and we proposed last year -- this is not in the budget of the president. this cannot go beyond the ability to pay for this. you can go to solutions.gop.com. if you pile up the spending of the democrats and you add to their government takeover, the national energy tax and the bailout, is a little wonder that job growth is lagging in this economy? we are not taking the risk, in this climate. and we cannot continue on this task. it is up to the democrats in washington, we will continue to stand on principle.

and we will battle more reckless washington spending. the budget plan will help create jobs, and this will give our children a brighter economic future. thank you. >> this week, the guests will give their perspectives on the ability of the u.s. government to shut down internet vindication in a security attacks. and also the use of the internet in the middle east. >> lieberman, collins, and carper put forward an act to enhance the security and the resiliency of the united states.

this would die when the 111th congress ended. this is the former administrator of the office of management and budget. how would this change will law? >> we have to look at taking a comprehensive approach on trying to update the statutes with the environment that we're in right now. this is dependent on the telecommunications services and activities, and the allied during the federal sector. >> and this would hands with the president can do right now? >> there is a lot of interpretation, this is about the national emergencies.

the president, currently under many of his provisions has the authority to do this under a national emergency. he is clarifying these and green these up to date. this will tell people what to do if there is a state of emergency. and we can clarify this and update this possibility, to recognize how we do these things and what the environment includes. >> so where did this term come from? >> when we start reading this in one particular sector, for the national emergency, and this is all private industry. if you really get into the example of the apartment -- the department of homeland security, they really clarify the role going forward.

they came about from september 11. when you look at this, this clarifies what is happening under the infrastructure. in the national emergency, they can cover this to the infrastructure and can take appropriate actions to disrupt or address what is happening. i believe what people are looking at, and they're calling this the kill switch. if you look at this and you read more details, the president cannot just do this in isolation without taking into consideration the other rules of law that are taken into this. the president really does have the authority, and if you think back to september 11, and what was happening, this affected all

the airplanes going into the united states space. taking that kind of scenario and bring clarity to that, on that kind of infrastructure so people would know what was happening in the case of an emergency. >> this is what was happening in egypt. there were statements issued it talking about the proposed legislation. this is part of what they had to say. they said they would not authorize the president or anyone else to shut down the internet, exercising such broad authority would be over the constitution but the current law gives us issues to be concerned about.

what are some of the ambiguities of the current law? >> from my opinion and working on this in the past, i believe that using these interpretations that were based before the pervasiveness of the internet. you have these -- and the act was passed, there was not a part of homeland security that could deal with the kind of actions that you could take. that is one of the challenges. i do not think that anybody in the united states would endorse legislation that would violate privacy or civil liberties. i think that this legislation -- having to clarify some of these areas, we saw this play

out in the previous administration. they had gone through a lot of the reform, and what constitutes electronic surveillance. you have to bring clarity to that situation. and what we're trying to do is bring clarity to that so people know what will happen. >> they also talked about the legislation. this is a little bit more of what they had to say. that the president can only in both these authorities -- who is able to define the national emergency? >> they go on to say that you have to define this. and they talk about a center that is established at the department of homeland security, and they are very specific about what the director

of homeland security would have in this arena. and we have to put together the meaning of the rules, in conjunction with the secretary of defense, the office of management and budget, and the attorney general, and this would take into consideration the other rules of law that we have. and we would defined what this would be. if you look at the timing of when this came up, what was happening in the world and what is happening now, everyone knows what was happening then. if you remember, there was the denial of service attack, and the infrastructure there. what happened is that this happened, and there was a move that came in from russia.

