commencement speeches on c-span. and search more than 800 past speechs from world leaders on line at the peabody award winning library. it's washington your way. >> >> on monday, the space shuttle endeavor lifted up. it was the last shuttle launch in the 30-year program. frank culbertson testified before a senate commerce subcommittee on the future of space flight and the funding of nasa. his last mission was in 2001 at the international space station aboard the space shuttle endeavor. the hearing was chaired by bill nelson, former astronaut. this hearing is two hours.

>> engines now throttling down as endeavor passes through the area of massive --

>> 50 years ago, we celebrated >> just a few weeks ago, we celebrated the 50th anniversary of human spaceflight. the bold statement to go to the moon within the decade, and that was within nine years, and that was announced just three weeks later. i remember when years ago i was a young congressman, i was still on the floor of the house and salamiaker, tip o'neill, and motioned me over to sit down with him. -- saw me and motioned me over

to sit down with him. he knew might participation in the space program and says, billy, let me tell you, he said, one of the times i was a young congressman from boston and i was down at the white house, and he said, and i had never seen president kennedy so nervous. he said, he was just pacing back and forth like a cat on a hot tin roof. i called over some of his white house aides and said, what is wrong with the president? and they explain to tip that we were getting ready to launch alan shepard on a redstone rocket. the soviets had surprised us three weeks earlier, or weeks earlier, by putting someone in orbit.

and here we are on a rocket that did not have enough to throw weight to get that mercury capsule up to some of orbit. and the whole prestige of the united states was on the line. and the rest is history. alan shepard flew, then gus grissom flute, even though his k in the of one antic and he had to swim for. in the meantime, the soviets put up a second orbital flight. 10 months later, we put that redstone, we put that mercury capsule on top of an atlas rocket and john glenn kind then, knowing that it had a 20% chance of catastrophe. and then of course, the rest is

history. these successes in space have become an expression of our technical prowess, announcing to the rest of the world just how capable we can be and how this spirit in this country, this can-do spirit can overcome extraordinary obstacles. well, we have enjoyed a steady stream of benefits that have come from the concentrated investments in enabling the technology is and producing space applications. basic research, human exploration, earth observation, of national defence -- just a few of those that have resulted

from us being the leader in the global space economy. as a result, the spinoffs have improved our livelihoods of all of us earthlings. the technology that spawned over the last 50 years as change the way that we live. space-based technologies have become so pervasive that many times we do not realize we are relying on them. and i am just astounded over and over that people say, well, nasa needs to advertise more what it does. well, nasa does. every year they put out a book of spinoffs. you think about this book being

put out for several decades, at just how many of those technologies that have spun off have added up. not only gps but look at the noaa and what that has done for weather and a prediction of storms, look at the nasa satellites that complement's the perth-based observations -- earth-based com -- observations, changing the way that we defend this nation. and they have been integrated into nearly every aspect of the u.s. military. as well as the intelligence operations that now we see the

fruits of in blending the intelligence community with a surgical military operation. these benefits along with the numerous spinoffs and the efficiencies gained 3 application of space technology has provided this nation with a significant return on investment. we have gathered up some high- powered folks here to talk about the importance of space activities and the contributions of these undertakings to our national priorities. frank culbertson, a retired astronaut, capt., u.s. navy, retired -- he is a veteran of three space flights and served as the commander of the international space station during expedition three.

that is another thing. i am just amazed, frank, when you talk to people, somehow they have gotten the impression that we do not know of-the space program is being shut down. we have a space station up there that has six astronauts on it. and when the space shuttle docks, it will have a lot more astronauts on it. and it is 120 yards long. you think, looking in the stands of a football stadium down at the field, from one end of the end zone to the other, is how big the international space station is. forward toe looking sharing your experience of 146 days in space. frank slazer of space systems.

it is a leading trade association. elliot pulham, chief executive officer of the space foundation since 2001. he leads the team providing services to educate and inform government officials, industry, news media, and students about the space industry around the world. dr. chris chyba, professor of astrophysical sciences and international affairs at princeton. he directs the program on science and global security. he was a member of the review of u.s. human spaceflight plan committee, and also known as the augustine committee, and is now

a member of the president's council of advisers on science and technology. i want to welcome all of you all here. we are delighted that you are here. we want to get out on the record your thoughts, what we can do for the future, a lot penetrating questions. i want to turn to our ranking member, senator boozman, and then of course i want to turn to our colleague, the ranking member of the full committee, senator hutchison. with your permission i will yield to my ranking member. >> of course. while we're waiting on kay to approach the microphone, i just want to say the successes we have had in nasa, the bill being

passed last year, as well a lot of the funding that has now implemented the nasa authorization bill -- this young lady is responsible for a lot of that. so thank you. >> mr. chairman, i thank you. we have worked very hard to try to move nasa forward. i think that the authorization bill that brought together the need for the commercial investments and the commercial opportunities along with the uyouth of our work force that has so many years, and building the launchers, together we believe we have a good way forward. and what i hope we can hear from you today is that we need to

adhere to the authorization strategy, and that that is the way we should be proceeding. i think the chairman and i and senator boozman and senator rockefeller are all very concerned about how slow everything seems to be moving. about a couple of months, we're going to be relying on the russians to take americans into space. we have one more shuttle that will be going up this summer but after that, we're looking at maybe 10 years if we do not really start focusing on this and making better progress, of russian taxiing of our astronauts into the space station, where we must use the

opportunity for the unique research in that space station if we are going to reap the benefits from the investment that we have made. i am hoping that we can hear from those of you who do have expertise in this area on how we can move more expeditiously and assure that we get our vehicle up and running sooner rather than later, and secondly, to fully utilize the space station and the research capability that it has. and we have astronauts in the air right now, and we are all wishing them well. we are very excited -- it was really this committee that first heard from dr. king about the spectrometer and the ability to use that for energy, the study of the dark matter and the cosmic rays for future energy

resources. that excited this committee, and now because of the work that many of us on the committee, including of course the chairman, we are going to see that spectrometer be a part of the space station. so now we need to make sure that we can get our astronauts there on our own i hope, very soon, and we're going to look to you all to help us figure out how we can move it a little more quickly than right now. thank you very much, mr. chairman, and i also want to thank senator boozman for jumping in on the subcommittee. he has just been the greatest advocate and a quick study, and he is enthusiastic and we really appreciate your being on the committee and on you bring to it. thank you. >> senator boozman.

>> thank you and i appreciate the opportunity. the chairman and i were at a meeting this morning, and one of the if the season meeting was that we needed to work together. i think the relationship that you and have had with regard to this issue is a great example of that. this is something that we all agree on, so important to our country. the tenuous hold that we may have on our position of leadership in the realm. i am grateful that the ranking member of the subcommittee, senator hutchison, is with us today.

our long standing commitment to the nation's space program is both an example and an inspiration to me as i settled into the work of the subcommittee as its ranking member. i also want to acknowledge the successful launch on monday of the shuttle mission commanded by mark kelly. i wish the entire crew of the shuttle and those already aboard the space station success in carrying out this very important mission. it is expanding the scientific capability of this unique national laboratory, and providing essential spare and rollout -- -- replacement parts and other supplies to ensure the health and vitality of the space station systems. i had the pleasure of going to the kennedy space center at the end of last month for the first plan to launch. problems prevented that launched so i was unable to see it. but my experience during that visit was very meaningful, not only able to see and paul to

remarkable skilled and dedicated work force, but i was able to see firsthand some of the facilities and features of our nations and the world's premier space portal. also i was able to sense the spirit and dedication of the workforce as well as their strong desire to have cleared guidance and direction from their agencies leadership. as well as congress and the administration for the future. these people know how to do what needs to be done to ensure this nation's leadership in space. all they need his direction and resources to go do it and they need it now. as you know, senator hutchison had noted many times in committee were the crucial. bank of transition in our programs and are already slipping quickly to our very ability to develop and operate in national space launch system will be in doubt.

we simply cannot allow that to happen. the congress provided a clear path to move the nation away from that press office in the 2010 nasa -- nasa authorization act. it is past time for the provisions of that act to be implemented. and i strongly support the committee's efforts to ensure that that is done. i look forward to hearing and the witnesses, and more about the great benefits we received as a nation from our space program and a reminder of a can of what is at stake. and with that, i yield back. >> senator rubio, did you want to make a statement? >> just briefly, mr. chairman. thank you for holding this hearing on america's space program, critically important. thank you for being here is such an important time as we are nearing the last launch of the shuttle program and continue to ask ourselves what the future of the space program is for america. i reiterate everywhere i go that

america's space program is not something that we do for fun. it has a deep commercial impact, significant national security components, and it really helps the best senator nelson will tell you in florida, we have all types of industries to exist because of the space program. they are spinoffs of things we've learned along the way. i do not think that we will answer the question today, but the only concern i think i share with other members of the subcommittee, is where are we headed, literally and figuratively, as a program? what is our goal for the program or to mark i think this program has always functioned best when it knows where it is going, where its destination is. its purpose for existing. the sooner we can have that question answered, the sooner we can understand what space exploration will mean for this new century in terms of where we want to be. the easier will be to move toward that goal and i hope we make some progress on that

during this hearing. thank you for holding this hearings and thank you, members of the panel, for being a part of it. >> i'm going to arbitrarily go by alphabetical order. if you could all keep your comments as much as you can tour around 5 minutes, and we want to have plenty of time to get into questions. and so alphabetically, it would be dr. chyba. >> i was hoping that you would begin at the end of the alphabet. chairman nelson, centers hutcheson, boozman, rubio, thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify on this and. subject. in 2009, as senator nelson noted, had the honor of serving on the review of the human space flight plan committee, which issued its final report in october that year. the committee formally ceased to

exist in 2009. today i speak solely in my personal capacity though i do wish to recall some of the committee's most important findings. the human spaceflight committee was established to review the program of record and possible alternatives. it examined nasa is planned architecture, the constellation program, and concluded that it could not be executed for reasons that were primarily budgetary. the committee considered a variety of alternatives, five principles integrated options were a value-added against 12 metrics, including science, technology, economic expansion, public engagement, and mission safety. no architecture would provide missions beyond lower orbit until close to 2030 under the fiscal year 2010 budget profile. i think the most important contribution of our committee report lies in the framework it suggested for thinking about human spaceflight. the report emphasized that this is one of goals, not destinations. the debate over human space

flight should not begin as an argument over destination, going back to the moon or mars. it risks choosing a destination and searching for reasons to justify that choice. the committee concluded that human space flight serves a variety of national interest, inspiring the generation, furthering national security, driving technology, innovations, and other areas important among these, but with the enormous expansion that that entails, it does not make contributions to these errors that are so unique or cost effective that they in themselves justify the decision to go beyond low earth orbit. sending people beyond leo as a fundamental goal, charting a path for expansion into the solar system. this bill embraces the international space station as a means to an end rather than a destination we have left behind. on scientific integrity, it

