they allowed the tkroeps to be flown? a lot i think there are of questions the f.a.a. is theyg about drones and how will be flown. t will take several months for the people to get permits and it limited. they want to know where and why they are flying and the process how people will be certified to fly them is still being worked out. they have to done that they can them same before receiving a full operational permit. so there is a phased approach in the you are right future we may need to see more licenses or regulations and to keep people from using them just for purposes that are not ok. mentioned congress is working on legislation about a half dozen pieces of it. what is he looking to do? guest: i'm not sure what he is looking to do specifically but a lot of members of congress who are concerned about this and want warrants before them to fly n use

around, they want limits in now before the drones are flown a lot. think that might help assure americans that their rights are being protected if they feel the e is coming up with solution before the drones are flying around. now no single i want to said regulate privacy. there is no one taking on that ta task. from the is next f.a.a. on this issue? see howhey are going to some of the technical issues can be worked out. a chance to get test drones and f.a.a. will get chance to see how well the drones can fly in air space. mike in massachusetts,host: mig down, if you could ask a quick question? caller: who is going to take responsible -- responsibility for dropping these things out of

the air. what about moving drugs around? thank you. question.at we do not know how people are going to move those things around in the future. figuring out if people are breaking the regulations, what happens to them? that question remains unanswered at this point. host: the faa is having a town hall meeting online today. if people are interested, go to their website to find out more. now we go to the national press club where they are having a newsmaker luncheon. the guest is congressman elijah cummings of maryland, talking about gun legislation. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> ok, so we will begin.

welcome to the national press club. happy easter and passover season to everyone who celebrates those. and happy spring. will the world's leading organization for journalists and, as we say, the place where news happens. my name is bob wiener. have we are honored to congressman elijah cummings of baltimore, presenting it a reality check on congressional gun legislation. the representative is a ranking member of the house oversight democratic reform committee. the congressman is the former chairman of the congressional black caucus. now with more than 100 co- sponsors on gun tracking legislation. he takes the gun safety issue personally and points to his nephew, 20, murdered by a gun

shop when he was a student. despite projections of prompt action in the newtown, conn. massacre, including 21st graders, neither chamber has moved to final passage. president obama insisted in his state of the union address that victims of mass gun violence deserved a vote. joeident obama designated , including an assault weapons ban, limits on magazine capacity, and mental health monitoring and assistance. he will discuss the state of congressional action and substance of the gun tracking legislation as well as other pending bills. the representative represents

maryland's seventh district. he is a member of the joint congressional economic committee. thank you to your staff. he is congress's leader on drug policy, which is how i met him and first work for him in the white house drug office, where they incidently admire the congressman enormously. elected in 1996 after serving in the house of delegates for 14 years, he was the first african- american in the history of maryland and to be named to the second highest office. he states he has dedicated his life to uplifting and empowering people. congressman will speak for 20 to

25 minutes followed by questions. ariel? if you could stand up? a student at the university of pennsylvania in a course called dealing with the media will actually deal with you and take the microphone around and make sure you do not abuse the privilege of the questions, ok? so, please send a fire self as u.s. questions. identify your name and organization. questions but not speeches, please. i also want to thank richard mann, right here. thank you. my staff also assisted. and the staff of the national press club, as well as the "

newsmakers" chair, and congressman staff, sophia simmons, jennifer hoffman, jean fernagain.my fine jimmy? >> yes, you got it. >> and carlos [indiscernible] treatms that someone to gum legislation as an april fool's joke. or they want to wait until the next massacre to bring attention back to it. today "the washington post," the lead story is pro-gun targeting key bills. i am going to read the first three paragraphs. "gun control measures that seemed desperate to become law after the school shooting in newtown, conn., are under jeopardy after the lobbying campaign from gun advocates.

senators have been unable to within the system for background checks, something nine out of 10 people support. gun trafficking a federal crime could be gutted if lawmakers except new language being circulated by the national rifle association. should we not all be outraged? so, clearly the congressman is a leader in the field and one that we must year from today. the national press club is the place where news is made and today we are so thrilled that you are here to do it. congressman elijah cummings. >> thank you very much, mr. wiener for your kind introduction. i am indeed honored to be here

this morning. a present -- a tremendous honor to be in the presence of my wife, i would like to thank her for being here today as well. today i want to talk about an issue that is extremely personal for me and my family. that is the issue of gun violence. in june of 2011 i lost my nephew, christopher. oft him to a senseless act gun violence. christopher was just 20 years old. he was a student at old dominion university in norfolk, virginia. like the beautiful children who lost their lives at sandy hook, he was an amazing young man with his entire life ahead of him.

it is a painful thing to see your nephew, your son, or your daughter, to see their blood splattered over walls and couches, or wherever they may have been killed. others, i was living to the unimaginable suffering of losing a loved one due to gun violence. the pain that i feel in my heart today, even these years later. last week during a press conference urging the country not to forget the massacre in newtown, the president was joined by mothers who are fighting the legislation to reduce gun violence. fully tell you, i understand their passion. i fully understand their pain.

i also fully understand their purpose. because when you lose a family member like that, you just do not mourn them at their funeral. you mourn them every single day of your life. you mourn for the person they could have been. for children murdered at five years old, six years old, as they were at sandy hook, you mourn every missed a birthday, every graduation, every christmas, and that is right, every easter. every milestone list is a reminder of the life they could have led had they not been so cruelly and violently stashed away. ,ot only are we morning we lost

but remembering what could have been. this loss leads to great passion. to it just does not lead great passion in family members. it leads to great passion in those who hear about these incidents. those who were the neighbors and friends of these children. those who went to church with them. the passion is deep and powerful. i am thoroughly convinced that that passion must be to change. -- need to change. we will keep fighting for gun safety legislation. i will be fighting for that legislation until i die. i want to start today by talking about our fight against the

problem of gun trafficking and straw purchasing, which i have been working on for several years. forum but ian organize last month included first responders and law- enforcement officials who were victims of gun trafficking crimes. is our brave it law enforcement officers and first responders who find themselves on the wrong end of a gun barrel. to share some of their stories with you today, lest we never forget. we need to constantly remind ourselves of these stories so that they are printed within the dna of our brains as we debate the gun issue. ted f these brave men is

kazino. alarm, the fire, turned out to be an ambush set by a name -- a man named william spangler, a convicted felon who served 17 years in prison for killing his 92-year-old grandmother with a hammer. despite his history of violence, spangler convinces neighbor to buy the 12 gauge shotgun and bushmaster rifle that he used to murder two firefighters and injured two scardino.cluding mr. here are the pictures of the two firefighters that lost their lives that day. 19-year-old thomas

[indiscernible] and his mentor, might chiapperini. he left behind -- mike chiapperini. a reality check, he left behind a wife and children. that is the reality check. they are no longer with us. they're dead. we also heard about the loss of one of his own officers in pennsylvania. encountered and her thomas, a convicted felon who swerved into oncoming traffic -- andrew thomas, a convicted felon who swerved into oncoming traffic. for some reason a straw

bought sevenlingly handguns and two rifles for this killer, even though he was a convicted felon. something is awfully wrong with that picture. officer fox was only 34 years old. he was one of our heroes. he was in iraq war veteran who returned home as a hero. he left behind a pregnant wife and a daughter. that is the reality. the chief told us that he was like a son to him. from a sanm we heard francisco police chief. the chief described a gun trafficking ring that stretched from georgia, rural georgia, california. it involved hundreds of

firearms. as a matter of fact, the chief told us that a lot of people who are convicted felons there are looking for ways to be legally make money. instead of going into drug crack -- drug trafficking, the going to drug trafficking -- gun trafficking. neededconcerned that we a dedicated law to address this gaping loophole. many of these firearms, by the way, wind up in the streets of the bay area. they are recovered at crime scenes across oakland and the bay area. including those areas including armed robbery suspects. the handsm fell into of a convicted felon. multiple gang members and drug traffickers.

ladies and gentlemen, let's be clear. this problem is everywhere. just sandy hook, not just baltimore, not just a rural georgia. just last week there were reports of another straw purchasing incident in colorado, which i am sure that you heard about. a convicted felon shot and killed colorado possible prison chief and a pizza delivery man. -- colorado's prison chief and a pizza delivery man. the shooter was on parole after east -- serving four years in prison for punching a prison guard in 2008. now, most americans already think that gun trafficking is a federal crime. i have news for you, it is not. they have no idea that there is no federal law targeting firearms traffickers who use

straw purchasers to buy guns for convicted felons and other dangerous criminals who cannot legally buy guns on their own. in congress we have heard repeatedly from law enforcement that the law to prevent straw purchasers, and this is their words, not mine, that they are viewed as nothing more than paperwork violations similar to getting a ticket for going 65 in a 55 mile zone. again, not my words, those are the atf and police words. after years of working on this issue and hearing firsthand from law enforcement officials that they needed congress to strengthen gun trafficking laws, i join my republicans and democrats in february to introduce gun trafficking prevention acts for 2013. this common-sense legislation explicita first time

prohibition on firearm trafficking, making straw purchasing a serious crime by increasing the maximum penalty to 20 years in prison. i am grateful to have significant support from law enforcement officials all over the country. nearly 30 organizations support the bill, including law enforcement officials throughout the nation. these officials believe that this legislation it is very critical to combating firearms moving to criminals, cartels, and other dangers people. also enjoys significant bipartisan support in the house of representatives thanks to the fall leadership of rep scott mitchell.

