 's hnin the technological world that may be convert today a weapon against us -- converted as a weapon against us as, you know, planes

and cyberspace have been? >> tt's what we try to do sir. ar emend drivetto p is abati w financial markets drive to the point where it starts to question the value of nation states. the otr one is a pandemic that, basically, goes global and redefines sociopolitical undaries and implications anat d y yndhat. inureaders in and try and understand which of those are most consequential or impactful or provide the greatest risk. and you can talk about it from an agency standpoint. there was aroject where the ste department tri to do abtear a-- iagis ea - it never really got the traction inside the government. it's a useful project. it requires some investment in time, it requires some championship at the leadership level, but it also alloyou to len about some junior with a thth aeahi

ooming process. there are current admirals of the coast guard that i first met as lieutenants in these work groups talking about what they thought might happen i a port after a weapon of mass destruction. you're able to see these people being very, veryhofu a url ow tng ei en lrm ul just add one thing? yes, ma'am. >> as we think about these big, huge threats, catastrophic threats,t's still important to drill down on the smaller threats, and senator collins mentioned the uerwe br nto dat n-- a bomb that was external to his body. now the worr is that the trade craft has evolved so that there n be internal bombs much like mules carry dgs,anle rrugatlleve s ureton systems. and at that level i think we need very sharp focus because i think that things of that kind are going to continu