should not be justified with exaggerated claims about its scientific payoff. we live in times of extraordinary discoveries about space. we have a current review we have learned that early mars had standing water on its surface. some is still accessible. we'll learn that there of many other ocean worlds in our solar systems. moons that hold liquid water. potions that are as big as our own. we learn the other solar systems are common and that most of the mass energy of the universe is not made up of a kind of matter we are familiar with here on earth can we do not know what this exotic matter is. human spaceflight should be an ally and not of budgetary opponent of these discoveries. that committee report called for the space agency to concentrate on the hardest technical problems involved in space flight. sending astronauts into low

earth orbit, they commercial sector should play a bigger role. they should fill in behind nasa while nasa goes out into the solar system. the committee's report noted that problems for confronting nasa is that it seemingly can have either the budget to develop a new human spaceflight architecture or can have the budget for ongoing astronaut operations, but not both. nasa has to stop flying. this is the altman reason for the upcoming gap. indeed, nasa has plans to stop flying the shuttle. the nasa authorization act of 2010 declared that the long-term goal of the human spaceflight and exploration efforts of nasa shall be to expand permanent human presence beyond low earth orbit. this is consistent with our committees framer. an important objective ought identified by the authorization

act is to sustain the capability for long lower corporate and to expand a commercial excrescence as elements of low earth orbit infrastructure. there will always be arguments over absolute levels of funding, but with increasing commercial opportunities, it is our best opportunity of bringing costs down. beyond leo, the 2010 authorization act calls for a heavylift vehicle. and to provide final backup should it be needed for cargo or crew delivery to the iff. -- iss. we want to make sure that it preserves a robust future in human space. if there is one place where new resources should be targeted to mitigate the budget dilemma, it may be here.

to conclude, 40 years later that decade of apollo is still remembered as nasa is heroic age. but it spent almost $20 million annually on human spaceflight, not $10 billion. evidently we are not. to spend $10 billion more for human spaceflight. the committee argued this could enable exploration beyond leo on may timescale. evidently that is not. happen. it is not been our experience over the last four decades to further hope and we should embrace a model different from the apollo model as we move forward. thank you. >> thank you, dr. chyba. now we are at $18.5 billion per year, projected flat line, or least a few years. so that is the constraint we are looking at.

captain culbertson. >> thank you. good morning, chairman nelson, ranking member hutchinson, ranking member boozman, and senator rudy. i welcome this opportunity to discuss the advantages of the space program. and the vital need to maintain our leadership on this endless frontier. this occurs in the same month that we commemorate alan shepard's first space flight and president kennedy's speech to congress. i had the privilege and honor on two space shuttle missions and one expeditionary mission to the international space station blogging 144 days in space. all it is true that every day spent in space is memorable, it was one day aboard the international space station the war remained seared in my memory as long as i live. you'll see in a moment why i refer to this. to me the state serves as a constant reminder of why america's commitment to peaceful

explore and utilize space for the benefit of our citizens and people around this world is so vital to our collective future, and why we must not retreat from our leadership in space, especially in light of recent events. 10 years ago i was serving as commander aboard the iss and was the only american in orbit. on the morning of september 11, 2001, i just completed medical examinations on my fellow crew and called out flight surgeon with the results. the reply was chilling. frank, we're having a bad day here on the ground. we were stunned as he described events in new york, washington, d.c., and pennsylvania as they unfolded. i was able to grab a video camera and focus and horror on the spreading smoke and dust from manhattan. we found that the we just witnessed the second tower's fault. after being assured by my wife that are scattered children were

safe, i learned so that the captain of american airlines 77 that crashed into the pentagon, my naval academy classmate and friend, i checked perlin game. it became very personal to me at that moment -- chuck burlingame. it is hard to see a woman to your country. watching like being destroyed by such willful a tax is a jolt your psyche, no matter who you are. i have confidence in our country and in our leadership that we will do everything possible to better defend her and our families and to bring justice to what has been done. my confidence that justice would be served a month later as i watched the invasion from

afghanistan from space. i was even better for filled three weeks ago that the economy that i -- i was even better fulfilled three weeks ago. this serves as a useful point on which to discuss the critical need for strong and vibrant space program. everything was good after we landed, but also it was different on board. we had a job to do, as did the committee and team on the ground. but our relationship change. we spoke to a larger number and variety of people than we had been planned to. from royalty and prime ministers to special people such as walter cronkite twice. school children displaced by the event by ground zero. i spoke to over 40 schools during a timeout was up there. always it was is that they were looking to us to prove that humanity can work together and

do great things in the midst of the unthinkable. they wanted to look to the sky for an example of something to do -- something good, something positive. they wanted to hear that the world still looked ok from up there. some in this room were around when we went to the moon in the midst of that other war, vietnam. it was an extremely difficult time but we still have the ability and the courage to expand our boundaries and a changing society on earth and dealing with the reality of that conflict. everyone remembers the significance of the moon landing and how proud made them to be alive at a time like that. it proved that despite the biggest challenges we can imagine on earth, we can still do great things. we can maintain our leadership and do great things beyond the earth, beyond the horror we have to deal with every day. today we should be equally proud that we now have a permanent

presence in space, a place for our children to aspire to work as a stepping stone to their own boundaries. the space station has been permanently man for over a decade. the international space station rightly called the centerpiece of our human spaceflight endeavor for the coming decade is not only one of the most amazing pieces of human engineering is but one of the greatest examples of productive international cooperation. it will improve the lives of many in helped pave the way for humanity's net great leap to demand, to the astronauts -- asteroids, and on to mars. it is a cooperative project between the u.s., canada, japan, and russia, of the tremendous example of state power. because of the attractions of our values, goals, and technological leadership. i was well aware of that type of power as a career naval officer

saw the benefits of it almost 40 countries around the globe. as the sec that manager of the shuttle program, as of incredible benefit of partnering with our former adversaries, born in their capabilities and beginning to build the station that it provided humanity with a person not -- permanent presence in order for the past decade. i believe the iss is an ideal platform for developing research and technologies and techniques more ambitious and link the missions to the moon and other destinations. my last ride home from space, the crew of endeavor and the space station working together now to continue the job was begun many years ago. i want to at this time give my tribute to the shuttle team that has made all of this possible for so long, the dedication and commitment, the long hours, did to overs, the listening to the public, listening to the media,

criticism, they have done a fantastic job. my hat's off to them. like all the military i salute and the aircraft carriers of landed on, the shuttle is ending its mission. my aircraft carriers are in museums. this happens and we will transition to a new phase. to give you an example of the scope there is a surface area that to cover the u.s. senate chamber three times over. some have suggested that we do that. their 34 research racks. they're capable of accommodating up to 300 payloads up to 3000 hours a year. just reaching the point of full assembly, researchers are did demonstrate and i contain several references to all that

has been done up there. and is being done on earth. but it will require a robust system " -- for both resupply and crew transport. to face the timetable that we are on, in the and, national and the u.s. space industry are pursuing things that must be safe and reliable. the combination of commercial endeavors and government endeavors will need to work to make a balance of research with frequent visits by a experimenters and observers. i think we need to cut to the station as often as possible with as many spacecraft as we can. this will require the support of congress and the american people. and the authorization bill moves is in that direction. with respect how much we invest in the space program, i would imagine the members of the committee share my frustration that the public vastly overestimates nasa's budget. i would simply astounded the other day when i read a recent

congressional quarterly cover story on the space program which but did nasa's budget, hovering around 1% of the national budget. if only they were the case. the reality is that today it luck -- represents less than one-half of 1 percent of the budget. if they were just a mere 1%, we would not have to have this hearing. a discussion of nasa's contribution is a national imperative. a weak nation will be among the first of mason -- while it is not a foregone conclusion that the united states will remain the preeminent nation, and will reap the benefits of the march of progress. that is why am gratified that this hearing is being hearing -- held. in closing, am proud that our nation continues to inspire people throughout the world.

my mother and father's generation after world war ii took on the responsibility of leading the world as a great nation. they assumed the leadership and responsibility, but a lot goes with it. the space program as a part of the responsibility. you have to set an example and shine a light on the unknown and put begins in the sky such as the and announced a space station which can easily be seen with the naked eye. great nations do great things. we need to continue doing that. i feel a special responsibility because of my unique position as an only american off the planet on september 11 that this is vital to our way of life and future. it is an accomplishment. we inspire respect and sometimes in the well our freedoms allow us to do that. this to me is the abiding lesson of my unique experience. thank you for the opportunity to testify before this important

hearing. >> thank you, mr. pulham. >> thank you, senator. members of the committee, staff, i like to thank you for your service to our nation and thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony today on the impact and importance of u.s. space programs. is toundation's mission inspire, enable, and propel humanity. implicit in this mission is our understanding based the exploration, development, and use of space really does inspire our nation and our world, really does enable us to dare greatly and achieve our goals and propel us confidently into the future. first, let me address the global space economy. this is from the space report 2011, a copy that i have here and i think most of the staff already has copies of this. it is our most recent annual report on the industry. over the past six years, global space economy has grown by 48%,

$164 billion in 2004 to $276 billion in 2010. the average annual growth rate of the industry increased from about 5% to nearly 8% last year. that is one heck of a strong industry and a good investment. the space economy comprises products and services and both terrestrial and space-based infrastructure. what government space activities continue to play a major role, the space economy today is predominantly commercial. commercial satellite services, commercial satellite infrastructure together accounted for $189 billion in 2010, nearly 70% of total space activity. nonetheless, the civil and national security space programs totaling some $64.6 billion in 2010, the united states remains by far the largest government player. space is a tremendous economic engine, as my colleagues have

referred to. the space products and services have become an integral part of daily life, most people reaping the benefits of space systems and technology continuously, and as you said, without probably knowing it. the degree to which u.s. snapple investments in space has proven to be high impact investments of tremendous national benefit cannot be overstated. after all, today's robust industry has its origins in government space investment. direct tv, satellite radio, cnn, espn, monday night football, and countless other satellite services are all the grandchildren of america's investment in the telstar program. google earth, satellite weather, commercial industries from space and countless related value- added publications are the descendants of the corona of five satellite program. the u.s. aerospace industry,

which by some estimates accounted for 50% of the new wealth generated in america between 1962 and 2002, built its muscle on government space investment, like dyna-soar, gemini, apollo, and a list goes on. space shuttle and the space station. but the u.s. national investment has spawned new technologies and new industries that could not even have been imagined when those investments were made. because spacecraft needed a renewable source of energy on orbit, today we have the solar power industry, renewable energy. because spacecraft needed to be guided and controlled, today we have accelerometer technology used in everything from triggering seat belts and air

bags and our cars, to orienting smart phones. because nasa needed to accurately dock and undock spacecraft, today we have precision guidance technology that enables lasik eye surgery. because nasa needed to protect the environment at kennedy space center, today we have advanced environmental containment and clean-up technologies. because the air force required a precise global positioning system, gps is a fundamental underlying architecture for commerce, finance, logistics, inventory management, commercial, law enforcement, emergency services, and personal navigation are around the world. and because nasa required unprecedented capability to power the main engines, today we have life-saving heart pump technologies. none of these outcomes were expected. these technologies and more than 40,000 others are the result of our previous focus.