patrick me hand, carolyn maloney, they joined me in introducing this legislation. bipartisan support for the legislation grows every day. the housew surpassed of representatives. the legislation also has significant bipartisan support within the senate. it was passed by the senate judiciary committee with the support of republican ranking members, charles grassley, with the support of republican senators off the committee as well. this week, after months of work, the full senate will vote on this critical legislation. then there will be time for the house to act. hope the house judiciary committee act to begin the process of marking up

legislation so that the full house can vote on a package before summer. i know that we still have a long way to go before the president and sign this legislation into law. but it will be a tough fight. but it will be a fight worth fighting. have so much on our side. we have common sense. a desperate need. most importantly, we have the driving passion of thousands of families who have been victimized by gun violence. the vast majority of americans believe that congress passed legislation to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. i know that both the president and vice president share of the passion for reducing gun

violence. for the first time in decades the white house made preventing gun violence a top priority. just last week the white house held a press conference on this issue. but we will never forget those who lost their lives because a gun man decided to pull the trigger. as the president said, "" we are proposing -- what we are proposing is not radical. it is not taking away anyone's gun rights. it is something that if we are serious, we will do it. now is the time to turn heartbreak into something real." now, i have been asked apart from our gun trafficking bell whether i support other gun related legislation, and the answer is that i do. for example, i believe that

fixing the background check system is one of the most common sense actions we can take to prevent criminals from getting guns. i think that would complement our gun trafficking legislation very well. background checks would prevent many criminals from obtaining guns. the anti-trafficking legislation would impose strong new criminal penalties on those who try to get around the system. for myself, i have chosen to focus primarily on gun trafficking legislation, because it is an issue i have been working on for several years. i have worked painstakingly with both democrats and republicans to slowly build a bipartisan coalition behind this bill. i strongly believe that when people understand what this bill does, they will support it wholeheartedly.

in fact, even the nra has come around over the past several months. there are only two groups that still oppose this bill. let me say that again, there are only two -- that still oppose this bill. criminals and people who want to buy guns for criminals. if congress had passed this universal background check legislation, we will have made substantive reform to reduce gun violence across this great nation. we are not done yet. but i believe that if we work together and work hard and we focus on our common purpose, our common purpose of protecting our families from gun violence, then we will have succeeded.

not one, should have to send a child to school, be it sandy hook or old dominion, and wonder whether he or she will make it home alive. our country is better than that. we are better than that. cities,ca's inner suburbs, and small towns, gun than 11,000 more american lives each year. more than three times the number of americans that lost their lives during the decade-long war in iraq. that is the reality. by gun make these deaths violence transformative. as a nation we must help to heal the families who have suffered so much. part of the healing process for

me and for countless other families is to prevent other senseless deaths from gun violence from occurring again. we are the congress of the united states. putust be vigilant and party politics and rhetoric aside, taking protecting american families and future generations of our priority. this is our watch. this is our watch. to borrow the words of the great martin luther king, he said the be must substitutes courage for cost. for passing meaningful gun legislation as soon as possible." when i think, about the many young people who have died, i think about the

children in sandy hook. i think about the mass shootings we have heard about and seen on our television sets, the ones that you have written about. i do leave with all my heart that we survivors do not have the right to be silent. we do not have the right. with that, i will take questions. >> ok, i will monitor questions. stay here with us. you have to reach far down. i am going to lead off the questions and ask the moderator to ask if, the politics of this issue, with 90% of americans supporting your measure and the background checks, in fact are

there not more parents concerned about the lives of their kids than leaders of the nra? not even the membership, which by a majority supports these measures. what are the politics that allow the nra to transcend and have a story like in today's open "the washington post," that your bill will be gutted and inserted with new language? what are the politics around that? how can we reverse it? are we going to lose the opportunity unless american selectively pay and not attention? -- pay not attention? willam so pleased that you all have a in a few minutes an opportunity to ask wayne pierre appear. -- up here that question.

i cannot answer that question, because i can only speak from my own reality. i do believe will all my heart that when you have 20 children children,little simply learning how to read "run, spot, run," getting ready for christmas and somebody comes -- i said ins them my speech that there are certain transformative moments that happen in all of our lives. if that does not cause folks to say that we need

to look at the way that our country is operating and say that we need to do something about gun violence, i do not know what will. i will be interested to hear what the nra has to say about that. having lived in politics as lawyers i have, one that greatest concerns is these arguments go back and forth and we wind up doing nothing. we wind up doing absolutely nothing. i do believe that when you have pregnantents, they are with opportunity to make a difference. and if we do not act in those moments, then things will likely only get worse. me beating upear

on the nra. i want to work with the nra to bring about meaningful legislation so that we get something done. i want to deal with the bottom line. do we get something or don't we? do we have legislation, or don't we? the arguments will fade into the universe. the question is, have we accomplished anything. greg questions. i would put that on to mr. pierre. >> all right, are you ready? start in the back. identify yourself and your organization. strawpurchasers, -- >>

purchasers resulted in the deaths of one u.s.-mexican border patrol agent. would your bill prohibits the federal government from participating? yes,early, first of all -- and other words it was wrong. reason it wasthe wrong. the legislation would address that issue. >> in the front? >> you talk about these transformative moments. but there have been a number of them. a congress woman was shot in the head. is it really different? in the latee bill 1980's in texas, a shooting in

scotland in 1995, repealing the assault weapons ban in the house. whyitt why would this -- would this be different? >> 5-year-old children. i do not know if any of you have children, but the idea of sending a 5-year-old to school and then someone walks in and murders them, i think that that -- in other words, every life is precious, whether it is a 100 but-old or a five year-old, you can learn something. i am glad u.s. that question. i believe that -- i wish that

all legislators could go and do what i did last friday. one of the things i try to always do is make sure to feed my passion. what i mean by that is that i stay focused on my job. twot one week ago i -- weeks ago i called our medical center in baltimore. i asked if i could come and see an autopsy. autopsy of see an someone who had been the victim of gun violence. after about one week, a case came up and he allowed me to see it. i wanted to be reminded of how

serious this thing was. to see aopportunity young man, the age of my nephew, who had been shot in the head. i looked at him. a very healthy young man. i watched the autopsy. of you havew if any ever seen an autopsy. it is not pleasant. i am glad that we titled this will be titled it. what is it? reality check. this young man the day before was probably sitting getting prepared for easter. this was a human being.

friends and probably a girlfriend. who has a mother and father. the reality is i am looking at a body. has gone through the autopsy process. we need some reality checks. i do not know what it is. i do not know, i do not know .hat has to happen people are trying to do the right thing in their judgment. people concerned about the issue

of gun violence are trying to do the right thing in their judgment. there has to be a way to make these things come together and make sense so that folks do not have to witness that. i am convinced that it can be done and it must be done. people say -- do you have hope? just because you do not get every single thing the one, i learned this as a legislator, you just keep pushing and pushing. the difference is what we're talking about. of course you would step back and hear about that.

perhaps again that would be the question to ask. >> second row? >> alito caldwell, associated press. the language proposed by the nra would increase the evidentiary requirements. making an already difficult crime to prosecute that much more difficult because there is not a federal trafficking law. is that something that you would except? >> i think that'd waters down the bill tremendously. according to what i read in the post, it appears that they are not solid on the language.

it is apparently a draft but i would hope that our friends in the any -- nra would consider that. i want to be effective and efficient. we have laws that are meant to are convictedo felons from getting guns. it would seem that we would close the loopholes with regard to that. [indiscernible] said something not long about when -- not long ago when talking about this bill. he said -- we are working on .aws to beef up his own

it was a week or two ago. beefing up penalties on straw purchases and the illegal trafficking that they want prosecuted. look, we are 5 million families. law-enforcement families and trainers. "we want to make people safe. that is what we do every day." i did not say that. the nra said that. if that is the case we should be able to come together and create some common-sense legislation that is effective. i'm hoping we will be able to do

that. we will have to wait and see. >> could you tell us about the stacks of legislation to put restrictions on ammunition [indiscernible] the leader of, has said that he does not know if he has the votes to do what he needs to get that legislation up. he says he has opened up a door as an to be put before amendment. personally, i would love to see limits on magazine clips and assault weapons.

but at the same time i want to make sure that something gets done. this and argue that. and we would do absolutely nothing. we have to be absolutely careful of that. to her credit, senator feinstein has done a phenomenal job and i have tremendous admiration for her and her efforts, but at the same time i is thatat is happening they have a determination and we will have to see how it goes. >> in the back?

