mr. schiff. mr. schiff: i'm pleased to yield to the gentleman, mr. becerra. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. becerra: i thank the gentleman for yielding time. the goal of america and the international community in our negotiations with iran is and has been to prevent iran from producing and possessing nuclear weapons. by all accounts iran had already reached a point where it was perhaps just months away from crossing that nuclear threshold. i repeat, months away. not years, not decades, months away. so few votes can be taken more seriously than one intended to halt the spread of nuclear weapons. that's why this congress and the american people should support the agreement negotiated to prevent iran from producing and possessing nuclear weapons and we should vote in this congress against any of these congressional measures attempting to thwart its implementation. the negotiate aid greement provides for inspection and verification a regime which iran had to consent to and it

mr. schiff. mr. schiff: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to yield five minutes to the gentlelady from new york, mrs. lowey, the ranking member of the appropriations committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized for five minutes. mrs. lowey: thank you, mr. speaker. reasonable people disagree about the merits and shortcomings of the joint comprehensive plan of action. in the strongest democracy in the world, we have the sacred duty to uphold the high standard of debate and govern responsibly. that's why i'm profoundly disappointed by personal attacks, character assassinations on both sides of this debate, and i am outraged by the republicans' attempt to score political points on this critical issue of national and global security. the threat to pursue wasteful litigation and to tie the hands of our president until the end of his term are particularly outrageous when the senate has indicated it will not even consider these measures. i strongly oppose the blatantly irresponsible partisan pol

mr. schiff. mr. schiff: i'm pleased to yield to the gentleman, mr. becerra. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. becerra: i thank the gentleman for yielding time. the goal of america and the international community in our negotiations with iran is and has been to prevent iran from producing and possessing nuclear weapons. by all accounts iran had already reached a point where it was perhaps just months away from crossing that nuclear threshold. i repeat, months away. not years, not decades, months away. so few votes can be taken more seriously than one intended to halt the spread of nuclear weapons. that's why this congress and the american people should support the agreement negotiated to prevent iran from producing and possessing nuclear weapons and we should vote in this congress against any of these congressional measures attempting to thwart its implementation. the negotiate aid greement provides for inspection and verification a regime which iran had to consent to and it

mr. schiff. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, directors, for joining us today. thank you so much for your service to the country. i'm pleased we're holding this hearing in open session, and it's telling that our committee open hearings this year have been focused on cyber, the challenge of securing our networks, and related issues of encryption and terrorist use of social media are among the most pressing challenges we face. the threat to our public and private networks is all too apparent. in the past year alone, we have seen highly publicized hacks of sony pictures, not far from my district, intrusions into health insurance providers promera and anthem. and a devastating hack into the office of personnel management. these three instances, which took place in the context of thousands of other intrusions every day, show the breadth, scale, and crippling potential of the threat to our economy, our privacy, and our national security. there are no simple answers to these problems. in fact, some

mr. schiff. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, directors, for joining us today. thank you so much for your service to the country. i'm pleased we're holding this hearing in open session, and it's telling that our committee open hearings this year have been focused on cyber, the challenge of securing our networks, and related issues of encryption and terrorist use of social media are among the most pressing challenges we face. the threat to our public and private networks is all too apparent. in the past year alone, we have seen highly publicized hacks of sony pictures, not far from my district, intrusions into health insurance providers promera and anthem. these three instances, which took place in the context of thousands of other intrusions every day, show the breadth, scale, and crippling potential of the threat to our economy, our privacy, and our national security. there are no simple answers to these problems. in fact, some of the steps we can take to better secure our data and our privacy can have unintended consequences. a good example are the largely wel

mr. schiff. first of all, i very much appreciate the feedback from the companies we've been trying to engage in dialogue with companies because this is not a problem that's going to be solved by the government alone. it's going to require industry, academia, associations of all kinds, and the government. i hope we can start from a place we all agree is a problem and that we share the same values around that problem. when i hear people talk about the crypto wars, it throws me because wars are fought between people with different values. i think we all share the same values here. we all care about safety and security on the internet. i'm a big fan of strong encryption. we all care about public safety. the problem we have here is those are in tension in a whole lot of our work increasingly in counterterrorism and counterintelligence work, and given that we care about the same things, i hope we can agree we ought to come together to solve that problem. i've heard from a lot of folks it's too hard, an

mr. acting ranking member. richard schiff, i also want to wish a happy birthday in advance. i think you're celebrating maybe the 32nd anniversary of your 15th birthday tomorrow. spirit that would make your 82, i think spending now that i'm 55 i started celebrating anniversaries about five years ago. i want to ask the question that they also be appropriate for the second got to go back to armed service committee so i will start the discussion here. i am concerned with your efforts when it involves an isp that's not within u.s. jurisdiction. and efforts that we would have fear to strengthen our ability to get to information for u.s. domiciled isps, if the potential risk that could have for people who may intend to use this for the kinds of purposes that you going after. some may or may not be. would risk do we have gone beyond just the 180 day retention requirement, dealing with that and clarify the obligations of the isps with respect to the water requirements? what risk do we have of just having that snakes go to another past year and still be able to do what they want to ac

mr. clapper, who is here. general clapper who was here today. i thank you both. as you heard in the introduction, we're fortunate to have both devin nunez and adam schiff with us, provingrue post-post-cold war moment where the assessment about what the biggest threats the united states is facing differ considerably, if you look in the national threat assessment that you get each january, february, it's, for the past few years, said cyber is the biggest threat. if you look at what the pentagon would tell you, they would say a resurgent russia under putin is the biggest threat. if you look at the assessments that come from others who are more focused on the middle east, they would tell you the rise of isis is perhaps the biggest challenge that we face now, although not necessarily one that could reach the united states. so i'd like to ask each of you to both tell us which of those you believe, but then more importantly, tell us what the fact that we're getting such a different . we try to first start out to be bipartisan. we can do that quite often, because it is behind closed doors. with he don't have a lot of the political banter that you withily see in public hearings