the third. and now like to touch upon his national security. the funding of the national space program has brought tremendous benefit to u.s. farm policy and national security. our leadership in space has been a preeminent factor in american soft power since the dawn of the space age. while president kennedy's speech rice university is often quoted, was quoted are the political and national security realities that america was coming to grips with at that time. kennedy said, man is determining cannot be deterred. the exploration of space will go ahead, whether we join in in in or not. and no nation which expects to be a leader of other nations can expect to stay behind in this race for space. whether our objective is to win the cold war, extend a hand in friendship, incentivize

collaborative behavior, or build a broad based international community as in the international space station program, the soft power of space programs is often one of our best foreign relations and national security tools. all americans know about the special mission to get osama bin laden. i wonder how many of us will ever know how huge a role played in that accomplishment. finally must be recognized that our national intellectual capacity, directly affected by our investment in space programs. as the apollo program was gaining momentum, enrollment in graduate studies in science and engineering was also gaining momentum. in fact, the apollo program was both expected and intended to double the number of american scientists and engineers. doing the hard things requires our best and brightest minds. developing this intellectual capacity requires inspiring, challenging, and exciting work to do. when america has made that

investment, we have never failed to achieve our capacity for greatness. thank you. >> mr. slazer. >> thank you, chairman nelson, and ranking member boozman, distinguished members of the subcommittee. it is an honor and a pleasure to testify. i am here on behalf of the aerospace industries association, an association of over 300 aerospace companies representing 90% of the industry. sustain stilly 11 million jobs nationwide, including many high skilled positions. all organization was disappointed that the 2012 budget proposed to under fund nasa given the current fiscal environment, we believed that the current level is the minimum

required for its programs. our position is that it should reflect the budget priorities as outlined in the nasa authorization act of 2010. this flat -- despite the clear bipartisan direction provided in that act and the 2011 continuing resolution, substantial uncertainty remains over the direction nasa will take, but specifically on the new heavy lift space launch system. this is causing ripple effects throughout the space industrial base and highly trained work force. as the space shuttle is being retired in the u.s. is paying russia over $60 million to get crews to the international space station, it is critical that nationals -- nasa's exploration program be adequately funded to remain on track. two generations of americans have never known a time when our nation was not engaged in human spaceflight. let's be clear, this is a legacy, not an entitlement.

without continued investment this could become the last generation of americans to be part of a space fairing society. this is led to considerable work force uncertainty across the entire industrial base, where firms are faced with wrenching decisions to let highly skilled personnel go due to lack of funding more clear direction. in addition to workforce fluctuating budgets and delays, taking their toll on schedule capabilities and the industry's ability to manage programs, sending mixed signals to industry and placing big complex space program at risk of overruns are kept -- or cancellation. eruptions or cancellations negatively impact large companies and can be catastrophic for smaller firms, often the only entities with unique abilities to produce small but critical components on which huge portions of our economy, infrastructure, and that a security depend. as an example, only one firm in

the united states produces a chemical called on ammonium perchlorate, necessary for solid rocket propulsion. it is used in the solid propulsion and a wide variety military assistance. the suttles retirement is already impacting a wide range of users as costs rise. whatever government budgets are cut significantly, capability shrink. this capacity loss could leave as incapable of building critical national security systems in the future. developing the work force of the future is a top priority of our industry. nasa remain an excellent source of inspiration for our youth to study the stem disciplines and to enter the aerospace workforce. aia is committed to stem education. as a last weekend at hosted over 600 students from all across this but -- the country a rocket launching competition.

all the students there are clearly motivated, but for many students, the lack the program continuity is impacting the attractiveness of the aerospace profession. into this anonymous survey was done were 60% of studies in stand corrected but found it to be an unattractive place to work. one of the reasons for the lack of interest in aerospace may be the uncertainty of nasa programs. just as the recent wall street crisis turned people away from financial careers, uncertainty in aerospace hurt recruitment. the commitment to a robust spaceflight program will attract students and hold on to the current workforce while benefiting the national security space programs. a robust and sustainable space exploration program is essential to building our future economy. aia believes that the fundamental driver of economic growth since the 1960's has been at our investment in space

driven technologies and inspiration. today a number of new commercial space systems are being developed by entrepreneurs who have made their fortunes and other fields inspired by the apollo era. u.s. space program is at a critical junction. while cutting the federal deficit is essential for our economic future, cutting back on space investment is a penny wise but pound foolish approach that would have a detrimental effect on the deficit. instead of the embarrassing situation of buying orders from russia 50 years after first manned space flight, our nation's future will include one more commercially developed american crew vehicles supporting the international space station and possibly new commercial space stations along with their robust nasa exploration vehicle and a heavy lift system beyond low earth orbit. we continue to make -- this will

depend on are still making the investments necessary. >> and all of your written statements will be put in and made a part of the record. and i would start with you just going to ask one question and then i am going to flip it to you, senator hutchison. dr. chyba, you participated on augustine commission, and one of their recommendations was the flexible path. it informed a great deal of the authorization bill that senator hutchison and i worked on. so how would you respond to the criticisms over the incremental approach or headlines that come

out about a rocket to know where? >> thank you, senator. i appreciate question. as you know, the augustine committee made up set of possible options. it did not make recommendations among the options but it was one of those options. if you look at that analysis as i sure -- as i am sure you have, the different possible options according to the mattress against which we evaluated them, the flexible path contain the other options. they're ranked best along virtually every magic. i am not surprised that in the, it was the option was chosen. it has the great advantage of providing the best budget profile. if you imagine a scenario in which you're going back to them in quickly coming in not only have to develop a heavy launch vehicle but the landers and in the case of the constellation

program, that was a very capable lander. the flexible path, you do not have to up front develop all of the land for infrastructure along with the heavylift vehicle. if it is not framed well, it is the book -- easy to level the criticism you just mentioned. but in the end, we have to think or carefully about what our future beyond low earth orbit looks like. i said in my brief comments that everyone looks back on the apollo program with admiration, but we need to draw not only from the program but for the 40 subsequent years of human spaceflight. twice since apollo there have been efforts made by u.s. presidents to launch an apollo- like initiative. announced hissineh space exploration initiative but the budget was not there. president george of you bush had

his vision for space exploration which led to constellation, and virtually immediately the budget was below that which constellation was planning. they had been planning against an ultimate steady state of $10 billion a year. that was lowered virtually instantly as well as not taking into account the cost of the space station was there were one have to do in 2016. and with president obama is budget, you're looking at something close to $7 billion a year. so i think we have learned from experience that that kind of apollo vision, as desirable and inspiring as it is, is not working for us as a vision for the future for nasa. we need a different approach. i think the right approach is an approach in which we still keep our eye on the human move out into the solar system, on that inspiring mission.

i want to get there as badly as anybody else. but we're not going to do it by announcing an apollo-like program. what we have to do instead is twofold. we have to develop a kind of infrastructure or you might even call it an ecosystem of low earth orbit that has a variety of ways of encouraging the advance of human spaceflight and cost-cutting. and that includes encouraging this robust commercial sector. but the government is going to have to provide the station as a destination, and for important experiments and of elements that will further enable human spaceflight. and also, let's hope, this remains to be demonstrate, but let's hope that there will be a commercial market for suborbital flight and also with an additional private inflatable into the that people want to go to for the remains to be seen.

but i think the government of the man alone is probably sufficient to get the ball rolling. we have to have the heavy launch physical capability that will allow us to move out beyond low earth orbit. so what favor an absolute support these authorization bills approach to this. this is not a mission to know where. it is in a mission to expand human civilization into the solar system, the most ambitious possible space objection. but it tries to do it in a way that has the hope of being sustainable, of actually providing that future. if you look back at some of the reports issued in the last 40 years about our future in space, to many of them in my view included dramatic artist renderings of what our future was going to look like a rocket ships flying everywhere, astronauts going in every

possible direction during i respect and admire that vision but i think our citizens and our children need more than power. depictions of what that future looks like. i think flexible path is our best hope of attaining that future. >> senator hutchison. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate that very much. we tried to make the balance right within that budget constraint of a flexible way for it, that does support private innovation but also keeps the pace of our expertise and what has already been proven also as an ongoing effort, and we hope we got the balance right. but here we are. the german and nine -- the

chairman and i and senator boozman are all concerned about the delay. the in decision, the seeming on motivated approach to modifying contracts so that you keep the industrial base. from 14,000 contractors and civil servants that had been in the space shuttle work force, we are now down to about 7000. we have cut our expertise and work force in half, but what we were trying to do in the authorization bill was create any vehicle where these people could be transferred in keep their expertise rather than have them leave and not be able to get them back. .

our country. that me get a special thanks to each of the participants who are here as part of this forum and panel. they will each be introducing themselves. i want to particularly thank michael ertoff for joining us. a unique experience and background. you stay gaged in these issues. we are fortunate to have you at the sec as part of this forum. -- the fcc as part of this forum. as many of you may know, this is national small business week. we have gathered to talk about

an issue that is critical to our economy. small businesses and their ability to seize the benefits of new technology and protect against cyber security threats. the fcc is releasing a tip sheet for small businesses and lodging -- and launching a page on our website to help them protect themselves against threats on the internet. american small businesses are key drivers of innovation, economic growth, and job creation in our country. small businesses employ more than half of all private-sector workers. they generate 2/3 of net new jobs over e last 15 years.

at a time when we have to focus on job creation, making sure we ha technology platforms that are conducive to small businesses creating jobs can make a big deal in our economy. small businesses drive innovation, whether it is small businesses here in d.c., or in cities around the country or in rural america or in silicon valley, small firms produce 13 times more patents per employee than larger ones. broadband information technology is increasingly important for the success of our economy, to jobs and to the future of small businesses. broadband is high-speed internet. online business tools.

we are using a lot of terms that you're going to learn more about on this panel today. all of these tools and information that are available online, can enable businesses to grow and jobs to be created anywhere. they allow small businesses to market their products and reach customers in the next neighborhood, in the next city, in the next stage. it is not just limited to big businesses. this can be small businesses as well. it is not just small businesses in big cities. it is small businesses in rural america is as long -- rural america as long as they have been activity.

blue valley meats doubled its employees and boosted its sales force to% even in the rough economy of the last few years after setting up a website and starting to sell its beef onl ine. there are many examples of that. there is a cup cake bakery in washington, d.c. that has been able to go from zero stores to over ten stores employing new people with each new store. when i asked the owner of the shop how he was succeeding even though the economic was so challenging, he said the answer is technology. you have got to go to where the customers are. the customers are online. you've got to reach them there. that is what i am focusing on. he has 10 stores in the washington, d.c. area.