>> robert, from wjla. just a quick question, it has been made clear in the past, the point that was made today, a proposal made to congress even on speculation for the state changing laws about armed guards on campuses. your perspective out -- on armed guards on campuses? >> having more guns in schools is not necessarily the answer. i think due respect, that any jurisdiction that wants to take care of their kids in that way, their students, it may not be a bad proposal. we still do not know exactly all the details. i assume that that is what he will be talking about in the next few minutes. keep in mind that gun violence is not restricted to schools.

have malls, movie theaters. in my neighborhood, the neighborhood i live in. schools are one thing, but we it in a general scope. district,area in my howard county, which has guns in schools, certain schools. talking to the guards, they tell me that the greatest benefit is intelligence. in other words, talking to the kids, learning what might be going on. things that nature. so, i do not know. but i would not just throw that

suggestion out the window just as i would not want them to toss " we are trying to address here. to accomplish some good things and i would hope that they would take a look at those things and not do things to water them down. >> going back to the high , thert for the proposal

bill has [indiscernible] sponsors in congress. but there are more than 500 members of the house. 20% level of approval of , withot -- both members this legislation be good? at the same time when there is hard support around the people , do youhis legislation think that congress is not being effective in the position? >> 435 members of the house, 100 members of the senate, just to get the numbers right. >> that is a lot. may not evenion

have that. my point is that the number of co-sponsors does not necessarily equal the number people who support the legislation, you get what i am saying? i think that we have, as a congress, a duty to look at this problem very carefully. i think that when we have a other toility to reach come up with meaningful regulations, like those happening in our urban areas every day, one of the things about this legislation, and i

want you to understand this, what is happening is we have cases where as i said in my speech where folks are convicted felons. figure outying to how to make money and supply their gang members with guns. there are a lot of cases where .e have had testimony on this get someone to buy guns. one gentleman's girlfriend purchased 64 guns in rural georgia in a manner of months. those guns were sent to oakland, sold and distributed, the next

thing you know they are showing up at crime scenes. that is happening all over the country. according to testimony we have hasived, gun trafficking become one of the crimes du jour. the problem is that we do not have the necessary dedicated gun trafficking federal statutes to close that big hole. always buy back in the various cities. the guns are constantly flowing into areas all over the country.

we want to make sure that we do everything in our power to stop it. members understand only two people would be against this. the criminal and the person who wants to buy the gun from the criminal. who not know anyone else would be against it. >> thank you for doing this today. spoken to many congressmen over the years on this issue. what keeps coming up? can you generalize the major things to keep coming up?

>> you know, i think -- i cannot say one particular thing. seen tow that i have the republican co-sponsors. i think that the nra, not telling you anything you don't know, has put forward significant efforts to put forward their position. people would say that that is a consideration. others i assume are looking at but i believe that there is a way where you are do it -- dealing with something of this significance

as something in your brain, the kind of pain and suffering that comes out of this issue. that it is on the side of what is right. by the way, our constituents are pretty much convinced already. talk about gun owners who say that they believe that background checks would be supported at 90%. gunse who actually have feel strongly about these measures. in some way the role that the mayor of new york has played has

been significant in trying to a push to remind them to come up with reasonable ways to investigate the problem, at the same time making clear where she puts it in the home. surecing that out to make that folks understand that's we are not trying to take away their guns, but at the same time you want to demonstrate so that things like sandy hook do not happen. >> [inaudible] project home base after [inaudible]

explicitly, are you frustrated by the fact that democrats in the senate have not moved on this? are you concerned that this legislation could be slipping away? question. frustration -- i am not frustrated. thatse i believe everything has its moment. i think that the cases being -- keep in mind that we were at a point where we could not even have this discussion a year ago. i may not have even been invited to the press club. but here we are.

this is about moving the ball up court. scoreot know if we will two points, three points, or more. it may be that we laid a inndation to do even more the next congress. passion is that the that comes out of the parents from sandy hook, the passion that people that you and i know about in baltimore from those who have suffered so much gun violence, the passion that comes , i do not getrs frustrated because my concern about frustration is that sometimes you can get so caught

up in the frustration that you get distracted from your goal and i always try to keep my eye on the prize, to make a difference. the prize is that when i think about a young man who is lying , with a bullet hole under his year on the side of his head, that is my passion. that if he could speak, he would say that congress does not have the right to remain silent. and that we need to keep it in mind. a lot of people look at folks who have suffered from gun

they are thesay -- crusaders. but one thing that they do not think about and tend to forget, that they are acting out their pain and they have turned it into passion to carry out a person. but you still keep pushing on. , this is the gun. they're doing it so that it does not happen to other children, so that it does not happen to other young people. two other folks, like the teachers in sandy hook. ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much. conclude,sman, as we thank you for the sharpness of your time.

we have been yelled at for going too long. we have a very informative presentation and we would like to present you with this traditional national press club mug. thank you for coming. by the way, yes, we would have found another reason to ask you. [laughter] you, all. >> we are now adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013]

>> if you missed of any of what he had to say on guns, you can go to our website, c-span.org. a task force has added more than 100 of types of guns to connecticut's banned gun list. tweet us. hash tag.l is the the national rifle association

is releasing a report on security in schools. the centerpiece is armed guards in schools. live coverage expected to start in just a moment. airportssion about tsa screening procedures coming up at noon eastern time. isth korea says it restarting up with a reactor and increasing production of nuclear weapons material. john kerry is meeting today in washington with south korea's foreign defense minister. we will have live coverage at about 4:20 eastern.

good morning. hutchinson and i welcome you to this important presentation to increase school safety. i received a call last december from the nra. they asked if i would be interested in leading an effort on school safety. we arrived at a agreement which is my mandate. we will not have any predetermined outcomes. we would have the full support to employ the experts to develop a review of our national efforts on school safety and make the recommendations as

appropriate. the nra has fulfilled their side of the bargain. they have given us the support needed to reach their product that we are presenting today. there is no guarantee the nra will accept these recommendations. these are the recommendations of the task force. to introduce the members of the task force that are here today. we're delighted that some of them have joined us. on the first row is ralph -- where are you? over here to the side. former commissioner of u.s. customs.

an expert in the field of law enforcement and security. washave a retired colonel, air force security officer, former joint staff's anti- terrorism and homeland defense director at the pentagon. . formerhoenix solutions decker th former deputy assistant secretary for critical infrastructure protection. some of theecognize other members of the task force that have arrived at this report. i am pleased to release the

comprehensive report of the national school shield initiative. this report includes everything tom best practices technology to review of surveillance and includes the recommendations that i will present later in this presentation. theseer three months, experts have engaged in the assessments of multiple schools of sizes, of composition. assessments and evaluations of best practices and vulnerability ies. have conducted interviews with people knowledgeable in the field.

the president of the national association of school security and a commander of school security in the philadelphia school district. thank you for joining us. .ne of the experts in the field some ofo go through the findings from the school assessments. we will present our recommendations from the task force. we will have a comment from a special guest and open it up for questions and answers. i wanted to cover some of the things that we found. we looked at the interior and an exterior doors, architecture and design of the schools.

then we look at the armed the staff that may be armed. we believe they make a difference in the various layers of security. we found something very significant. here is really a two-tiered layer of security in our schools. officers, technology and surveillance and magnetometers and policy development. then you have the smaller schools, the middle sized havels, those that resource challenges. they are part of a major focus

will need to have. our recommendations are directed at the schools that are trying to do something with school safety but are struggling with the resources to do it. .ook at perimeter fencing they are not adequate perimeter fencing for a school. ones that do might not be in proper repair. use the technology to have a single point of access for visitors to check in and to show identification. we find that many of them have server ellen's cameras. -- surveillance cameras.

it might be at the ceiling level rather than at the eye level. look at the doors which are so critical. some of them do not have the thee coverings to protect and exterior doors. is there and an anti-carding device? the interior doors and windows in our best practices show some of the state of the art designed for interior doors. the windows so often go around the interior doors. are they sufficient to protect against an intruder.

.he bus operation all the buses lined up to pick up the students. there is better practices for you didbuses a line so not convert it all the students in one place as they load and unload from the buses. we've looked at the personnel badges. sometimes the badges are not worn. sro training. there is some enhancements in training that can improve not just their training but also their coordination with law enforcement. then the armed security staff. there has been a movement to

consider armed security staff. the findings referencing managing threat information which goes to the mental health side of the school environment and whether there is proper collection of threat information and response, whether it is through the action of counselors in addressing any mental health challenge in the schools. there's a compilation as an appendix to this report. the best practices that we found around the nation reflecting some of the work of the to problem of education and the department of justice and the department of homeland security and appalling that together. let me move to the

recommendations of our task force. these recommendations have three audiences. first would be the national rifle association for long-term support in the area of school safety, to reflect their strong commitment in that area. second would be to state policy makers. thethird audience is federal policy makers. is forst recommendation model training programs. modele presented a training program for school resource officers that is an enhancement of what they currently undertake an hour required. o 60 hours of

training. that is an appendix in the presentation. modele prepared a training program for a selected armed school personnel. this is probably the one item that catches everybody's attention. why is is part of our recommendations? in pearlthe incident high school in 1997. an active shooter went into the school and killed two students and wounded others. left thetant principal school and went to his truck and retrieved his semi-automatic

firearm and return to the school and disarm the the assailants. that is an example where the response is critical. the key is reducing that response time. if he had been trained or had access on his person, he might have saved more lives. of so -- one of the findings the team went through one school that did not have school resource officers and they were plotting to arm school staff. when the inquiry was made about what kind of training do you have, it was clearly insufficient training. adequateon't have

direction on what is a model program for armed personnel. teachers should teach. if there is a person out with good experience and is willing to go through this training of that is anours, then appropriate resource that a school should be able to utilize. changing theopt to be it allows a firearm carried by school personnel when they go through this model training program. thatve a model state law can be considered for this purpose. is anird recommendation interagency agreement between

the law enforcement agency and the school. thateard the concern police personnel in the school or armed guards in the school somehow increases the episodes of juvenile delinquency and the reporting of disciplinary action rather than treating them as routine school disciplinary incidence. cleareed to have understandings reflected in a memorandum of understanding between the school and the law enforcement agency. onlinecal tool, an assessment tool that is web- based that the schools can utilize that would be on the national school shield website.

summarized inbeen the document that we are presenting. schools have to hire an expert or they struggle with local law enforcement to develop their policies. this tool is available for any school free of charge on the website and will not be something a principal can fill out. the school will have to be able to get access and they will be asked questions on access control. does the school and forced it to visitor sign-in and access control? what actions are taken when on

authorized visitors are detected? those are a sample of the questions. then they go to the best practices to address the solutions for their security policies. a change in state education policies. educationin our state advocacy based on the curriculum the students take. they have is that done a safety assessment and they have a plan that is in place. that is a recommendation for the states. they do something in terms of assessment.