and we can have these kinds of situations happening, and we have plans in place, should these kinds of actions take place. >> going back to egypt, and the way in which the government shutdown internet traffic, do you understand the concerns that people have about the potential of shutting down the internet? and do you believe that this legislation may be altered in any way? >> i can see where people would be concerned. but you have to look at the country, -- there is no technical way. he did not just turn this off. what would have to happen for something like this to happen here, is that the service providers would have to cut off the service, and given the rule

of law and everything that we have here, i find this incredibly hard to believe. this legislation is attempting to bring to the table -- that they would actually say that they were fine with shutting everything down. the service providers would have the ability to do that, and the government would have asked them to do this. i do show concern that people would see this and say that the president could declare an emergency and take everything off line. but you really have to work through and a fine with this would mean and show what constitutes this emergency. >> the former official of the management and budget office, with the legislative title -- >> i believe that the more

policies that are in place for clarification for the executive branch is easier to implement. i do understand in this particular case, why i am supportive of this. there was not a department of homeland security when many of these things came through. we will ask the department of plant security to do certain things and you must make certain they have the statutory authority to do this. >> that is karen evans, the former minister for the office of management and budget from 2003-2009. we now have to make the car -- timothy whitkarr. what are your thoughts on this legislation? >> i agree in the fundamental

point and say that we have to bring clarity to these issues. this is a new era with the threat of cyber crime, and i agree that we have to have a better understanding of this to bring clarity to the issue. but this bill, as it was written in 2010, does not do this. the way that we interpret this, this is creating an open-ended authority, for the director to take control over a substantial portion of the internet infrastructure. and the language does not permit this kill switch. this does not create the actual kill switch. but the executive branch authority is there to mandate the internet service providers,

to respond to and ordered to shut things down. >> can you give me an example of what you mean by this, and how would you be changing this? >> if you look, there are sections of the bill -- they do not give a clear definition of what is the proper threat, the definition of what the critical infrastructure will be, and this is not well provided. this does not give a clear recourse for the private sector and the internet service providers to appeal. there is far too much authority in the executive branch, without the proper checks and balances. we would expect this in any action that fundamentally threatens the right to free speech.

the internet in the 21st century is the most important engine of free-speech that the people have, and this is not simply a question of grounding airplanes, as was the case in 2001. this is the question of shutting down the most important engine of free speech. i would disagree with this and i would say that the first amendment implications in the bill, i would make certain that in whatever version that is put forward, you have real clarity about protecting the basic civil rights. >> i want to go back to what joseph lieberman and senator carper said.

the legislation would prevent limiting internet traffic -- >> i think that the earlier statement this week was a step forward. i would like to see the specific language in the bill, to be proposed before passing judgment. i think the legislation that was introduced in 2010 the top -- in 2010 does not clarify the legislation. we have to see this in the language of the proposed bill before we're able to take comfort that they are moving in the right direction. on the days that egypt shutdown their internet, speaking on

behalf of the white house, internet access and the like -- the right to social network -- i would like to see the white house make good on this, make good on that pledge and policy to make certain that we do not see the bill that will lack clarity, with the basic rights to connect and to access the internet, which i believe is fundamental. >> do you see yourself supporting legislation along the lines of what has been introduced? >> i am appreciative of their concerns, and the implications. if they are planning to introduce something in congress, we would like to have a look at the bill before passing judgment. >> thank you for being on the

show. protecting cyberspace with the national act of 2010 -- this has been proposed to be reintroduced in the 112 congress. this is online at c-span.org. next, we have a professor at the us states naval academy and we're talking about the internet and the middle east. we are now joined by deborah wheeler, who is the author of this book. "the internet to tyhhe middle east." we are talking about how egypt was able to shuyt down mobile and internet traffic in

previous days? >> my views are not those of the naval academy. shutting down the internet. not only did the government lose $90 million but the protest in all theros grew because bored teenagers without jobs who are computer saavy, so they joined the protests. >> how did they do this? haveny of the country's traffic that is managed, with information -- or the amount of loyal corporate entities.