another thing. cloud base services, internet based services can lower the cost for a small business, increase efficiency for a small business and boost a busines' bottom line. this could be products to run customer relations management or run others that we will hear examples of from the panel. lower costs from cloud based services that are more expensive, more profit, more jobs. having a broad band connection makes a $200,000 per year positive difference our revenues for small businesses by helping them reach new markets. the opportunities for badband for small businesses are real and so are the challenges. we are here to focus on the cyber security challenge. it is not the only challenge we have before us.

we are working onhe of d.c.. -- the fcc. we have a deployment gat. we are -- deployment gap. we face a expect from -- spectrum gap. demand for spectrum is the increasing - is increasing exponentially. the demand for spectrum is outstripping suppl we have to do somethin we don't, it will affect our economy. small businesses areaying, i can use some of these devices to

communicate with my sales force. i can use these mobile devices to move more people out onto the road to respond more quickly to service calls, to respond more with -- more quickly to sell a product a to communicate directly with a client or each other. a plumber who is at someone's house who can take a picture with his ball and have people at the office looked at it and say, i cannot figure out what is wrong with this. to be able to check inventory. all of these uses of mobile technology can help drive the efficiency and productivity with small businesses as long as we have enough spectrum to do all this. it is going to be a challenge. this is why we are working with congress to free up more spectrum. that is the stuff we are not

talking about today. we have convened this round table to discuss what of the biggest challenges our country faces, a growing threat to cyber security. almo two years ago, the president declared that securing cyberspace was a vital strategic goal. the white house delivered a road map to protect critical u.s. industries from cyber threats. this afternoon, there will be more announcements on government-wide cyber security efforts. there was a new position created by president obama two years ago. his name is howard. i would like to it knowledge the axle of work being done by the leadership at the department of homeland security -- acknowledge the excellent work being done by the leadership at e department of homeland security.

they are working to tackle these threats that require the expertise and participation from a number of agencies around government, including the fcc. congress is looking at doing its part, which is iortant. congress has been considering legislative proposals that would include increased information sharing between the government and the private sector to rapidly respond to cyber security threats and attacks. it is vital that small businesses be parts of the cyber security equation. -- be part of the cyber curity equation. they have the most to gain by addressing the cyber security threats and increasing the trust on this platform. small businesses that do not take protective measures are vulnerable targets for cyber criminals. a recent study found that

american businesses louis billions of dollars annually through cyber attacks -- businesses lose billions of dollars annually through cyber attacks. the average cost to these attacks is about $200,000 per attack. in a moment, you will hear from a loca businessman. he will talk about the benefits of the internet and about how his r criminals hurt is ♪ construction business. 42% of small and medium businesses reported a loss of continental and private data in the last 12 months. or is it% experienced a net across as a result. -- 40% experienced a loss as a result.

we are here today to help small businesses overcome the security challenges and seethe benefits of online commerce. i expect today's discussion will reveal many small but significant steps that small businesses can do to protect their company and their customers. let me announce a number of steps that the fcc is taking today to help in this educational endeavor, to promote a safe and secure internet and to promote security for small businesses. we are launching a small business security pe on our website. you can go to the front page of fcc.gov and you will see a place you can click. we will be releasg a one-page tip sheet to help businesses understand cyber security

precautions. we are working with macafee and symantec and s.c.o.r.e. we have a representative from s.c.o.r.e., mcafee and the national urban league. s.c.o.r.e. did a great job interacting with small business all over the country. we did a national broadband plan. we developed a successful partnership, bringing our complementary expertise to the table to help small businesses around the country accelerate their moves online. we are focusing on how small businesses can protect

themselves. we are working with s.c.o.r.e. to distribute this material in the effective ways s.o.r.e. has developed over many years. we have partnered with organizations like the national urban league, the national black chamber of commerce, the national hispanic chambeof commerce to distribute these materials. we have a partnership with an organization called n.i.c.e., which runs the stop, think, connect campaign, designed to raise awareness about the need to strengthen cyber security and generate and communicate new approaches and strategies to help americans increase their safety and security online. all these initiatives are collaborations with the people in this room.

as thecc's broadband plan emphasize, there is tremendous power i the government and private sector coming together to help solve some of our nation's toughest problems. ciba security for small businesses is an area where i am -- cyber security for small businesses is an area where i am convinced we can make a difference. i want to thank all of our partners for their partnership. i look forward to working with you to protect small businesses and our economic. are going to move to our panel. what i would like to do first is ask each of our palace -- our panelists to briefly introduce themselves. we will jump from there into a discussion. why don't we start here.

dr. phyllis schneck. >> i am dubie cef technology officer for the global public sect of mcafee public sector. >> i am dave notch. i work with thomson reuters. >> i am the vice president for national security at the u.s. chamber of commerce in washington, d.c. >> good morning. thank you, mr. chairman, for having us here. i am michael chertoff. i am the chairman of a group called chertoff group. i was the homeland security secretary. >> i am chanelle hardy.

>> good morning. i am ken yancey. i am the ceo of s.c.o.r.e. >> my name is maurice jones. i am been ceo up local construction company. we have experienced a situation with ciba security. for our company, i want to let you know that what is out -- without the broad band, we would have suffered a lot of inefciency without being able to communicate with our superintendent a things of that nature. without the benefit of high- speed technicians -- high-speed connections, we would lose money in ways we would not be able to

quantify and i would not be here in front of you today. with that being said, cyber security has its growing pains. one of the issues we experienced was due to those growing pains. our experience started with getting a phone call first thing in the morning from a reporter asking us if we knew we had experienced a financial loss. at that time, we had no idea what happened. as the present and i started to sit down and go through certain things, we realize the bank had been attacked by a cyber criminal. to give you an idea of what happened, there was an e-mail that came. we thought the e-mail was coming from a valid source. on clicking on things related to the e-mail, we gave the cyber criminal act the way to access our database. by the time we realize it, we

were missing quite a b of funds. by working with different organizations, we were able to recoup some of the losses, but not all of them. we experienced financial losses without the benefit of broadband technology. we would not be able to function today. these things are essential for us to grow without we depend on businesses and things of that nature. we have come to a better way of doing business, interacting betterith the broadband technology withur structure and style -- structure inside the company. hopefully, we will not be a part of that type of financial loss again. >> thank you. i want to ask you one question and then open it up for broader discussion. talk a little b about the ways that you use the internet to help grow your business. sure.

of course, we use the website to attract new customers, new clients. it is a way of expressing to people what we do, a way of reaching out to bigger general contractors. we are a subcontractor. at the same time, we use the technology to constantly send information. without being able to send information on line, we would really behind -- be behind the business curve. we wld not be able to sell applications online, submit financial data. we can log onto bank accounts and verify information now in real time. without it, we would really be at a loss. it allows us to take a business that might take 15-20 people to run to be run with 10 people from an overhead iperspective. we can come out positions that

are dire, especially during times when costs are so hard to control. sotimes, the revenue is out there -- is not out there, so the best thing you can do is try to control costs. >> thank you, and i'm going to ask you to keep on engaging in the discussion. we're going to move to a broader discussion. i want to let our audience know both here and online, feel free to submit questions in the room. if you're on-line, and there should be a placeo click to submit questions. we will try to get to as many of them as we can. secretary chertoff, let me move to you. you have many years of experience in this area. you have seen both the opportunities and the threats develop. you continue to be directly engaged in this. can you give us an overview of

the most common threads that small businesses have tworry about? >> first of all, i think this is a very valuable program you have launched here. for a lot of people, particularly small businesses, even though they've read in the newspaper about dramatic compromises of cybersecurity, they may feel it is something only very sophisticated companies or institutions have to worry about. as mr. jones illustrated through his own difficulties, this really touches everybody. at the same time, it is important to recognize that what we are talking about here is managing cyber risk, not eliminating cyber risk. there will never be a program th wil eliminate all possibilities of cyber threat. the only way to do that would be to get off the network, and that would cause an enormous loss of some of the great potential that we have using the internet.

you he to look at the balance. a lot of this has to do with the nature of your business. differenbusinesses will have different sets of concerns. at one level, there will be basic concerns about the integrity of finances and customer information that will apply to almost every business. and the other hand, when you're worried about your intellectual property, for example, being stolen, at could be of more concern to a high-tech business than a bakery. i am sure bakery recipes are important and proprietary, but probably not of interest to bad actors in other parts of the world purify everybody will ha -- parts of the world. everybody will have different concerns. the particular technique mr. jones talked about, which are called fishing -- phisng,

where you open a device or tool that allows people toteal your information, that is a very common device. there is a whole spectrum of the tax that you deal with insider that can range from actually a -- spectrum of attacks that you deal with in cyber that can range from stealing loaves of information to stealing password -- loads of member nation to stealing passwords. there are several categories of information. first, you want to be concerned about how you protect transactions that might reveal sensitive financial information about your own business. q1 to be concerned about proprietary business data, what -- you want to be concerned about proprietary business data. if you deal with customer

information, credit cards and things, you owe it to your customers to ensure that that is not compromise. you have to be concerned about intellectual property. that is a very big target for people who steal things over the internet. you have to be concerned about criminal groups that try to extort money from you by threatening to attack your system. often they do that by overwhelming your network with bogus messages. that, of course, shuts off the network to legitimate customers and also creates somewhat of a crisis of trust with customers who may be engaging over the internet. finally, you have to look for those who maliciously attacked you. we have had two experiences recently where a group referred to as anonymous will attack

institutions because they do not like what somebody is saying or they are a -- or they do not like a client or customer of the institution. those are all things to be concerned about. this forum is not only about education, but about empowering small businesses to know that there are steps they can take to deal with these kinds of problems. >> very helpful. i want to turn to h p. very interesting position when it comes to this, because you offer a whole array of products to help small businesses sees the benefits of the internet. you also, partilarly iyour job paula have a real view and insight into the securities sought -- in your job, have a real view and insight into the

security side. every technology can offer benefits, but also brings with it some risks. with something like internet access, you can eliminate the risks by not going on line. from a cpetitive standpoint, that is not a good idea because other businesses are going to be on line and the opportunities forrowth and lower costs would not be there without it. it is not what we're advising people to do, to turn it off, just the opposite. i would like to us to talk both about -- as concretely as you can -- remembering that a lot of small businesses are on line, but a lot are not, what are some practical ways you can see for

small businesses to expand their markets and lower their costs. then, on the security side, what are concrete things small businesses can do to protect themselves? >> it is true that small businesses are today cyber- dependent. they cannot operate effectively or grow effectively without having cyberspace at their disposal, yet cyberspace's continuay threatened, not only by individuals out to extort money or ideas, but also multinational and crime syndicates that are there as well. each of these threats are apparent to not only small business but to governments as well. the resources to deal with them are different at each level. i think it is important that small businesses work toward establishi security relationships as well as they would establish relationships with other kinds of suppliers, relationships with the people that will bring you the piece is

the need for the product to make. likewise, you need to establish relationships with the folks that support the security of your company. it is important you have folks on stuff that understand the privacy of the information's your handling. how you process, store it, wha you are doing with it when you're done with it. that will protect you from losing in the nation, and also protect you in the long term from being accountable for losing that information. it is very important to make sure that the survival of your business is something that will happen after a cyber attac as secretary chertoff mentioned, cyber attacks are going to happen along the way. the question is, how prepared are you, and how invested are you in knowing that this critical portion of your business is protected? with that, there are several products available at many levels that can help.

a lot are available from small business value added resellers. they come packaged with the equipment that you might buy. it is important that you understand what you're buying, because you might not have to make sondary investments. a lot of this is available freely to you because you're dealing with sophisticated vendors. likewise, there a relationships to establish with organizations like info-guard, so that you can understand what is happening in the broader environment and get some great in vice -- great advice. now, the other thing you have to look at is how my going to survive in the face of threats? just like you have to deal with weather and traffic, the price fluctuations in materials, you also should say i know i have to deal with the security of my

information and i know it will not be perfect. i now have to plan f it and deal with reality as it comes. look at the tools you have, the processes you have, the people you have, train them and leverage them to the greatest ability. no small business can be outside the cybersecurity business. they have to intersect at some level and understand investments they have made, and try to leverage those investments toward the most important piece of their business which is to survive in the event of an attack. >> i want to ask you a similar question. you're one of the largest information based companies in the world. what do you see both on the benefit side and on the risk side? also, talk about your own experience at thompson reuters that could be helpful.