-- wederal policy makers need to have improved coordination and more directed funding. we have three departments of the government that are all engaged in school safety -- education, justice, and homeland security. agencyed to have a lead with greater coordination. is greater role support for innovation and training grants. the school districts have absorbed the cost and they are prepared to do that.

the seventh recommendation is to the nra. he national school shield become an umbrella organization to support school safety across this nation the the free access into the best practices that will be available to the schools and to create pilot therams to fine-tune assessment tool and also to look at paula programs in mental health -- to look at pilot andrams in a mental health to answer questions. we recommend a long-term commitment through the national school shield. we have a specific pilot program on a threat assessment and mental health.

thatecret service found 71% of attackers felt threatened or bullied. ist is a great indicator -- indicator. partneringd the nss with other partners interested in mental health and that we can create programs that will be state of the art encouraging information sharing, identify threats and offering counseling support. please read the report. it is accessible online. please give close attention to

the appendices that are attached to it. now i want to introduce somebody who is the parent of james who was killed at the sandy hook elementary school, which triggered the national review of this issue of school safety. mark has expressed an interest in school safety and has asked to make a comment. mark? >> good morning. i wanted to take a minute and applaud the task force and the nra for spending the time and resources for putting a program like this together. it is important that everybody recognizes -- we send our

children off to school. expectationstain and in sandy hook, those expectations were not met. this is a comprehensive program. i think politics should be set aside. i hope this does not lead to name calling. these are recommendations for solutions. solutions to make our kids safer. whichd a report from 2002 has some great input. the federal, at state, and local level out of ort report to make newtown yorktown safer?

i put this on you to implement solutions so people do not have to go through what i'm going through. i was on google this morning. nine school shootings since newtown. i do not know that everybody got the press with respect to the impact. i just applaud you for doing this. i think it is important. look what took place at sandy hook. mental health. that is a big component of this. we need the kids to be safe. positivew for a interaction with a lot

enforcement professional. law enforcement professional. people knew about what people didn'tmind but the y report it to somebody. we have to prevent this going forward. [applause] >> thank you, mark. now we would be happy to take questions. yes, sir. about training volunteers. [indiscernible] >> is there a microphone around

here? volunteers, my impression is there would be great reluctance from school superintendents. we have shifted to school staff, trained school staff that is designated by the school board. for every discussion school district in terms of sro's and armed school staff and volunteers as well. one is a liability concern. theissue is addressed in best practices. the school's all-time elite make these decisions. u.s. about the cost of this effort.

$1 million by the nra to fund this effort. t.ey have supported i looking at the support, you can see it it is a substantial investments. am., ma' [indiscernible] our whole effort is about school safety. the impact i hope we have is that we talk about things that will keep children safe for in school. programs from the private sector and support from the policy makers.

we want the debate focused on school safety. yes, sir? [indiscernible] do d.c. any common ground -- you see any common ground to work together? well, i help they continue to talk and work together. i have not focused on the separate debate in congress they firearms and how should be dealt with. when they are seeking common

ground, i hope this will be the common ground. there are common sense steps that can be taken by policy makers. president obama supports additional funding on school safety. it is focused and you can open -- he biggest chunk additional grants through homeland security to the schools. they can compete with additional dollars. yes, sir? >> recent polling on gun legislation shows more than 80% of americans support universal background checks. why is that proposal not part of eld? shi

>> my organization is represented in this room. we might have won a few of background checks. on school safety and making our schools a safer environment. we all want to make sure that criminals, those that had been declared with mental issues, that they not have access. that is a discussion that will go on. we're trying to do something about school safety. non-sroould agree that personnel might be armed inside a school and they should undergo an extensive background check.

>> that is part of the recommendation. any school staff designated by the school to be a trained, armed response. they would go through background checks and testing and screening and then 40 to 60 hours of training. everybody has a different level of background and experience. that is a very comprehensive program. anyone designated as an armed response should have the adequate training to accomplish the task and be safe. [indiscernible] >> you mean in terms of an

accident? one thing you know for sure is the response time is critical. just like the assistant principal that i mentioned. he had to go to is truck to get a gun. if you can reduce the response lives.t will save that is the objectives. theyrm retention and how know how to protect that and to make sure it is properly cared for. that is a key element of the model training program. >> you talk about response time .

offshooter in newtown got dozens of rounds. in reference to newtown, what was the first thing the school did after the incident? they got armed officers to protect the children. they did not have response capability. you had teachers giving up their lives. we want to have a better response, to give the schools more tools so they can respond quickly. yes, sir. >> if any part of the national school shield involves coordination with the bureau of alcohol tobacco and firearms or

a push with the nra to support that? wondering if the atf was involved? education, home and security, and justice. that has been our focus and not the atf. [indiscernible] >> the nra is entering a gun problem with more guns. >> every local school district will make a decision.

i talked him at the philadelphia school district. every student goes straight studenteter. -- every goes through a magnetometer. i respect that decision. other school districts want to have an armed response. they want to have a different capability. we are giving them an option. if you're interested in making the schools safer and to save children's lives, look these recommendations seriously. the presence of an armed security in a school is a layer that is just as important as a

mental health component. if you have the armed presence it ist locking doors, inadequate. it is a comprehensive plan in which the armed school personnel is one element. report showr pu how many armed personnel would be needed at a school? what do we do about recess? >> excellent question. there is no specific recommendations on how many sro's or armed personnel is in a specific school. john?

>> not specifically for the school. make sure you're looking at the entire posture of your school, your building, the number of students. the schoolbe up to to determine the level of resources. an sro in every school building is important. right now you have sro's rotating between maybe three campuses. . would judge that insufficient there should be at least one and every school campus to reduce response time. >> would you review the relationships between the school and the nra?

--the relationship between ok. i amelationship -- employed as a consultant that leads this task force in which i have asked each of these experts to independently look at the issue of school safety and to make these recommendations. whether this is unanimous? everybody has signed off on this report. there is probably a lot of different political leanings and different viewpoints that are reflected. there is a unity of opinion when it comes to these recommendations on school safety. [indiscernible]

it is important that they be trained with the firearm that they carry and utilize. they have to practice with that. there is no specific recommendation on that. is everything from and .idearm to shotgunned to ar-15 weapons a variety of that are utilized by the school officers based upon their local

leadership and what they determine is best for their environment. u.s. question about the presence of security. mall there is security. there is security here at the national press club. is nothing i am afraid of. i'm very wide open. there is nothing i'm nervous about. 'am. ma >> is it the conclusion that every school in the united states should have an armed presence? >> the specific findings is the

presence of an armed security personnel in a school adds a la diminishesrity and response time that is beneficial to the overall security. we recognize that the decision is locally made. some school districts decide not to go that direction. we want to make sure our resources are available whenever decision is made. a rural state. the smaller school districts struggle. this is a key tool to provide more options for school security and safety. >> what is the average cost to train one of these -- to

maintain them every year? >> what you come up here? tony. >> the program is about 40 to 60 hours. the average cost is somewhere pernd $800 to $1,000 student. right nowot set cost that we of the attached to the program. we have made the recommendations but we're not attached a price to that. when i say student i mean student in the training programs, not students in the schools. >> last question.

