so it really was designed to make sure that at least with respect to know we each use the nsa, we had some meeting of the mind. so there's nothing in your opinion inconsistent between the memorandum of understanding between dhs and nsa, and the cybersecurity act of 2012? >> oh, not at all. >> i'm pleased to note for the record that in testimony earlier this week, secretary of defense panetta and chairman of the joint chiefs of staff general dempsey both endorsed this legislation. and then this morning before the armed services committee, the director of national intelligence clapper, general burgess, the head of defense intelligence agency also endorsed the legislation. both of those expressions of support were unexpected by senator collins in me, and, therefore, all the more appreciated. i wanted to ask you this question. d. h. s. and daschle control systems cyber emergency response team has played a critical role in providing support to the owners and operators of critical infrastructure. can you describe some of their capabilities and the work that they've done to assist private en

as a memorandum that describes the division of how we would each use the resources of the nsa, but it doesn't deal with the protection of the core critical infrastructure the way that the bill does. it doesn't deal with the private sector at all the way the bill does. it doesn't deal with information exchange the way the bill does so it really was designed to make sure that at least with respect to help we each use the nsa we have a meeting of the mind. >> there's nothing in your opinion inconsistent but in a memorandum of understanding between the dhs and nsa and the cybersecurity act of 2012? >> not at all. >> i'm pleased to note for the record that in testimony earlier this week said it to the defense leon panetta and the chairman of the trend chiefs of staff general dempsey both endorsed this legislation, and then this morning before the armed services committee, the director of national intelligence burgess and the head of the national intelligence agency also endorsed the legislation. both of those as questions of support were unexpected by symmetrical once and me and therefore

the concerns. and here's with that solution came up. nsa collects the threat information, brings back home and then gives it to folks out in the private sector who can handle that information the way -- they can use it operationally. but they can also protect us while they're doing it. folks like verizon. they have very advanced capabilities when it comes to defending their network. >> anyone else want to jump in on that one? >> quickly, i agree with that. the intent of the bill is to harness the capabilities of nsa. but it's also testament, i think, that senator rockefeller, former chairman of the intelligence committee and senator feinstein, the current chair of the intelligence committee and also we've had many debates on the issue. i think the outcome was that it should be within the secretary of homeland security's jurisdiction to be the prime facilitator. i think that's, you know, testament to quite a lot of discussion and debate. >> there's a message for getting nsa support. it is called tsr technical support. it is used for years an

i think senator mccain alluded to this that it's somehow duplicates the nsa. we don't need to clarify the authorities ordered jurisdiction to. as the chair of the joint chiefs and the others have recognized but dod and the dhs use the nsa but we use it in different ways. we are not duplicating are making it redundant. we're taking the nsa and using it to the extent we can within the framework of the bill to protect our civilians cyber net efforts. >> i understand the department of defense supports this legislation? from what i can understand, at least. is that your understanding? >> i think wholeheartedly. >> in terms of the privacy concerns, those concerns, in terms of the information supplied where there has been a threat that information when it is submitted to the government entity is protected? >> rights, the content is not shared. >> tell us more about that, content is not shared by the information shared with required minimization and requires the elimination of personally identifiable information. it includes all the things necessary to kill the public

but to leverage the capabilities of nsa through dhs to push up that as much as possible. anything there to induce that sector? i haven't considered that mys f myself -- the network of cyber security exchanges the bill sets up. this may kind of reach out to more sectors. we basically want to build on capacities for instance for the financial sectors and isacs around the country and who are eligible to be cyber security exchanges. we incentivize sharing information with those whether they're federal or nonfederal and we think establishing those procedures to link this network of exchanges will really facilitate the sharing of information. i think that's ant important point. >> finally the high end of the thread spectrum do you feel this piece of legislation would impede some of their capacities and capabilities? >> i think from -- >> provide strategy to push back? >> i think from a defensive nature on the critical infrastructure side, yes. i think, obviously, there are advanced persistent threats out there which are, you know, difficult to defend against. but i think that by

as a memorandum that describes the division of how we would each use the resources of the nsa, but it doesn't deal with the protection of the core critical infrastructure the way that the bill does. it doesn't deal with the private sector at all the way the bill does. it doesn't deal with information exchange the way the bill does so it really was designed to make sure that at least with respect to help we each use the nsa we have a meeting of the mind. >> there's nothing in your opinion inconsistent but in a memorandum of understanding between the dhs and nsa and the cybersecurity act of 2012? >> not at all. >> i'm pleased to note for the record that in testimony earlier this week said it to the defense leon panetta and the chairman of the trend chiefs of staff general dempsey both endorsed this legislation, and then this morning before the armed services committee, the director of national intelligence burgess and the head of the national intelligence agency also endorsed the legislation. both of those as questions of support were unexpected by symmetrical once and me and therefore

so we're trying to leverage the expertise of the nsa rather than re-creating it. we're trying to leverage the experti expertise of the private sector by making sure that when best practices and performance requirements are developed. they are first identified by the private sector and put forward by the private sector in that it's only through a process and collaboration with the private sector that we sort of identify the best practices that really should be the standards for it is most critical infrastructure. those are the things we're tried to do through legislation. stimdz it's sometimes it's hard to get legislation perfect. there is consensus on the need to account, and our hope is that action will occur soon and will address the sort of areas of highest risk. >> thank, nick. >> nick did a great job of describing some of the points of our bill, and i'll just add to that briefly. i think secretary chernoff described the bill quite well when he talked about some of the flex iblibilities in the chemic facility regulation. we're focusing the on the most critical,