>> from the benefits standpoint, we use the internet for distribution. obviously, many of our customers connecto us a rare t internet. it is a very good way to reach a very broad -- connect to us over the internet. it is a very good way to reach a very broad audience. mr. jones alluded to the risks that come in through e-mail and malicious code. we also see that often over web browsing. those are the two main channels. everyone is susceptible to those, both small businesses and large businesses. we see that very often. secondly is just direct attacks on your system itself, whether it is a hacker coming in and perhaps stealing credit card data off your web server or serving at -- or stealing a database. those are the two main risks we see.

today, those are what occur more frequently than most. just to comment on an earlier comment made about services, i view causes services as a way for small businesses to leverage the purview of large businesses. you can get good e-mail, ceram and process knowledge at a cost service and not really have to build the infrastructure yourself. i think that can give small businesses a step up as to what has been available in the past. >> ann, talk about small businesses today. what did they know in terms of

opportunities, and what did they know in terms of risks and threats and what they should do? >> 97% of our membership is small business, so we doeal with them a great deal. as you can imagine, using the internet as a small business is a wonderful tool. you can reach the world. the downside is, you can reach the world. the bad guys are watching you. if i were to sit down and talk to you about infrastructure and railroads and banks, i think you'd be surprised at how well they are protecting their infrastructure. i think events like this and cybersecurity awareness month in october all help to raise awaress, but we need to do more. i think it cannot just be one month out of the year. we need to have a campaign much like the stop, think, connect.

it is a culture change. it is going to take a long time, mu like wearing seat belts, not smoking, and getting people to not click on a link or not open an e-mail if they do not recognize it. basically, yes, the internet is a great tool, but you need to protect yourself. it is about the bottom line. you can really hurt your brand. you can end up in a lot of legal trouble if you're not procting yourself. that is key, and we are trying to get the message out to our members. >> thank you. i am going to taka minute and mention that we are releasing today tend cybersecurity tips for small businesses. en cybersecurity tips for small businesses. i am going to move on, but i would like you to comment on these. let me review the headlines

quickly for people listening and people here. then i will ask our representatives fm symantec and mcafee to commen one, train employees and security principles. two, protect information, computers and networks from viruses, spy where and other malicious code. three, provides firewall security for your internet connection. four, download and install software updates as they become available. five, make backup copies of important busines data and affirmation. 6, control physical access to your computers and network components. fi enth, secure your wif- network. eighth, secure individual user

accounts for each employee. ninth, limit employee access and ability to install software. 10, regularly change passwords. comment on any of those. help small businesses understand what they can do to immediately improve their security online. >> how much time do we have? [laughter] first, i want to thank you and thank our audiee and panelists. it is important that we understand these risks. the way we do that is by a hearing from everybody else. it is a little bit like the cbc. we learn about the disease not from its popularity, but by how

it spreads. we, as the good guys, especially in small business, have to remember how important that small business is. we are two-thirds of the job creation and 60% of the gdp of this country. we have to focus on not just one bit of information. other governments and other companies are very interested in what i in every single small business in this country and around the world. they will find ways to get it. instant messages a new one. mobile is a growing one. when you think about these things, i can pull a couple out. physical access -- very oftene see an insider threat. you can secure your perimeter.

it is shiny objects. when someone offers you a free gift, heaven knows what happens when you click on that. you have to protect your brand. you have to gross sales and help your employees eat so that you can grow sales and build value. when you lose the quality of your brand, that will go away. it is a people think. regularly change passwords. a cyber event cou cause physical damage. that is one of the many attacks we see at their worldwide. the nuclear passwords were the easiest to get and the hardest to change. resilience is key. be as flexible as you can be. another quick point to mention,

at mcafee we say safe never sleeps. we see 14 million new machines become compromised every day. these attacks will overwhelm your network. you can be part of that, if you are compromised, hurting other companies, or used as a compromise machine. i commend the fcc and this program in putting out some tips that hp smaller businesses leverage the power of the internet and make your business and your customers safe. thank you. >> thank you. cheri from symantec, similar question. what jumps out at you as far as actionable steps he thinks small business oers could take right away to significantly -- you

think small business owners could take right away to significantly improve security? >> as you mentioned, semantic conducted study released in 2011 that actually surveyed small business owners and customers around the world. what we found through that was that 50% of small businesses do not have a plan. more shockingly, 41% said it never occurred to them that they should have a plan. 40% also said t data protection was not a priority for their business. when you think about this, 40% of small businesses saying data protection is not important to their business, that is kind of a shking statistic when you thk about it. data, as mr. jones indicated, is what your siness runs on. it is why your customers trust is dependent on, in how you conduct your business. from the standpoint of the 10

cybersecurity strategies for small business that the fccs releasing today, we think it is a great list. we are delighted to announce that we will be posting this on our small and medium business website that is dedicated to that particular segment of the communities of the week and try to get that awareness out to them. i would also like -- so that we can try to get that awareness out to them. and also like to mention that as customers of small-business owners, we found that not being prepared can also go have significant impacts. 44% of small-busine customers have actually seen a small business vendor shutdown due to an attack. that cost as customers roughly $1a day. here is the kicker. more than 54% of those customers actually switched vendors were

switched to another small business owner because they did not believe they could continue to rely on that small business owner. so this can have, cybersecurity ca have a bottom-line impact steerer survival as a small business, and frankly those security -- impact to your survival as a small business, and frankly the security in packs can -- in packs can be the key to your customer's business. >> you spend a lot of me with businesses run by people from disadvantaged backgrounds, minority communities. do you see any unique issues among the businesses you work with that we should put on the table? >> i would not say unique,ut i would say that if you look at the most recent poll out from

ew, there is an indication that there is greater discussed -- greater distrust among the community about internet security. perhaps the slows down ways in which minority owned businesses begin the process, but as others have discussed, it is critical to take that risk. it is one of the reasons the national urban league is excited about working to spread the information about cybersecurity for small business, because we know that is critical to the growth of urban small businesses. speaking to the secretary just a ment ago, up we were speaking about the importance of having some natural suspicion and being able to spot the kinds of things that cause problems for small

businesses. i think there is a little additional skepticism, but overall, a recognition of the opportunity. >> ken, could you describe sc ore a little bit? i will admit, i did not know about it before we partnered with score. describe what you do, and what you are hearing from small businesses around america about the internet, good and bad, and your thoughts about what they should be doing. >> thank you. thank you for having me and for having this panel, and thank you for your partnership. for those that do notnow, as gore is a volunteer organization of mostly retired -- a score is

a volteer organation of mostly retired small-business owners who mentor people who would like to start a small business. we speak about any topic that relates to growing, managing, buying or selling a business. our volunteers are well-trained and very knowledgeable, and anxious to be of value to these would-be entrepreneurs and existing entrepreneurs. we parered with the fcc recently on a new e-business initiative where we're working to train these business owners on the values of broadband technology. how can they grow their sales? how can they manage internally more effectively by using these tools? a natural extension of that would be to talk about security. when we started the e-business now initiative, we did do some focus groups, and most of those that did not have a web presence

or a web presence that included the opportunity to do e- commerce, they did not because they were concerned about security. there are so many tools and so many opportunities to mitigate and manage that risk as secretary chertoff said, it is really something all small business owner should be aware of. small-business owners are busy. they're wearing multiple hats, and they often do not take the time to think through some of the issues that relate to a web stragy, inrnet strategy and cybersecurity strategy. i think the list you're putting out -- and congratulations on doing that -- no. one is critical. you need to have a plan and communicate that plan. that is not hard to do. this should be part of your ongoing business plan as a small-siness owner. this should be something you review a couple of times each

year, maybe when you set your clocks forward and backward. don't just check the batteries in your smoke detector, also review your business plan for security. people need to know about opening some drives, sharing passwords, leaving their computer on. talk to them about securing data and data back up. in a natural disaster or a man- made disaster, business is that lose their data, 90% of them never go back into business. we saw that with katrina, and i'm sure that with some of the tragedies we are experiencing today, we will see that going forward. we work at score to educate through our volunteers, the web, and other vehicles, to really break down the steps that business owners can takand actually make a difference. talk about the plan.