>> how does it cost the school -- how do you justify paying for that? because it is it necessary. there is reference to a school resource officer might cost $60,000 in one jurisdiction and 000 in another. it varies. the trading costs should be a more constant. how does a school justify it? look at the armed school personnel. 40 tost would be for the

60 hours. .hen the training cost itself there's a lot of different ways the trading can be accomplished by the states. it would be by professional private sector trainers. it could be by the law enforcement entity in the state. we want to make sure it is accessible and we have as many traders that are properly trained as possible. that was a follow-up. [indiscernible]

that is the sandy hook report you are referring to? [indiscernible] i would be interested in what connecticut is doing for school safety. i will cite it is totally inadequate. assault weapons and a dozen stop somebody caliberg in a .45 firearm into the school. it doesn't stop violence in the schools. you have to do something about school safety and enhancing our safety measures in the school.

it can be done. that is the purpose of this task force. thank you for your work in this. will our hope the nra accept these recommendations. thank you for your attendance today. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] can see this briefing at our website. go to c-span.org. we are looking at some of your tweets on the topic of gun control.

gun contast htag rol. theave a portion of what logic cummings had to say. -- had to say.ngjah cumming reduce gun violence. fully tell you, i understand their passion. i fully understand their pain. i also fully understand their purpose.

because when you lose a family member like that, you just do not mourn them at their funeral. you mourn them every single day of your life. you mourn for the person they could have been. for children murdered at five years old, six years old, as they were at sandy hook, you mourn every missed a birthday, every graduation, every christmas, and that is right, every easter. every milestone list is a reminder of the life they could have led had they not been so cruelly and violently stashed away. ,ot only are we morning w lost but remembering what could have been.

this loss leads to great passio to it just does not lead great passion in family members. it leads to great passion in those who hear about these incidents. those who were the neighbors and friends of these children. those who went to church with them. the passion is deep and powerful. i am thoroughly convinced that that passion must be to change. -- need to change. we will keep >> you can see the entire remarks at the c-span video

library. we have more live programming coming up in about 10 minutes. a federal appears court will hear arguments challenging body scans. live coverage begins at noon eastern. john kerry is meeting today with south korea's foreign affairs minister. the government representatives will be speaking to reporters this afternoon. that will be live here run c- pan.n c-s media.ave to take back more powerful than any missile or bomb. that explodes on

to the scene. screen for hat tv many hours in the week. we to hear people outside the box -- wen eed to hear people outside -- we need to hear people outside the box. taking your calls on sunday on c-span2. the catolive at institute for a discussion on tsa screening procedures. a look back from today's "washington journal."

the great for everybody to say. -- to see. that: the president noted the good news that things have .tarted to improve there're a number of solutions including greater use of the private sector to make that happen. here is a headline. guest: i am not the headline writer for "the post."

there was some improvement in the grade. there's been more investment in the private sector. mped two levels. it has been difficult to talk andt raising user fees things like that. these debates are starting to happen in the state. there is a major transportation .lan in virginia the state of wyoming raised its gas tax. finallythe public is making legislators they have to

deal with that. oc host: what does this money go ?oward guest: maintaining the systems we have and building new systems. hot lanes have just been added

to the beltway. there's some interesting financing there. foras become difficult certain leaders to take this issue head on. the costok at $15, imposed on families by bad roads exceeds that kind of incremental invest and. ment. there is tremendous employment uptick from these investments. for every billion dollars, 30,000 jobs are created. sun" from baltimore patients morning.

morning.his it goes to the different projects. state lottery will help build 15 .chools and renovate others and casino construction in the state of maryland. this gas tax is a job killer, says one. this is not good for business, he is saying. -- thethe united states federal level is only 18 cents a gallon. these create a tremendous amount of jobs. we did a series of economic

reports. and that that energy and ports -- we look at energy and ports. if we are unable to increase investments and user fees -- they are a fair way to do this. in million jobs would be at risk. look atnk we need to these as investments. host: give us the amount that your group is calling for? guest: look at all 16 categories that we graded and clout to the year 2020, there is a total need $2.1 trillionion,

of the various funding sources. that leaves about $200 billion a year. that is a big number. issubmit that $200 billion more than a doable challenge for the united states. back to the comments made by the maryland politician. so manytax can help people in the construction industry. the cost of building materials is relatively low. the cost of borrowing is low. infrastructure sectors are water and the environment,

transportation, energy. caller.democratic caller: good morning. i travel around our state and the roads are in bad shape. i am looking for the bridges to collapse. there is bickering over everything. they are waiting for something to happen real bad with these roads. sending all this money overseas and helping everybody else. some of the democrats go up against their own party. they need to wake up. 2020. not talking about

vivian.e right, we talked after the minneapolis bridge collapse. she raises a point about the conditions in tennessee. one in 9 bridges in the united states is deficient. these are bridges that require more attention from state engineers. host: you gave bridges a c plus. is that an improvement? guest: yes, urban bridges are still a concern. caller: good morning. 30 years ago, i was flying from california to boston.

i believe they were also liveioning at katrina.>> now to the cato building in washington for a look at tsa airport screening procedures. this is live coverage on c-span, just getting underway. >> good early afternoon, everybody. welcome to the cato institute auditorium. ofm jim harper, director

information policy studies here at cato. i am very pleased in a way to welcome you here today to talk about all the ways that the government in pages on your travel through surveillance and direct intrusion on your variance as a traveler. on a second thought, i want to talk about all of them, some of the major ways that they do. twoill talk about different but related issues with the government and the travel. first, we will hear from edward hasbrouck. when i saw him give this presentation at nyu a few months ago, i thought more people need to see this and understand the intimate travel surveillance that the government conducts over all of us law abiding and lawbreaking alike when we try to move around the country and the world. first, full presentation from edward hasbrouck regarding his research in this area, which i think is very interesting and

concerning. after that, we will turn to the .ewsy topic, the tsa rulemaking ginger mccall will talk to us about the latest developments in that area of the introduction of a rule making on the part of the tsa, having to do with the strip search policy, being required by court order and the tsa having taken 20 months to produce two sentences of purgatory language and only 52 pages of the vast justification. a couple of internet notes for those of you watch online on c- span or here in the room, the .ashtag is #tsasearch i will be looking for comments and questions that i will use throughout the events. feel free to share the event with your colleagues online. for yorur ease, there is a tiny

url, where the tsa accepts comments. acomment.inyurl.com/ts .com/tgain, tinyurl sacomment. first, edward hasbrouck. may have been coined for an hasbrouck. our very first meeting that i recall was in boston and during a meeting of the dhs committee on which i served. he insists that i press the d hs. meritorious. were i think that is what you will see from him today. him the goek called to authority on international travel and an expert on airfare,

how to get the best deals on the internet. he is an author, journalist, blogger, consumer advocate and expert. he is the author of the practical nomad, how to travel around the world. , our ordinary travel expert would be quite ordinary greed and special -- especially after 911, edward hasbrouck noticed what we were suffering from our freedom of travel. today, i think he is one of the foremost experts on the surveillance of our travelers are i.d. systems. s. it system the identity project was founded by john gilmore. at a different meeting, he challenged me along with all the

other members of that committee to return to washington without showing id at the airport. i took them up on that challenge and had a pleasurable experience. at the time, we are sent to search for not having an id, you got through the line faster. thanks to john gilmore. we will take ed's presentation first. please join me in welcoming edward hasbrouck. [applause] >> thanks very much for that very kind introduction. thanks to all of you for coming here and to all of you tuning in. if you want to follow along at home, you can find copies of the slides that i will be slowing splease.org.t paper september 11, 2001, the

u.s. government has implemented an extraordinary comprehensive system of surveillance and control of our movements within the country and abroad. bits and pieces of it have been called out from time to time, but i think there's been little understanding of the ,omprehensive big picture which i will give you as quickly as possible today. the first step is the id requirement of people having government-issued credentials in order to travel by common carrier, not so much to prevent people without id from traveling -- although that is incidental -- in order to ensure that each act of travel can be logged and correlated into the second, meant best component of this process, a lifetime personal travel history of your movements on the basis of which the government has been permission-ove to a

based control regime in which decisions are made each time you want to go somewhere as to whether the government will let you on the basis of your identity and on the dossier of history linked to that identity. finally, once that permission is in place, the government has made the final step of the default from yes to know, rather than a right to travel, which can be interfered with only on the basis of judicial action. the presumption is no one is allowed to travel unless they receive affirmative travel permission. andi think the governments systems since september 11 is that everything about airport is different and not subject to any of the usual rules have made it more difficult than it should be to put these things in perspective. good frame of reference for comparison for travel surveillance is when it's gone on in communication.

warrantless wiretapping. their recording movements. in one case, movement of messages and other movements of your physical person. both have been involved with burdens on the industry. in the case of the programs i will talk about, more than $2 oflion tby the underestimate mandated modifications in order to support reforming these government surveillance functions. finally, these systems have in common that they are suspicious dragnets. selecting information about everybody in case it might later be of interest to the government. although travel is not to be generous in the way the government says, there are significant differences. in is a legal framework,

more legal, protection than information about our physical bodies. that seems weird, but that is the way it is. congress does not seem inclined to fix it. the second big difference is and how the government uses this data. this is not just surveillance, but an active, real-time control system. it is a bit confusing, and this is going to be a bit technical. i will grant everything i will say from now on its a gross over certification, otherwise we will be her for days or weeks. travel it is complex and technical. matters byfused the its own inconsistency of policy and language over the last decade as the system has evolved. there are three different sets of not entirely identical but overlapping data that the government has required

airlines and travel companies to collect and make available to the government, demanding -- depending on whether it is a domestic or international flight. there are also different systems with different names. automated targeting system for international travel. there is also a difference that is not as significant as it looks, which is in the case of international travel. makes its own mirror copy of the reservation information, whereas for domestic travel, or it maintains real-time access. again, that does not matter so much. all of the controls on privacy of this information are controls on its copy, which are meaningless unless it can go back to the industrial host of the data and get another copy whenever it wants. who is holding the copy does not matter. whopeople who designed this mostly came from the nsa

assumed after september 11, they would get the information that the airlines have about travelers and make their own use of it. it is not working that. it also serves other travel companies, hotels, travel agencies and so forth and so on. there are four major and one more recent minor, google, which gives you a sense of how significant a business it is which together form an outsourced global cloud for hosting and data the entire travel industry. if you look at the diagram, you will notice there are at least two intermediaries between the travel and the government. this is why government can't get this data from travel

