barack obama did the best job of making sure it was on line as well as offline.e learned a lot from howard dean's loss in iowa from -- in 2004. his ground game, that person to person of voter appeal was not there. they have a lot of people signed up to support howard dean in iowa on the internet, but their numbers on the ground did not match or come close. they did not have the kind of ground can necessary to get people from the committed. john kerry did. the personal connection -- we can never predict the future, but we are a pretty intense information age. that personal attention is still so critical to take what you have on line and make sure you have it offline, too. >> more question. the woman and a purple shirt. -- the woman in the purple shirt. >> my question is for mr. willington. you talked about candidate personality and how that can affect voter for turnout. your candidate had a photo shoot in cosmopolitan magazine that came about how would you say that affected voter turnout? did you enhance that factor for within voters? -- for women voters? how do t

in vitoria, the world's largest iron ore producer had seven plants knocked offline, costing the company7 million. it is not clear who did it or what the motive was. but the people who do these sorts of things are no longer teenagers making mischief. they're now likely to be highly trained soldiers with the chinese army, or part of an organized crime group in russia, europe or the americas. >> jim lewis: they can disrupt critical infrastructure, wipe databases. we know they can rob banks. so it's a much bigger and more serious threat. >> kroft: jim lewis is a director at the center for strategic and international studies, and he led a group that prepared a major report on cyber security for president obama. what was it that made the government begin to take this seriously? >> lewis: in 2007, we probably had our electronic pearl harbor. it was an espionage pearl harbor. some unknown foreign power-- and, honestly, we don't know who it is-- broke into the department of defense, to the department of state, the department of commerce, probably the department of energy, probably nasa. they bro

. >> i know that if there are issues, that we should talk about offline, i will be glad to do this. >> i want to ask a question to the panel. the moratorium is affecting louisiana in a very tremendous weight. do you have the technollgy to know where the oil reservoir is? to you have the technology to know this? do you know how deeply that you have to drill before you go into the oil reservoir. >> let me just say, to a reasonably high degree of accuracy -- >> what is reasonable? >> i would have to get an expert to tell you, in the gulf of mexico, how many feet -- how many feet below are you? >> what group exists if you were going to drill an oil well, possibly? what are the risks involving that? would there be a tremendouss risk, minimal risk, is there a risk of having a blowout like we did over the deep water horizon? >> in response to another question, most -- a lot of these issues and blowouts have occurred prior to ever reaching the objective. hazards with shallow gas and overpressured salt water may lead to well controlled problems. the issue is that you do not have a lot of oil c

you get carbon credits for taking the coal generation offline, that co-2 that's not emitted, and you replaced it with a nuclear, just the tool that reduced the co-2 emotions. -- emissions that coal-fired generating, which might be a network, will have half their co-2 emissions that have been cut by the -- because of the replacement of nuclear become their carbon credits. what do they have now? they have something with value. they can take their carbon credits and they can sell them, through an exchange, on the board in chicago, two exchanges that exist, as far as i know right now, any organization that has any hint that any utility that has to burn more coal or natural gas or more diesel fuel and emit more co-2 wouud have to buy the carbon credits from the entity that had created them by replacing the co-- emissions with, say, nuclear, or wind, or solar or some other source. so these exchanges go on. carbon credits are expensive when they start and as they dial this down, the idea is to reduce the co-2 emissions from the standard, the cap, ast the cap at 2005 emissions levels, and tr

i will take my questions offline. guest: the caller raises all good questions.hose are all on answered questions right now. -- those are all unanswered questions right now. we are waiting for the faa, but i do not know if they can answer privacy concerns. someone else is going to have to deal with that part. the head of challenges just dealing with the safety question. host: would congress be able to write legislation to limit the as are set up guidelines as to where they can be used and what they can be used for? guest: that is awfully technical for congress. what they are doing right now, that is best left to the technical expertise over at the faa. what they're doing in the congress is the have legislation to push the faa saying that you have a plan to integrate these with specific mileposts and dates where things will happen. there is an faa reauthorization bill moving through congress renown then deals with their budget and future planning -- moving through congress right now that deals with their budget. the house would say, ok you have until 2013 to, but

were not collected consistently, agency databases lacked key functionality resulting in staff using offline work arounds, and some data that would be useful for evaluating management decisions were being collected in an ad hoc fashion. the oil and gas industry has changed dramatically and will continue to change as technology improves, allowing oil and gas resources to be developed that were out of reach, not long ago. this is true on shore with the expanding development and offshore in deep water. the ongoing oil spill illustrates the need to be able to assess the risks associated with new technologies and to attenuate not risk where possible, and mitigaae the damages associated with even rare, catastrophic failures. there are plans to reorganize interior's oil and gas program. there are opportunities to address this need on short and offshore -- onshore and offshore. changes in the industry require a balding guidance and regulation. this change provides the opportunity -- require evolving guidance and regulation. this change provide the opportunity to work across mms and blm. any reorgani

i would be happy to talk to you offline about that. we met with you guys. >> one more question. >> yes, this gentleman over here with the yellow tie. >> i am with the center for regulatory effectiveness. i have a question for steve larsen. we applaud your transparency actions, but there's a of -- but there appears to be a couple of actions you have taken that are inconsistent with your idea of transparency, and that is most certainly issuing a number of rules which made it impossible for the public to participate in the roll-making process. i realize there might be conditions that warned that, so my question is two-fold. with respect to the premium increase rules, will they be issued as an nprm, and will they be subject to the executive order which means that they will not be able to review them before they got rid >> all of them are going through the -- did get out. all of them are going through the omb review. i am not sure i'm ready to comment on what the process will be for issuing them. you mentioned the time frames. we agree with