50% of small businesses do not have a plan. secretary chertoff, let me ask you about that. how concerned are you about that, and how can this give us a broader persctive of what we need to do as a country on cybersecurity? >> what emerges from the conversation we have had here, there are really two parts to solving this issue. one is to educate people. if you are a business engaging in transactions on line and you have a date to a breach and a loss of -- and data breach and a loss of information, it is important to realize your customers will probably not reach engage with you. the second part of this, and

at is important about the program you are rolling out here, is that you are empowering people to understand that they can actually address the problem. it is complicated, particularly if the look of these high-end kind of attacks. people walk away the message haso be there is a lot that business can do to protect itself. we have talked about some. blogging the correct, the products to protect yourself -- buying the correct kind of products to protect yourself. also, buying the correct kind of products. you're not going to get the updates, you may find things embedded in that hardware or software that could be malicious. being careful about making sure

you are buying their products to protect yourself is an important part of your plan. resiliency. how to make sure you have back up your data? how you make sure you can reconstitute? what some of us call computer hygiene. how you train yourself and your work force in basic principles that minimize the risk that you'll have a compromise of risk of your data. on the issue of passwords. passwords that rely upon your spouse's name or other kinds of very available personal information are not likely to be useful or protective. educating people and how to select an change passwords is impoant. common sense is a great tool. we have talk about tony eails

that come to you and induce you to click got -- we've talked about phony e-mails. a common one going around is summit will going and get an address book and it will get everybody'address book -- everybody is addressed and it will send e-mails out to everybody. usually is something like, sorry to bother you, i'm stranded in paris. can you send me money? often this is from somebody you may have seen yesteay and they were not planning on gog to paris. educating your employees about that is important. flash strives -- drives.

the was a report outlining what had been one of the major security breaches in the defense department. it began when an individual officer picked up a.s. peace stick -- usb stick of uncertain origin and a major intrusion occued. -gen -- hygiene. you do not pick up and eat everything off the street. this is very, very important. >> a couple of themes. we started about talking of being on-line can help small businesses and guarding against it is necessary. having a cyber security plan is

a competitive advantage. not having want is a competitive disadvantage -- not having one is a competitive disadvantage. if you do not have a plan, you're more likely to get distractions. having a plant is aompetitive advantage -- having a plan is a competitive advantage. the stuff is complicated and technical. i wanted to come back to maurice jones. you're not ung talking about on panels at the fcc. you have explored this issue. what are the best ways to communicate about these issues

with small businesses that are not technology businesses, but that are starting to use the internet to grow their business and lower their cost? what have you seen in your work be effecti in talking to your own employees, talking to other companies in similar businesses? >> sure. thank you again. using the system itself, e- mails. when you get anymore, check the validity. if you received something that does not make sense come pick up the phone and call. make sure things make sense to you. having small meetings. the monday morning meetings. we may talk about things like this. sit down and let people know, if

you have a problem with your e- mail or blackberry, let somebody know. communication is always the key. people felt the victim. it is about communication. checking the e-mail, picking up the phone, calling supervisors and making sure people are what they seem to be. >> it starts with a lot of small businesses, especially ones that are offline busins is starting to embrace on-line opportunities. is this all too complicated? how can we make sure that what we're doing is actionable for small businesses? >> i think you're right. the assumption is that this is an i.t. problem. if you lay out simple steps that

are inexpensive, businesses will do tha i like the top 10 list that you put together. i have a prop. we didn't internet security essentials for businesses. security an internet essentials for businesses. educating your employees, making sure they have strong passports, designating someone to handle security, taking control of your network, making sure you of someone who is watching the flow of traffic or the e-mails. thene put into policies and problems. identifying and prioritizing your business information. what is important to your business? defending your company computers. to not be plugging in those free things you gett conferences.

that is a terrible ia. think about when you're buying new computers, what are you doing with your old computers? having a plan to deal with if you get attacked. who'd you call? do you know the groups out there that can help you? a third part is defending your data on the go. for folks who travel abroad, make sure they protect their blackberries. backing up your computers regularly. not just participating in cyber security month, getting information from the chamber of commerce. make sure your folks know what they should do and wt they should not do. >> chanelle hardy, can i ask you

the same question? what suggestions on how to break through the common concern that technology is for other people, we're not in the technology business so it is not our problem. >> i think a lot of that gets to who was providing the information and making sure that organizations, individuals that are trusted. part of the rule that the national urban league plays, we have developed services to 36 states, working with small businesses through things like our entrepreneurship center, where we have been in the committee for a long time and they know the formation that we're providing is safe and tested. when we can partner with the sec and disseminate that information, then there recognize that we are giving them the same types of useful

tools that we provide in our direct services world. >> i want to put a topic on the table. often we talk about small businesses at forums like this. we have a picture in our head and small business or other offline businesses that are starting to think about the internet to expand their business. more and more, there are small businesses that are on line only. hp, if 100% of those online start-ups are doing everything they can to protect themselves, are they, or is there more work to do among all line -- online start-ups as well? >> there is a good chance they

are already ahead of the game. there is a good chance they don't n their own networks. a certain level of serity. their culture is in and they are partnered with folks that have the broad responsibility to party do the security and the availability aspects of the security -- of that business, they are well off in terms of security, but there is always more to do. they have to have a way to switch business to another provider of those services if that provides to be susceptible to a threat like that. it is not like they can turn off the need to pay attention to what is going on, but in general they are more prepared than somebody who is running a less technology intensive operation. >> then the ask dr. schneck.

we have heard about startups and the often struggle to raise money and a very focused use of capital. some of them are young folks starting at of college. how important is it that even young entrepreneurs just starting out, how important is it to stop and say, do have a cyber or security plan as part of my business? so that i am protected. >> i think ann nailed this. this is an overall risk.

there was a report that showed around the world a huge increase in awareness of all the attacks that you mentioned today, and then some. withinhat increase of spending, some plan was responsible for that. if you look at the spectrum of mpanies, i had a small company when i was young and i was part of a slightly larger company after that appeared in both cases, security was not a profit center. that was over 10 years ago. the role of a small company is to make revenue and to grow. it insures your trust. it says you're building an infrastructure that is responsible. you are part of the entire infrastructure. we're all connected. if you don't do your part to

keep a healthy network, you're endangering all the other companies, big and small. a lot of those online start-ups that leveraged, some managed security providers we have seen have had issues with break-ins and personal information being shared where it should not be. you do need that plan to shift over. venture capitalists are looking at what your infrastructure looks like. who is your idea guy? how are they locking this down? that is part of the insurance echoes into venture capital. >> i will ask you a similar questions, cheri mcguire. ift of what we're hearing

you're a small business and a growing -- whether you're an offline business using on-line, it is important to think about these issues early because you are not immune from the threat and also because it could become even harder and more expensive to wait and then deal with an infrastructure and try to superimpose security. if you could each, and what you're seeing -- if you could each comment on what you're seeing. >> what i see a lot of is -- more contacts. we serve a number of market verticals. we have numerous security departments across those

verticals. in many cases, they are not the same. here is the requirement that you have from your customers and your regulators and this is how you build it into your business and your products and services going forward. we see the numbers a different way, whether it is is developing products for services, it is always cheaper to build it in upfront. that is critical. the complexity of the problem -- we seek well-regarded surity companies are having issues. it is complex and it may seem like something we'll never get past. i like the list of 10 items. there is no end of the information that you can find on the internet about how to secure

your systems but little that is summarize that can be useful. another intesting statistics. there is a well-regarded data -- that was just appalls. 96% of bridges could have be avoided by doing a medium ever in security measures -- 96% of breaches. they could have been avoided. >> any small business and those that are working online have to recognize there is a risk. you cannot transfer the risk away just because you have a vendor or someone providing services to you. you still own at risk when it comes to providing a service for your customer. a break in the trust can hava detrimental impact to your bottom line and the survival of

your business. from that standpoint, you really need to know what questions to ask of small business owners of your vendors. what kinds of security protections do they have built into their class services, for example? how do they handle things like data breach that you may be paying them to provide service for profit those kinds of questions that a small business owneshould ask. >> what is the class -- what is the cloud? >> the cloud is storage in the cloud. it is a remote way to access your data comes to back up your data, secure your data, to use various applications such as, you know, word-processing, accounting, those kinds of tools that you can access, pay a

service provider for, access them from pretty much everywhere. it provides opportunities for small businesses as well as lower cost. they don't have to manage those prophecies, updating of those applications over time, updating the security. it is all being done at another layer by a provider this small business owner does not have to do it anymore. it is a way to simplify your business, gain efficiency, perhaps reduce costs, be more secure. it is something small business owners need to recognize. there's a risk associated with that. the need to manage that risk. >> there are terms that i think we all use ourselves that we know very well like cloud and malware, phishing, and i'm wondering and i will ask our team in partners to follow up on

whether we should pursue ways to delop a glossary, usable glossary that mr. jones with tell us, this could be helpful. that is something we will follow up coming out of this. lemme think some of the staff that has worked so hard on this. animal jimmy barnett -- admiral jamie barnett. tom reed. our main point of contact for small businesses. the staff of our consumer bureau, also very focused on these issues. a number of folks who worked very hard on this. i want to thank all of you for putting together something that i think has been and will be very productive for small businesses. secrary chertoff, then the ask

you a qstion -- let me ask you a question. it came to us online. more and more malicious attackers are compromising small business web sites by leaving the compromise site unaffected. attackers -- redirecting others to malware. the owners have little resources to scan for and correct security breaches which dealt primarily affect their sights. is there a role to discourage these? that is a great question. dr. schneck touched on this

earlier. they are controlled remotely and can turn them into an attack. this is a challenge that we have in cyber security. obviously there is an incentive to ptect your own system against being compromised or degraded in some way because there is an economic loss that you want to avoid. what do you do when the attk on your system will not actually result in a negative consequences on your system, but rather a negative consequence on a third-party either because it is used or sicken or remotely or because it becomes a way to embed malicious code in the network of the third-party? this may not have an incentive because it is not feeling the consequences. the consequence is being felt by a third party. this is an area where people may

find themselves facing lawsuits because the victims may wind up suing or complaing about the website the was the source of the attack, even if it was in a sense. -- even if it was innocent. liability exposure and even some regulation to make sure people are properly incentivized so that their own networks to not become a weapon against some innocent third party. >> a very practical question. al kinney. this is from someone in our audience here. if my business is under attack, and who'd you call first? -- do you call private experts? a very practical question. >> thank you.

the first thing is to make sure that your business can still run. that business is important to you. the employees that you have. once you look at that, the technical experts that you have established relationships with during the course of planning for your cyber security and next, those are the people that you need to call. law-enforcement needs to be broadened in concert with that to this problem. -- needs to be brought in. there are some immediate things that you should do with that information to make sure that you preserve it for law- enforcement but also provide continuity for yourself. so you should switch over to your backup systems. if you have another place the year of made an agreement with to help you with your business. you need to switch over there quickly. theneed to perhaps unplug

internet from that system. unplugging from the internet can provide some protection for you so that you don't continue to bleed information over the internet. you need to find a way to enact your plan of communication. the customers know that something is going on and you have the responsibility to protect their information and describe for tm the types of risk that they may be incorrect because of this problem. it is an integrity issue that every business wants to make sure that their brand is p notch on a good day and a bad day. be honest up front. >> excellent. dr. schneck. for companies that use smartphones for employees, or

whether any special precautions to take? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i was in georgetown a month ago -- smartphones are an extension of every other piece of technology that we use. they have an address. they do have additional information as to where you are. precautions go to consumers asian -- consumerization. shiny objects that everybody would like to use. they play and reedbirds -- they play angry birds. what we're facing right now is a huge increase i malware is directed to mobile in this country. and then start looking at how we

can lock those phones down but make them adaptable. make it so the consumer, the small business consumer, the military, all those can work with the smartphones and still be secure. everything with an i.p. address, you are connected. and they are connected to you. on the plan to respond to a breach, the fbi and secret service have done an amazing job of our reach to the private sector. as part your plan, build in a relationship with law enforcement, secret service. having that law-enforcement in that list of cell phone numbers on a first name basis on who to call so that you could help drive the investigation. you know when you can unplug

stuff and you know when to preserve that information frantically. >> if i could just add to that. we have seen an explosion with the use of mobile devices. the simple thing is to make sure you have anti-virus or security virus installed on your smartphone. thats a simple thing you can do to protect yourself. second, use the same kinds of common sense precautions that you use when you use your laptop or your desktop at home or at worked. do not click on those e-mails that you do not know where they came from for sure. do not go to those websites that maybe are not totally trusted. use the same kind of common- sense principles when you're using your smartphone. >> that is very helpful.