companies without needing a warrant. the traveler does not necessarily even have any way to know whether the government have gotten this data. of course, being a global cloud, each node is suspect to vulnerable with the -- phone her ability. -- vulnerability. to terrorists and government agencies, other law enforcement in the u.s. and foreign governments and their agencies around the world. in europe, there's been a great deal that say this diagram shows someone traveling within europe on a european airline that makes reservations through a european travel agency, even with a master copy there still may be multiple mirrored copies in the cloud which dhs can

access without anybody in europe knowing about it. the converse holds true as well. if you are traveling within the u.s., any government in the world where the airline or the reservation system or the travel agencies has an office can get ,ccess to it read for example the chinese public security bureau can go to the united airlines office in beijing and ask them to call up your reservation from washington to chicago. they can do that and they are required to because they are chinese citizens subject to chinese jurisdiction and law. they can hand that over in toto . no record is kept of this. it is not visible to the airlines that doesn't happen. unless you or someone you know has to be looking over their shoulder when it happens after the fact, there is no way to know whether whether it has happened. own is the tsa's

incomplete diagram of how this process works on the government side. there are many incomplete lisnes here. i want to focus on a few things here. the aviationce booking entities. these are the upper left. they are shown as a path to pass through, rather as the centerpiece. they are are not shown as connected directly to dhs at all. should cross out those, those should be going to record to the aviation booking. over on the right side, you see this is more than just what the tsa may describe as watch list mapping.

it is more complex and real- time evaluation. we still have the threat analysis, a black box -- it is showing here, a red box. to a is other activity call center so that the police can come and question you. was published before the latest update for both the secure flight and havems showing they now real-time access to other commercial databases, credit reports and whatever. what may be most significant, something that getting over to the left side of this diagram, this is an enlargement from another version of this diagram. you will notice there is passenger data moving from left to right, traveler to the airline, to those who are evaluated on the government

side. you will also notice that there are arrows going back from right to left. printingforging past result. that is the message. those are the control lines that have been demanded be built into the infrastructure. you might think if they are stopping you from flying, that might implicate the law. it does. that contradicts express statutory language not only guaranteeing your right to travel but specifically guaranteeing your right to , specifically a beginning tsa and its operations and rulemaking to consider that right as they never have done and any rulemaking to date. now, if they are not following it law, can you get reviewed in court. it is interesting to look at

what the express policy of the dhs has. these statements are from the secretary of homeland security who repeatedly said that he did not believe that no-fly orders should be subject to judicial review. he thought his decisions should not be subject to review by the kind of person he used to be when he was a federal judge. while these are policies of the dhs under the bush administration, the obama administration official has repudiated these of use and it continues to be the practice -- not so much to defend the systems that i'm talking about here -- but to actively resist being obligated to defend them before any court at all. so, what is in the records they compiled? your lifetime travel history? if you traveled across the u.s. borders in the last 10 years,

dhs has a file on you. with the identity project, we have put out forms for people to use. you can find them on our website or on my website. we have been compiling the your -- the responses. i stewed for the portions they have repelled. tions theyfor por withheld. in their discretion, they released quite a bit of damming information. some information we know is there include complete copies of passenger records, airline reservations and non-airline data. of any timelog, you cross the border and notes attached to that to give more information about whatever they deem of interest.

is a very simple passenger name record from washington dulles to bueonos aires. in only contact information this reservation is the phone number of a friend than a game -- gave what i reconfirmed my flight, who was intrigued and surprised to know he was permanently linked with me and our homeland security files. -- anotherever simple reservation from montréal to san francisco. we see an ip address and a timestamp. that can be correlated with internet records, the e-mail address, credit card number permitting them to pull in another associational data. they talk about using them for, to find people who are not yet suspected.

this is deliberately a guilt by association machine. that is what it is designed for and that is how it is used. it is not limited to air travel or travel to and from the u.s. ,his is a trip to brussels linux three and four, and this reservation, reflect the portion of the trip from paris and the back by train. what is that doing in the trial ? ride fromis a strasburg to frankfurt. thatis the smoking gun shows the dhs has root access. they are not merely using an airline user id. they have their own id with privileges. this person traveled to berlin, stayed there for a week, then to londono prod --

and then came home. lines three and four are within europe. the rest shows this was a separately-issued ticket, not connected to or from a flight to the u.s. on an airline that does not fly to the u.s. united airlines would not have seen that. only a user with root privileges would've been able to retrieve that, as the dhs did. everybody who i have spoken with who is gotten their files from dhs and the set what this is mean, when i have got over it with them, there's been something that disturbed them in their file. most of the time, once they have seen that, they don't want their file on the internet. each of these things here are something i have seen an actual examples of files that people have received in response to their request. to tellwhat dhs shows

us. hotel reservations, if they are made. whether or not they show up as a complex question, but they sometimes do if they made the reservation with the flight. i have seen them linked together with their name, gender, age, date of birth and so forth. whether those two travelers asked for one bed or two. , religion,l requests a special service request which may show medical conditions. these show up routinely. reservations for tours or cruises. the demographic, there is a lot of other information that might be more revealing than you think. billing codes are routine. law firms routinely have their travel agents enter what client they are billing the trip to.

everything that the travel company captures for its isiness purposes, this linked to by dhs into your permanent file. there can also be discount codes. if you get a discount because you are part of a group that is traveling to a particular conference or event or convention, that billing code may reveal what organization you were attending. even if it is an organization that is normally resistant to disclosing its membership list, as many are. second component of these files, in addition to the reservation, is the entry exit log. this is an excerpt from mine back to 1992. it was suppose to be published in the federal register before the system came into operation, it would not be published until 14 years later in 2006. operation of a system of records without proper notice is a crime.

no one has ever been prosecuted for it. this information is not just limited to flights to and from the u.s., it also includes overflights. canadians, if they go to cuba, -- what about the reverse? what would happen if cuba were beeny -- i routinely have in cuban airspace on american airlines flights between miami and pretty much anywhere in south america. what if cuba were to say everybody on any of these flights, the cuban government, nobody gets on one of these plans on american airlines unless the cuban government approves. what would we think of that? that is with the u.s. government is now demanding of

other countries. it is not limited to air travel. amtrak, this is a trip i've took by train across the u.s. canadian border. here is one for a trip by qatar. more recently, they have installed license plate readers at the border crossing. it would also include the license plate number of the car i was driving in. finally, the free text notes that can be associated with any entries and is logged. this is not people who were arrested or suspected, these can be entered even when nothing was found. negative vehicle exam, in this case, this was someone who walked across the border. why is this recorded in their permanent file? purpose andable use?

my file, i flew back -- it connected through london. i had an apple and some bread and i said can i keep these? they said you could keep the bread, but the apples you had to throw it away. i thought nothing of it, throwing it away. i found later that i was permanently linked to this event. at anther occasion agricultural industry expo in buenos aires, i checked the box that says i have been around livestock. you may not know what happens when you check that bought. get down atpeople your feet 5:00 in the morning in miami and wash your shoes with disaffected. if they get offer was my shoes, they get off on watching my shoes. why does this belong in my permanent file?

this is in john gilmore's file. he had a book entitled drugs and your rights. again, if this is not ouribited recording of first amendment rights, i do not know what is. trip thatm another john gilmore had taken, he was traveling for months. passenger attended a conference in berlin and traveled around to visit friends. 100% baggage exam, negative. passenger self employed, entrepreneur in the computer software business. i guess it an entrepreneur is suspicious and blogs in your personal file. -- belongs in your personal file. i hope all of you will be inspired to look into what is in your file, but also to look more closely at the reality of how that is being used and what we need to get out of the situation we have been put into,

where we now travel by common carrier only as a privilege granted by permission of the government. thank you. [applause] >> now, you have some sense of the digital lookover that you are getting before you arrive at the airport. what about the examination your body gets when you do get to the airport? you will find that ginger mccall lacks the intensity of edward hasbrouck thomas but she has the doggedness and maybe more. she's the director of the privacy information (program. she teaches on the law of open government at georgetown law center, working on a variety of issues including consumer protection, open government requests. she litigates the freedom of information act lawsuits.