we have what is happening in egypt, we tell them to stop service. >> and how will they stop the service? there is the kill switch. is there a way to stop traffic at the border. >> this is a matter of removing the trip -- the address from the roster of applicable traffic, and enclosing this down. i am not a specialist on the side of things. i am looking into the social and economic impact of these technical relationships. >> you said that $90 million -- this is government revenue, and those sorts of things. >> commerce and revenue, and other banks have shut down in egypt. the bank of abu dhabi has cut

down several branches. these have now been downgraded. this is an economic crisis for egypt. and there was a form of economic crisis before the protests. >> in a country like egypt, how do most people access the internet? >> in 2000, in those early days, we were getting information technology into the hands of people and training that technology to bring in the foreign director. not for the whole country, but for those who would be a part of the commerce wave. as part of this process, the government had the small centers throughout the country, to try to train people in have to do these jobs. and once this happen, things

were starting to grow, but the fact is that the people -- the government established these numbers, 777. you could just dial into this number, and your internet access would be free. this rose the number of internet users from 250,000 to 3 million people in a matter of four or five months. and this was in egypt alone. >> people are doing this in their homes and internet cafes? >> people have a laptop and home phone. this can be very small with this community of people. but there is the internet cafe on every corner. >> and people access this to the internet. >> the program in egypt said

that a large percentage of the egyptians did their access through a public access. was in 2004. >> in the middle east, what is the percentage of people using the internet? >> i have been trying to do a case study, and the reason is because 80% of the public is going on line. this gives you the address, for the people in that cafe. the people using that address every week. i spend a lot of time with researchers in internet cafes, interviewing the people who are using this and asking them how many hours that they spend online. do you have access at home or at school. the majority of the people were going on line with public

access, for an average 12 hours per week in an internet cafe. this is part of their everyday life. and then you have the mobile phones and twitter. >> what are they accessing? >> we were interested in what they were using this for. 99% of them are using this for their e-mail. 90% are using this for chatting. they are speaking with people locally and in the international community, we are learning to participate in world affairs. this was my first sense that something was up. that these technologies were constructing a kind of culture, a ground for the democratic participation.

we have been doing a survey, we have people who are blogging family activities online have exploded. >> have you found yahoo!. this is and priesthood high-end mobile phone service them m -- this is the high-end mobile phoen service. >> a large percentage said, "tehe state can't hide anymore. a new era is dawning." this was 2009. i say, "show me the money."

where is the change in institutionalized power. i was writing a book, "information without revolution/" ?" i had been working and tuniscia shows there will be politcal change. >> in the middle east, is there censorship? >> i just got back from of dhabi. -- abu dhabi. they have one of the heaviest fire walls in the region. this does not make sense because somebody people have access. what the government will tell you is that people will not allow this in their homes

because they do not want children having access to these things. >> we are talking about pornography? >> pornography and blacklisted materials. >> and they can access the u.s. government sites? >> it they do this. many of the people we serve a read the newspaper, and they have access to news and information. >> how effective was this? i have seen graphs with the traffic -- there was still some traffic going through. >> some people have the mobile units, and access technology in that way. they are using a satellite system or the gps.

>> and egypt was not able to shut this down? >> not completely. what i said it is a shift in the culture. and if you are looking at the technology and the way that people live, and how people interact with the government, and society, this is like learning to eat with a fork, and you are trying to feed yourself. without the internet -- they were disturbing things with the word of mouth. you cannot put that back in the bottle. >> i noticed some statistics, even with the largest population of 60 million people, a very small percentage of people were

on line, and there was a high percentage of people in iran. >> this is a statistic that we do not know what to do with. in 2009, the colombians failed to change the institutional power. >> the internet was shut down? >> there was no complete shutdown. they did not completely shut this down in iran. they had certain sites that were closed, and this was not a complete shutdown. this is a big question that we will ask until we can speak to him directly to find out what happened. >> and what is your conclusion? >> he was worried about the safety of his family.

he was convinced by people in the military that he should leave i do not know what delays the process with mubarak. the economy has come to a screeching halt. they are losing large amounts of money every day. investor confidence is going down and there will not be an immediate return of tourism. we have these kinds of movements in this process. >> in the last couple of days, -- i want to read this article and let you respond to this. facebook is wanting to know if activists should have anonymity on the site. do these become defacto political forces? >> this article is ier