this is been very productive. i thank you all. we're getting near the end. i like to ask eh of the panelists to provide one piece of takeaway advice to small business owners who are watching this panel or will come to later. we have our tip sheets. i'll start with mr. jones and go round the table and then we'll skip secretary troth -- secretary chertoff. the question is, talking directly to small business owners, one piece of actionable advice, something they can do today to help protect themselves and sees the benefits of online opportunities. >> educate yourselves, education

is out there with a great use of the internet and give you things like googl searche and you can find out things in five or 10 minutes back and make your day a lot easier and more comfortable to understand what you are dealing with and understand what kind of simple things you can do to protect yourself. believe it or not, the list of top 10 may take you know more than half a day to look at and organized in an effective way that can help your business wants to understand what is your business is subject to. >> excellent. >> very similarly, this is a competitive advantage and a competitive disadvantage for the list of 10 is only good if you execute around it. i would suggest that anybody take that list of 10 or other resources they can find and do something that creates value in their business for their customers. unless they act and act quickly,

it will be a disadvantage. in this environment, nobody needs that. >> the first step in cyber security for small business is all about relationships. you want to be able to impress upon your employees their responsibility and give them the ability perform a task the need to do and work with law enforcement and other industry groups to understand what is going on in the environment and what the tip of the date is for how they protect theiretworks and you need to be involved with industry at large so you can invest with capital funds are operatg funds as needed to further secure your enterprise. it is all about relationships and knowing where to go and when to go there. >> what actionable piece of advice do you have? it be a deterrent to you're making maximum use of

the opportunities presented by the internet and make sure us the education and resources that we are discussing today to allow you to continue to grow and expand. we have seen tremendous growth, particularly in minority-owned businesses in the last few years. many, my single employee businesses. it is a real answer to a lot of the challenges we face in the employment due to the recession. knowing how to empower yourself, to not allow concerns about cyber security slow down and limit your business is critical. >> thank you. >> they should implement the to 10 sec remmendations as well as the chambers internet security guidelines. those are simple steps and they are inexpensive. is far less expensive to invest an internet security now than to lose trust business and partners later. >> recognize you have a risk

first and second, don't ask fore it is too late. insure that your information is protected completely, get your employees involved, get them trained, tester plans frequently, review and update those plans on a regular basis, and lastly, don't be afraid to change with the evolving technology. that will keep you safe in the long run. >> all good suggestions -- i would say in closing, now what is valuable to your business and no if you lost information or intellectual properties and you can no longer function, now were that bad and that gets lost in the day-to-day operations. make sure your increasing revenue because sometimes we forget the bigger picture. until you really sit down and alize that, this can go a long way to protecting you. >> it is a lot -- as a way of

getting a lot of value of getting communication is to take a leadership position in your sector. whatever kind of business you are in, had that business be a leadern implementing security. you can find pretended security at could bulk rates and you can get informational relationships that will protect you and your customer and her brand. >> secretary chertoff, please offer actionable advice but also if you could put this into context against the backdrop of a broader cyber secury issues that the country faces along with the broadband opportunities that we need to seize, what are your thoughts? >>two little actionable tips -- be mindful about free wi-fi. people have the ability to collect information off a free wi-fi. there is little in life that is actually free except for your

family members. second, when you have your employees, there are capabilities that and now you -- enable you to the disabled in of late. watch out for lost devices. i think this program is vital because you have given small businesses actionable advice at they can use to enhance security and that will benefit businesses individually. in a larger sense, a huge part of our national economy now rests upon the ability to operate on-line whether you are a business in the physical world or exclusively on line. you cannot really compete globally without the ability to use the internet. that means it has to be trusted. it means we have to safeguard our intellectual property. people who work about -- a worry about our national security are aware that enormous amoun of very valuable intellectual

property is being stolen all the time by people who are acting as criminals or even seeking to help overseas competitors. the ability to protect against that and make sure the benefits of the internet are available throughout the country so that we are on the cutting edge of the global move to internet and cyber communications, i think that is the number-one priority for the national economy over the next 10-20 years. these efforts are a big part of moving the country forward to compete in what will be an exciting but also challenging global economic environment. >> that is very helpful. thank you so much for taking time to join us today. each of you are all playing a very iortant role in our broadbent economy whether it is building businesses and employing people or whether it is advising them or whether it is building and marketing the

security software that companies can use, the chamber, the national urban league working with small businesses, all of you, thank you so much for taking the time to be here. i want to ank the staff again. let me conclude with a couple of observations. high-speed internet, broadband for small businesses and large is really the platform for our economy for the 21st century. no less so than electricity and telephone service were in the 20th century. imagine thinking that you could run a small business without a telephone or without electricity. at some point people did. small businesses seized those opportunities.

we are in the middle innings on small business is getting to the int on broadband where we have gotten a telephone service and electricity and it is important that this platform become available to everyone and it be seized two of them to our economy, growth businesses, to compete locally, nationally, and globally and to save costs and become more productive. we have to take the risks that come with new technology seriously. their respective the telephone service. the risks the kindle electricity. there are risks that come with broadband service. what we have tried to do today with this group and the work that has gone in behind it is to help busy small businesses manage these risks. so vacancies the opportunity of this new technology for their businesses and economies.

i thought the data point that stands out for me today is one that 50% of small businesses don't have security plans. 50%, each of the businesses that does not have a security plan is at a competitive disadvantage in and is that needless risk. you can't address every risk but there are many risks that small business can address. everyone on this panel agrees that it is not an on/off switch. we have to do everything we can to improve our security profile and minimize risk. we can't eliminate them but we can minimize them. my closing actionable thought to small businesses is have a plan. we have given year the draft of a plan. with this one page cyber- security to small-business is, take a look at it and look at

the resources available at fcc.gov. you will see a lot of material there. you will see similar information on the small business administration website and other places. we are trying to do the opposite of confusing people with inconsistent information. we're trying to focus small businesses on a small set of actionable things. give us your feedback on that because that is what we wanted to and we know we can improve every day. thank you to all of us for joining here and joining at home or at your business. i look forward to part two of what i thought was a very successful forum today, thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

[inaudible]

[inaudible] >> next, a forum on the effectiveness of cia enteric a techniques. in your calls and comments on "washington journal." the administrator for the centers for medicare and

medicaid services talks about the future of medicare, the administration, and democratic plans for the program. he also reaction to paul ryan's plan to gradually transition maker from a defined benefit program to one based on direct premium support. today at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> the local content nichols kickoff -- vehicles kickoff but tour. a look at the book industry with local booksellers. american history of dance on c- span3 from the st. peter burke museum of history. and the hidden history of and colette, a settlement of about 750 former slaves and seminole indians who fought two wars against the u.s. in the early

1800's. watch it on c-span3 and c-span3. >> next, a discussion about ci interrogations' and their impact on the operation that killed osama bin laden. at issue is whether enhanced interrogation techniques which some considered torture or a factor in the success of the operation. speakers at this event include former bush administration officials including johnny yoo who helped craft policies. this is about 90 minutes.

>> rather than presentations followed by discussion, we are going to do this is a round table. my job is to throw in questions if i can get a word in edgewise on this panel and unfortunately there are several lawyers on the panel. i probably will not. please turn off your cellphones, if you might. and that goes for the panelists. this is prompted by the successful operation that killed osama bin laden and the role of interrogation in that success or not, and then i hope this will open up some of discussions on other issues, including detention, drones, and what to expect next in the war on terror from the obama administration.

let me start off by asking about the news in the papers the last few days, which is whether in fact any of the intelligence that was used to the couriers -- to identify the couriers, whether any of the information came from the use of enhanced irrigation methods by the bush administration. but-interrogation methods by the bush administration. john mccain responded at the end of last week, taking issue with that claim and asking judge mukasey to withdraw his earlier statement. i like to give judge mukasey the opportunity to respond. >> the opportunity to withdraw my statement? [laughter]

as another character set in another connection, this is not personal, it is business. by business has to do with facts and law. the fact is that come -- muhammed -- khalid sheikh muhamed did disclose the ourier in thehis care questioning after enhanced interrogation. no one was questioned during the techniques. the questioning happens after they become compliant. was there a memo in the file beforehand contending that name? yes, absolutely, and it was completely disregarded. it was not regarded as significant until it came out of his mouth.

then when not only did that, but he then said that that person was the longer affiliated and had nothing to do with al qaeda and it was married up with later facts that were learned, it was obvious that he was covering for him and i was a significant fact. there were a lot of stones in the mosaic but that was clearly one of them. so much for facts. as for a lot, the techniques to which he was subjected including waterboarding were not in violation of law as it existed at the time, including principally torture statutes. that was disclosed in memos that i was basically tasked with reviewing at my confirmation hearing. i then found that by the time i had conducted my review, the program had changed, and that technique and a number of others had been eliminated and so there

was no need for further action. the dick cheney treatment act, the military commissions act, that change the landscape to a certain extent. to me the real issue, the real current issue, is not whether there was our was not a column in the mosaic that stem from that but rather what we have now, the trove of material that we got from bin laden's residents, according to all reports. there was a huge amount of intelligence obtained from this raid, which by the way was a commendable rate, done not what they drone which would have obliterated all of that. there was a huge amount of intelligence game. that is bound to lead to people who could in turn disclose a

valuable information. what programs do we have in place to interrogate those people? we have nothing in place but the army field manual which al qaeda uses as a training manual. we do not have that and we should. and this is really an issue that ben has written on, and explored in greater detail a much better than i could. we do not have a detention policy either worthy of the name. al regime,conservation al if you want to call it that, and we needed attention policy as well. >> let me turn to the head of the human rights first organization, to respond or comment on his comments. >> thank you, john. i want to start by saying that i appreciate very much the opportunity to be on this panel.

it is a great testament to the american enterprise institute, and i say the same thing to my folks all the time, that we need not be talking amongst ourselves, but we need to be talking with each other. i wanted to say one word about where i come from in this debate. i grew up in the military family. my mother -- my father was a naval academy graduate. i grew up keenly aware of that dangerous impact on the men and women in uniforms and their families. there was a strong sense of what our country stood for, the values for which we and our men and women in uniform fight. and my own views as an adult on this issue are very much shaped

by a group of retired generals and admirals who believe very strongly that torture and cruel treatment of prisoners is wrong. they agree with general petreaus and senator mccain, the controversy about owns the bin laden success, which brings us here today. torture not only violates our fundamental values and our principles, but it is counterproductive in the fight against our enemies, particularly al qaeda, and that it puts our men and women in uniform at greater risk. there with his panel was framed was what was the role of torture. and certainly the debate in the op-ed pages has been about, did torture lead to bin laden? could we have had this victory

with the elimination of osama bin laden with the use of waterboarding and other torture? with great respect for general asey, the fax were challenged by a senator mccain senator mccain was informed by his discussion and it turns out a letter from director panetta at the cia about what we know about what led to bin laden. the washington post earlier today got a copy of that letter and i think it will be public as some point, it was not made public by senator mccain. but it looks as though the record confirms clearly what senator mccain said in his piece in the washington post about the damage that torture does.