did your mccall has co-authored -- she greatly speaks on government issues. hopefully, she will add to her resume the fact she is now spoken at cato. she has provided commentary to numerous outlets and journals to discuss the tsa recent rulemaking to the extent there is one and the strip-searched machine policy. ginger mccall. [applause] >> thank you very much for having me. i hope i can give as much intensity. they have been able to give me coffee beforehand so hopefully that will add to it. so i guess i'll start off with the good news. right now we have a very unique opportunity to comment on a very controversial air travel program. body scanner program, as we're calling it at epic, nude body scanners, have been something

that epic has worked on for four, five years now. we have had several lawsuits on this topic. and it's come to fruition by the agency. now skeptics will be asked, what will be the notice? isn't the agency just going to go ahead to do what it wants to do anyway? but we do believe it's an opportunity for the american public to weigh in on this. if the agency doesn't take your comments into account, doesn't take our comments into account, we will go ahead and take this further into court. this notice and comment rulemaking actually came out of a lawsuit that we filed on july 15, 2011. this was a lawsuit in d.c. circuit court. we filed under several legal doctrines, including the fourth amendment, the privacy act and the administrative procedure act. now, if that administrative procedure act says if an agency is going to issue a new rule, it has to go through a notice

and commenting rule. it has to give you and the rest of the american public and everyone who cares the opportunity to comment on that rule and give the agency feedback. as the agency is supposed to take that feedback into account. we pitigsed and got frustrated and filed this lawsuit in court. the court ruled in our favor on the a.p.a. issue which is quite unusual. it was the result we were very pleased with. the t.s.a. has not justified its failure in the notice and solicit comment and the agency practice, these body scanner machines, the nude body scanner machines that show that naked image to the t.s.a. official, imposes are substantial burden on the public. according to the court, upon so many members of the public, millions of travelers going each day through these airports

passing through these body scanner machines that were at that point posting up this graphic image for some t.s.a. agents in a room to look at. and the court expressed concern about the agency's use of body scanners. it ruled against us on the fourth amendment issue, but this was largely based on the agency's representation that members of the public have the option to "opt out of the machine," that you could opt for a patdown. now when we had originally started pursuing this topic, that patdown was just a fairly typical patdown that you would expect. i suppose the agency got a bit more frustrated and started to issue enhanced patdowns. some of you might be familiar with the sort of libertarian campaign that happened in the wake of these enhanced patdowns, the don't touch my junk. if you are not familiar i encourage you to youtube it and to do a little bit of research

what's included in these enhanced patdowns. now, these enhanced patdowns, this is not an option that epic would stand behind. we focus on body scanners and for passengers to opt out. we don't think the enhanced patdowns are appropriate. in fact, in our comments we will ask for a very different alternative. but the court ordered the agency in this case to undergo that notice and comment rulemaking, and the court said to the agency you need to do this, "promptly." it was a nearly two-year delay. and during this period epic filed multiple times with the court to, you know, encourage the court to tell the agency it needed to follow up, to give the agency a 30-day deadline, to give the agency some sort of deadline which they will order this notice and comment rulemaking. 20 months later now here we are

finally looking at the rulemaking after the court set a deadline last fall for the agency to have this completed by the end of march. so on march 26, which is no surprise to those of us who are following this -- actually, i figured it would be later. i thought it would be the final friday in march at 4:30 p.m., but they did it a few days early. they got it in under the wire, march 26. the t.s.a. started its notice and comment rulemaking period. so you, the members of the public, and we at epic and anyone else, the organizations here, cato and others, can now comment on this. the deadline for filing is june 24. we have information up on our website on epic.org. you can look. it's in the upper right-hand corner of our website or look for the key term t.s.a. comment. you can use the tiny u.r.l. that jim has mentioned, and we certainly encourage you to comment on this. now, we have taken a look at this proposed rule which really amounts to two sentences.

and the two sentences that t.s.a. is proposing to use to modify its current screening procedures are -- and here i am geag to go ahead and read it for you. the screening and inspection described may include the use of advanced imaging technology. for purposes of this section, advanced imaging technology used to detect anomalies without having contact with the individual being screened. that's 20 months worth of work right there. so nowhere in this does it take into account really the invasiveness of these machines. nowhere does it take into account the fact that your only alternative to these machines is a superinvasive patdown. nowhere do they take into account the sorts of real costs to passengers, to passengers who choose to opt out of this and then subject to long waits. i've attempted to opt out personally on this and i ended up having to opt back in because i waited for about 20 minutes for a t.s.a. officer of

my same sex to give me an enhanced patdown. finally when i decided i was going to miss my flight to the conference i was forced to opt back in. and this comports with a lot of what we heard from travelers when we asked travelers to tell us what their experience at airports have been. and it comports with a lot of what we found when we made of freedom of information act request to the agency. we had requested originally back in i believe it was 2008 or 2009 several different sets of documents from the t.s.a. on these body scanners. this is part of what inspired our entire campaign against the t.s.a. we requested documents like contracts, statements of work, technical specifications for these machines as well as passenger complaints. and what we got back was a stack of passenger complaints that was probably about this high. and we also got back contracts and statements which you can find on our website. and these indicated that the t.s.a. wasn't really telling the truth about these devices. it wasn't really telling the

truth about what the devices where capable of. they indicated that the devices were not designed to pick up powdered explosive which is something i'll talk about a little later in context of the rulemaking. that the devices were capable of capturing, storing and transferring those underlying naked images that were produced by the body scanner machines. and there were several other interesting findings that we have. i won't spend my time on that but you can find that on our website and this is what inspired our later lawsuit about the rulemaking is we really thought this was quite a large step for the agency to be taking without ever opening up to comment from the public. so given the text of that proposed rule, which again you can find a lot of information about this on our website and also at the u.r.l. that jim has mentioned, we have some recommendsations and these are the recommendations we include in our comments and we have some places where we think it might be great for other people

who have complementary expertise to weigh in. first, the agency has completely taken over the dialogue on this. first, it was the use of the word whole body scanners. ok. so -- it was whole body imaging originally. whole body imaging but i guess t.s.a. wasn't that a nice and warm and fuzzy enough term and it gave the public too much of an idea of what was going on with these machines so they changed it to body scanners. now they've changed it to an even more sanitized term which is advanced imaging technology. we are pushing back on this. we would encourage you to do the same. i know people have slightly more exfour-seam versions of this porno scanners, etc. we have taken to call them nude body scanners or n.b.s., because it gives a much more accurate image of what the machines are capable of. we support regulatory alternative. in these comments the agency

summarizes several different alternatives. and one of those alternatives is just to leave things the way they are, to stick with the metal detectors as we've been doing for the last probably two decades, decade and a half. and another alternative is to focus on the use of metal detectors along with explosives detection technology. and that's something that we would endorse because it's much more narrowly tail ord. it's only looking for a -- tailered, and it's only looking for a particular thing and that's a threat. body scanners pick up anything extra you might have in your pocket. in fact as we discovered when we issued our freedom of information act request to the agency they are not designed to pick up the very powdered explosives that are the key threat right now. that is the petm. and we also are very heavily going to come out in favor of the passenger's right to opt out. and to demand the use of generic image filters. one of the things that the

agency did that i think was somewhat of a victory to epic and to cato and for those who worked on this for a long time, they did make modifications to the machines in light of public protest against them. they required that privacy filters be put on these machines. but what we're asking is that those privacy filters be mandated. and in fact congress has asked for that same thing. they've mandated that t.s.a. use image filters on individuals who go through the screening process. and the courts have actually relied on the fact and ruling against us on that fourth amendment claim, they relied on the fact that the agency has represented to them and has represented to the public, you have the ability to opt out. so we're saying in this rule, let's go ahead and just put that into the actual regulation itself that you as passengers have a right to opt out and that the agency must use these generic image filters. there must be no underlying graphic image. there must be no other image that could possibly be stored. the generic stick outline that

has a spot on it that highlights where the anomaly is, that must be the only image that is used by the machine. and we're encouraging the public and any organizations to have people submit their personal experiences with t.s.a. that stack of complaints that we got showed a lot about what the agency has actually been doing on the ground. there's always discussions here in washington about the reality in the ideal case but very little actual discussion about the reality on the ground. and the reality on the ground is very different in airports around the country. the agency represented and we saw when this controversy really started to pick up that they put into place in the d.c. airports where members of congress would be going through the airport really great signage about the body scanner machines and you have the right to opt utt. big television screens explaining to you what these body scanner machines are and you have the right to opt out. everywhere else in the country you have a piece of paper that was about this big and it was

usually about 25 feet away from the machine or right in front of the machine so it was already too late for you to exercise that option. and that was the best-case scenario, that you actually got that piece of paper this is a body scanner machine. and some places there wasn't even that. so again asking travelers to really let the agency know what their real experiences are on the ground. but there's some other issues to address that epic really isn't in position to address and i think others might be in a better position to address. and that's the ambiguity of the terms and the rulemaking. some of the terminology is very ambiguous. it allows a lot of wiggle room on the agency's part and we're asking others to submit comments on this. anyone who has any expertise on the effectiveness of these machines, what they're actually capable of detecting. we've received in the documentation from the agency that the machines were not

designed to detect powdered explosives. the sort of lit are a ture that we've seen by rapid scan and other manufacturers of these machines have indicated the machine, the machines detects high density objects, that is ceramics or hard plastics, not powdered explosives. anyone that has expertise on that, it would be great for someone to submit comments. the adequacy of the t.s.a.'s cost-benefit analysis, and jim might have comments on this, but looking at the cost-benefit analysis that the agency has put together, it's simply not accurate and it doesn't take into account the kinds of real costs that travelers suffer. the agency seems to believe that it's very expensive to allow people to opt out of these machines, but where is the classification for how expensive it is for people to opt out of travel via airfare? a lot of people after these machines started to be put into place began to travel by car, began to travel by plane -- began to travel by train and

there is a cost to that. so to look at that cost-benefit analysis and really take it apart, because the agency has not taken it apart. the agency has put forth the most favorable position that it could possibly put forth on these machines. to look at the health risks and really give those a good look because t.s.a. certainly hasn't. the agency, when it started putting these machines in airports, hasn't ever had an independent assessment of the radiation risks created by the machine. to really look at accuracy and the description of the capabilities of these machines. to look at the impact of the agency's screening program on travelers with prosthetics and other medical devices. the machines are designed to pick up anomalies and a lot of those anomalies are colonoscopy bags or sort of devices that people might use after a mastectomy. they pick up very personal, very sensitive medical devices.