and that is that the facts as a matter of record as we now know them are not as judge mukasey pointed out. the cia got the names of the couriers from a low level informant and the accuracy of that name was lightly confirmed by a foreign intelligence service, probably the kuwaitis. and as senator mccain from the cia director, we did not learn real name from so- called enhanced interrogation techniques. not for many detainee in our custody. none of the three prisoners that we reportedly waterboarded provided his real name or his whereabouts or an accurate description of his role in al qaeda. i think people are sometimes

surprised when a person from a human rights organization talks about the efficacy or not of torture. and that, many people think it is illegitimate to talk about that question when we are dealing with an act that has been so universally condemned by our own government, by many presidents going way back, and in fact in the case of waterboarding, that we have prosecuted and soldiers were engaging and against our own troops. but i do think it is relevant and i think here it is very important for us to have a discussion based on the facts. i think we will learn more facts as director panetta's letter becomes public. but we should be having this conversation based on facts and not fantasy. i think it is of course very tempting when you have a national security victory of a level that this is, the killing

of our enemy of osama bin laden, -- success has many mothers, as they say. but i think what we're talking about here is a policy of abuse of prisoners that has been repudiated definitively. i am sorry that we are having to have the conversation about it again, but i think it is necessary that we do, because there are very well respected people including of my fellow panelists here, who believe that torture was a pathway to bin laden. i think they are wrong and we should talk about it. >> marc thiessen is a fellow here and a writer for the washington post. he wrote and drafted the

president's speech discussing the enhanced interrogation program. >> thank you for being here. we appreciate you being here coming to engage and i hope we will agree to disagree agreeably. the first area of disagreement is that we who are on the other side of this issue do not argue that torture was necessary to get information from detainee's because we are give the what was done was not torture. i was a silly as by a major newspaper to write a pays defending the use of torture and i said i do not support the use of torture and they were not interested. a lot of people dispute the fact that the interrogation that took less was torture. senator mccain said the waterboarding was indisputably torture. many people dispute that including many people with him in vietnam. i make sure you are familiar with colonel bud day, captured,

brought back, and so brutally tortured that he could not perform his basic functions. i asked him what he thought of that and he said, "i am a supporter of waterboarding. it is not torture. waterboarding is scaring someone with no long-term injuries effects. it is a scare tactic that works." an american hero who underwent excruciating tortures and knows more than any of us what torturous. the same with a another medal of honor winner who serve with senator mccain in north vietnam. he said that waterboarding is not torture. torture involves extreme brutal pain, breaking bones, beating said the blood spatters on the wall, in my mind there is a difference. i could go on. there is admiral jeremiah denton as one who actually and north vietnamese propaganda videos before he was forced to

do, he actually blanked the were tortured in the course code to get the word out that they were being tortured. he also says that waterboarding is not torture. this is not an issue that is beyond dispute. it is not an issue that everyone does it not agreed. as dissevered for mccain, you mentioned that he said that it was not the first place that we learned about courier. he cited his floor speech of foreign intelligence report, the first mention as a important out tate and member came from a report in another country. we did not render him to that country for the purpose of interrogation. this is been held up as proof that we did not learn this from cia detainees. i want to talk to a member of of number of cia officials. none of them had heard of this report. they did not know what he was talking about. we dug deeper and it turned out

that the report senator mccain was referring to was a foreign intelligence report the was collected in the early 2000's, and had no information of any great value in it. it mentioned al-kuwaiti in passing. they only reason they found it was after the cia detainees had found him. they went to all of their data bases and started to find any mention of his name. they came across this report in 2007. it was the first they had seen it. it told them nothing that they did not know already. they moved on. the idea up -- his statement is technically true. it was the first mention but nobody knew about it. the way that they learned about al-kuwaiti, as he mentioned, they learned it from detainee's. senator mccain misstates the

situation with gul. he says he did not get the intermission -- that we got the permission to standard to briefing. but he was subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques. it was completely and cooperative. he underwent in his interrogation of became cooperative. just as it was with all the detainees for the enhanced interrogation stopped and he went to the standard debriefing. and that is when he gave the mother lode of the information aiti, the most important information that put us on his trip. senator mccain has been briefed on how interrogations' work. he knows that interrogation techniques were never used to gain intelligence. there were used to gain cooperation. they bring people to a state of cooperation. they ask questions that they knew the answer to to test whether the detainee was still

resisting. once he made the decision to cooperate, they stop the techniques, never went back, ever the subsequent years that they were in custody -- custody, the standard debriefing techniques. the idea that he got it through standard interrogation techniques ignores the fact that he would not have been talking at all if it did not been for enhanced interrogation. i think senator mccain service fairly believes what he is sane but many of the things he said look in his speech last week were misleading. >> part of the debate is a dispute over facts, what ever happened. in letters from director panetta or in links right after the bin laden operation, so i want to turn with the only person who has worked on the cia at the panel to ask him, which version of what we have been hearing

seems closest. [laughter] i hesitate to use the word the truth, but the facts as we know it, or could both sides be right here? and they are speaking past each other. what is your perspective from someone -- and the me say john rizzo was for many years and lawyer with the central intelligence agency, finally rising until 2008 to be the acting general counsel at the cia. >> thank you for that trip question. [laughter] i shall lay i stated the cia through october 2009. so i was acting general counsel for seven months for the obama administration. all i really can say at this point with any degree of certainty is that i was in it

from the beginning for better or for worse, for the next seven years. i was the addressee of the first memo. so beginning with abu zebeda, the real beginning, the cia that courierszed were the rosetta stone to finally locating bin laden. i distinctly remember from the beginning attending all of the late night operational meetings. there was an immense amount of information derived from

detainees on couriers. the detainees were asked to have been subject to the and parents -- in his interrogation program. as marc points out, the purpose of the program was not to break detainee said that they would blurt out the truth. the purpose of the program was to create a condition that would cause a detainee basically to give up hope and began to be truthful in the answers. some of the detainees who are actually approved for an answer to interrogation techniques never received them because they began talking relatively soon,

and without a considerable amount of the arrests. -- a considerable amount of duress. waterboarding always comes to but there were a menu of techniques, some relatively mild, waterboarding probably being the most aggressive. many detainees began talking after being subjected to some but not all of the techniques. i guess what i'm saying in general and i really do not -- i am gone from the cia so i have no cross to bear. i like to look forward to reading the cia director leon panetta's letter. i got to know him in my last several months and is a man of the utmost integrity and honor. so i would be prepared to accept his characterization of

the role that the program played. one other thing, when we talk about the enhanced interrogation program, what word, what do not work, we sometimes overlook an aspect of the program. the near-isolation of it, putting detainees incommunicado. that in itself is an interrogation technique that would not have been available other than by the cia program. i have always thought from the beginning, and i think there is evidence on the record, that merely the isolation, that nature of the program allowed no visitors, no red cross, and no news to anyway -- i have always thought that was a key important element for causing an

atmosphere whereby detainees with alternately talked. and by definition, isolation by itself is nothing but isolation. i would note that you keep that in mind because i think it is one of the unreported, not sufficiently recorded benefits or attributes of the program. as for the rest of the program, it was effectively taken off the table by the president's executive order. a few days after he took office. no idea whether that answered your question. but some of this is ultimately unknowable. i will not tell you that but for every single one of those interrogation techniques, we would never have learned anything.

i cannot say that. i cannot say with any degree of certainty that some of the information would have been collected somehow without the program. but i do know that the cia program, it was the most important, the toughest, the most sophisticated, and most knowledgeable element of the hawkeye the leadership. i personally find it hard to believe that any information, any valuable information, certainly the location of bin laden, would of been given up on a simple army field manual question and answer format. >> several have mentioned one of the biggest differences between the bush and obama administrations has been the closing down of any kind of classified interrogation methods. a lot like to welcome you from

the brookings institution were uris scholar and a well-known author published where you are a scholar and a well-known author. has that difference caused -- i hesitate to use the word distortion -- but differences in the way that the interrogation'' may of been carried out? this administration has ramped up the use of drones to kill al qaeda leaders were might be the case that the bush administration preferred to attack -- to capture them. the obama administration does not want to be involved in interrogation that cause the bin laden operation to be a kill operation. >> thank you for having me. i would like to start with a point that elisa touched on briefly, but there's some

emphasis. elisa mentioned that there are people in the human-rights community who would object to her having this debate at all. but that this is actually an important place to start. the new york times editorial after this question arose said the question of the efficacy of these techniques is an illegitimate question. and we were not allowed to discuss it at all. so i think the important place to start this discussion is, first of all, to agree with elisa that these are actually important questions, and it actually matters very profoundly, they are extraordinarily hard to answer for all the reasons that we had talked about and i am sure we will continue to talk about. the first important thing to say is that the situation in which we're going to capture high value detainees in a crisis environment and have to figure out what techniques you are and

are not going to do to them is going to rise again at some point. when it does, the calculation that we will make will not be a simple moral copulation. do we feel better if we are very nice and if we are not nice, versus, do we fill not nice to really not nice. the question will be indelibly inflected with the question of what we expect to take to look like. i want to emphasize that you can disagree very profoundly about these issues and there is a lot of disagreement that you see on this panel, but the first important. bank is that they are actually important questions and we cannot shy away from them. i want to divide the questions before returning to johns broader question, i want to divide the issue into three analytically distinct questions that are often conflated in the

sort of coercive investigation giving us bin laden, because there are different levels to the answers. all of them have been contested vigorously over the last 10 years, although the first question, a lot of people are not denying that they ever contested it. the first question is, was there very important information derived from programmatic custodial interrogations of detainees that you then assemble over time into a mosaic and continually process and go back and referred to -- and did that contribute materially to the mosaic of information that led to the killing of osama bin laden? i think the answer to that question is simply yes. i do not think it is a complicated question or a difficult question.

there is a debt -- this is where the debate interacts with the detention debate that underlies it. if you are not allowed to detained outside of the criminal justice system, large numbers of people at various times and interrogate them for those little bits of mosaic information that you then assemble, i do not think there is any good argument that this result of rises. so that is i think the easy question. the second question is the one that john just alluded to, which is, is there value added to that general process of custodial interrogations with strategic interrogation is the feature of it, is there value added to that when you isolate the highest value detainees in a separate program subject to a different set of rules? leaving aside the question of

what those rules do and do not permit. you're takin