to take a look at the layered approach that t.s.a. says it has to airport security. when we say these machines aren't detecting powdered explosives, what we hear from the agency constantly, this is just one part of a larger layered approach to airport security. so let's take a look at that layered approach. let's really take it apart and let's let the agency know the places where this is weak, where it's too invasive, where the invasiveness is -- the retention of images still really hasn't been an issue to be addressed by the agency. they've constantly denied these machines are capable of retaining images but the document wes got indicated clearly that the machines were designed by t.s.a. specification to be able to retain, store, transfer these images. and this sort of -- the stick figure technology that the agency has put into place now, what it calls automated target recognition, doesn't

necessarily resolve that problem. if there is still an under lying image that's taken by the image and overlayed with that politically correct stick figure, it doesn't fix the problem of the capture and the storage of very invasive image. so we would encourage everyone here and everyone who's watching to file comments on this, to really let the agency know what you think, to tell the agency know what your experiences are with these machines and if you have some expertise and cost-benefit analysis in radiation risks and these sorts of issues to let the agency know, to take the time, because this is a rare opportunity to comment on a program that, you know, we, a lot of us have been working on this for four to five years. this is a very controversy program and we actually managed to force the agency to have to take your comments. so, you know, do take this opportunity to comment on this program. thank you. [applause]

>> edward hasbrouck, i suspect you have a few opinions about the t.s.a. new body scanning. i'd like to hear them. >> yeah, i'd particularly strongly endorse what ginger said, especially for those of you watching, it's critical for the t.s.a. to hear from those of you for whom being required to submit to a virtual strip search or to enhanced groping of your genitals is intolerable and who have therefore suffered the loss of your career, the loss of ability to visit family, friends, t.s.a. needs to hear from those of you who have been impacted. they want to pass this off as nobody should care if they're getting their genitals groped. nobody should care if somebody, you know, who for all you know is masturbating watching you naked, nobody should care about that. it's minor. it's not they need to hear, especially from those who have

their lives totally disrupted because travel is something we take for granted. one, as ginger read that regulation, it basically incorporates the idea of the virtual strip search machine into the authority that t.s.a. already claims that you must submit to screening. you must submit to whatever they say constitutes screening. it's critical to realize that at present there is absolutely no statutory or regulatory definition of what constitutes screening. there's no way to determine if they say you have to do this, do that, don't do that, don't do this, to find out whether you are allowed to do something or required to do something at a t.s.a. checkpoint is to refuse their orders, be arrested and fight it in court. that's wrong. and that's a problem with the lack of rules, a lack of rule

of law that far transcends the body scanners. but the other thing -- second point i want to make more specifically related to the rulemaking is that it's key for people to remind the t.s.a. that travel is a right, that they have an affirmative, explicit, statutory duty to consider your right to travel by air. and that's what's been missing from the whole frame of reference from the start of these post-9/11 aviation security programs is any recognition that these are conditions being imposed on the exercise of a right. once you recognize that these are conditions being imposed on the exercise of the right, then you have to recognize that they are subject to strict scrutiny, including two sorts of analysis that the t.s.a. hasn't conducted. they have to be shown to be actually effective, not merely intended for a legitimate purpose, but actually effectively for that purpose. when you look at it, most of what the t.s.a. says they're

effective for is catching drugs, not actually finding terrorists. and second, they have to be shown to be the least restrictive alternative that would fulfill that purpose. t.s.a. hasn't even pretended to conduct a restrictive alternative analysis. people need to remind them that travel is a right which they must take into consideration. >> yeah, this discussion of risk analysis and effectiveness is really i think one of the weakest points of this program. it's a program that's not only very invasive but it's not very effectively. and nowhere in their cost-benefit analysis within the 50 or so pages of actual analysis behind their sentence rule change do they actually address this, do they actually sit down and say this is the real risk being presented if we don't put these machines into place. this is how the machines mitigate the risk and do some sort of cost-benefit analysis calculation on this. there are numbers on this and i know jim earlier this year or

last year, you had an expert who was very good at estimating these actual risks that were created in travel. i mean, that's the sort of thing we need in these comments is someone who's very good at risk analysis. >> so i have my work cut out for me, do i? >> yes. >> cato scholar john muler has done some excellent work on risk management and cost-benefit analysis and will be participating in this rulemaking. related to that, and let's go to the audience shortly. online someone asks, what are the real and hidden costs of the t.s.a. screening program? we've alluded to some of them. in the regulatory documentation of the short 52 pages, most of which is not actually analysis, they cite the literal dollar costs to t.s.a., but there are many others. maybe we can brainstorm a little bit or discuss some of the costs that accrue to

passengers, to the airline system, to airports and so on and so forth from the use of these machines. >> well, there's obvious the cost to the passengers who choose not to fly when they can avoid it now, to drive instead of to fly because they don't want to subject of these sort of invasive machines. >> if i may interrupt, that cost includes death on the highways which occurs more often per mile traveled in cars than it does in airplanes. >> so there's that cost. there's also the weight time cost. these machines take longer than the metal detectors. there's a cost associated with that. i'm sure you have some other comments. >> let me take the other side of it which is what are the costs of the surveillance component of the travel control, more than $2 billion by d.h.s.'s own estimated by unfunded mandate for i.t. changes for the industry. there's also a cost to travelers in that you are

compelled by government order to provide additional information not directly to the government but for the government's purposes you're required to provide that additional information to the airline. one of the reasons the airlines haven't screamed more at the unfunded mandate is they've gotten a government gift. they have a free ride. there are no restrictions whatsoever after you've been forced to tell them this personal information on their ability to use, sell, monetize this in other ways. so it involves a massive government coerced transfer of informational property from individual travelers to the travel industry. certainly measured in the billions of dollars, although i think it's difficult to quantify. >> you might recall as travelers, a few years ago as travelers started collecting a birth date. they didn't have that if you are a frequent flyer, they need your birth date. so nowadays and it was only a few years ago that wasn't the case, you have to share your gender and your birth date so

it can be run past these systems. do we have questions or comments from the audience? i see third row back from the aisle. wait for the microphone. i don't require you to identify yourself. >> my name is brian. i'm a washington correspondent for euro politics. newspaper. andry follow this issue because the e.u. spent years trying to negotiate passenger name record agreements with the u.s. i was just particularly fascinated when you started describing data that the u.s. government would have concerning trips taken within europe. not even on airlines. so can you just quickly recap how that ends up in the hands of the u.s. government and then just on the agreements, i know the e.u., the volume of data was also the issue of the retention period, how long the data can be capped and the fact

there was no judicial review, what's your view on those other issues? >> well, we could talk all day on that. in terms of how does the u.s. government get the information as i showed you about flights, train trips, bus trips within europe? it gets it because the data is already stored or copies of it are already stored or are accessible in the u.s. now, that's possible because u.s. companies that do business in europe has almost universally completely ignored e.u. data protection law and because e.u. data protection authorities have completely failed to enforce the law. that whole agreement between the u.s. and the e.u. that you were talking about only relates to the mirror copies kept by d.h.s. of this data and does nothing to cure the pre-existent flagrant violation of european law the fact that the data is already transferred in the commercial sector to the u.s. but enough about that.

the other part of your question s -- >> [inaudible] >> well, again, that -- the agreement creates no judicial review because by its own terms it is not binding on the u.s. and is not enforceable in the u.s. all the agreement instituted was a partial grant of immunity so that some of the things that airlines, that travel companies have been doing that violated e.u. law would no longer violate e.u. law. it did nothing to create a right of judicial review in the u.s. this data is already exempt from the privacy act as far as the government sector. there are no privacy laws governing airlines, reservation systems in the u.s. so the commercial use of this data is completely unregulated. so that agreement did nothing to solve any of the problems which predated this and persists. >> question right in front.

>> i am not afraid to identify myself. lisa. writer and editor at t.s.a. news blog. we've been covering this and urging our readers to submit their comments. before people submit their comments they should at least know the t.s.a. very conveniently has started removing all the rapid scan machines which are the back scatter, the radiation emitting x-ray machines. by the time they say this comment period rolled around, there are no radiation emitting machines. we've removed them all. the millimeter machines have not been tested for safety. even if they're 100% safe there is still an invasive search of your body. they have a 54% false positive rate. they alarm on more than half the people that go through them, falsely alarm. before you submit your comments, i would just urge you perhaps not to dwell so much on the radiation because they're removing those. don't give them that chance to boot your comment out of the public docket.

concentrate on the fourth amendment violation, the violation of our bodies, the violation of our ability to travel about the country freely, the violation of the fourth amendment, and the fact that the scanners are so ineffective, they have a 54% false-positive rate. >> the one issue that comes up with the false positives, once you set off that alarm, then you're getting the patdown. >> let's take a question over here. in the middle of the front row. >> my name is helen anderson. i have been trying to get my case of invasion of privacy by military satellite surveillance into court for 40 years. our country continues to be more invasive of people's privacy rights every year. attorneys will not take my case. my question is, why don't they do something about it? it's the legal profession that is creating all of this