we're trying to leverage it to the nsa rather than recreating it. by making sure that when best practices and performance requirements are developed, they are first identified by the private sector. put forward by the private sector, it is only through a process of collaboration that we identified the best practices that really should be the standards for the most critical infrastructure. those of the things we are trying to do through legislation. sometimes it is hard to get language perfect. the perfection of the enemy of the good here. there's a consensus on the need to act. our hope is that action will occur soon and will address these areas of highest risk. >> he did a great job of describing some of the points of our bill. i would just add to that briefly. i think secretary chertoff really described the bill quite well when he talked about some of the flexibility is in the chemical facility regulation. we basically, as he said, we are focusing on the most critical. it is the way we defined it. those that could lead to mass casualties, mass evac

on july 19 #th of 2010, it was reported that 854,000 people work for the national security agency, the nsa. in 33 building complexes amounting to 17 million square feet of space in the dc area. collection systems at the nsa interpret and store 1.4 billion e-mails and phone calls of american citizens in what amounts to a spy system. on may 23rd of this year, it was reported that the nsa has three times the budget of the cia with the capacity to download every six hours electronic communications equivalent to the entire contents of the library of congress. they also developed a program called thin thread that enables computers to scan material for key words and collect the billing records and dialed phone numbers of everyone in the country. in violation of communications laws, at&t, verizon, and bell south provide electronic records to the governments. at the height of insanity, and i have to say, east germany, for those of you who saw the film, the lives of others, at the height of the insanity, they were spying out of one out of every seven east german citizens. the united states spies on

to harnessing the expertise and capability at nsa. the intermediary role for some time. it is probably best housed in dhs. leverage the capabilities of nsa through dhs. >> insurance, reinsurance? anything to induced that sector? >> i have not considered that myself. the network of cyber security exchange -- this may reach out to more sectors, but we basically want to move on basic -- on existing capability. we want to -- who are eligible to be cyber security exchanges. we incentivize sharing information with those, whether federal or not federal. basically establishing those procedures to link this network of exchanges will facilitate the sharing of information. i think that is just an important. we wanted to make. >> finally, threat actors -- the higher end of the threat spectrum -- do you feel this legislation would impede some of their capabilities? >> i think from a defensive , yes. tha there are obviously persistent sides out there that are difficult to defend against. by skipping some standards, we can get to that point. i also

has the power of the nsa grown? >> guest: well, it's interesting. at least of the adviser, the power reached it height with henry kissinger. he was working for richard nixon. nixon did not trust the state department. nixon very much wanted to dominate foreign policy himself. he found kissinger a congenial partner, and so they -- nixon said at the beginning that he was going to resurrect national security council meetings like eisenhower and have this open process where everybody could argue. but that it would be structured so that he could clearly make decisions. he -- and he did some innovations this terms of how they did policy studies is so that unlike under eisenhower where they tried to reach con seven is us on policy, under nixon they were supposed to reach consensus on what the options were so the president could choose one of them and not be buried under a bureaucratic consensus. and they did that for a while. but nixon after he came to office found he really didn't like high-level meetings with people shouting at each other and people challe

which gave rise to the development of an intelligence capacity, breaking down of the walls between ourselves and cia, nsa, and the intelligence community, but i think always in the back of our mind, everyone at the bureau knew we could not let this happen again. on that day, i felt like that high school student who got the wrong assignment when the president asked that question, but it has been in the back of my mind since then. each president, for most on their mind is protecting the american public from another attack. >> we have a number of questions that deal with mission areas you did not mention specifically, given the importance of cyber security and espionage and counterterrorism. i wonder if you could say a little bit about two things, one being your sense of where the country is in respect to drug policy. the fbi is involved with drug policy along with other law- enforcement agencies, but more generally, how you approach the challenge of managing this broad range of responsibilities that the fbi has to continue to attend to, while at the same time prioritizing the missions you mentioned. >> act

the capability is tremendous. nsa has a tremendous capability. dhs in the views of my chairman and the members of my committee need to play an appropriate role for domestic activity. um, with regard to insurance, um, i am not an insurance guru, i do not work for the financial services committee. but we have talked with insurance providers, and how do we increase the marketability of cyber insurance. and the answer that we usually get back is we're going to get there. we're going to get there, the market will take care of itself. but we've also heard that actuarial data is extremely hard to get with, in this area of, within this issue because people are loathe to share information on -- that's why there is a provision this our language with regard to the charter that says information on, um, incidents shared iraq anonymized and collected and made available to -- the provisions will be -- the organization should make provisions for providing that information for study, academic study, information, actuarial data, that sort of thing. so is that going

i think there was an article yesterday, couple of articles yesterday talking about how the nsa is nowwarning that within a couple of years this group anonymous will have the capability to take down significant portions of the power grid which is something, frankly i was surprised that they assessed it would take a couple of years because i would have assumed that something they would be moving towards more quickly. the article is interesting to me because towards the end of this article it was sort of talking about how the electricity sector has not necessarily put in place the safeguards necessary to prevent against someone taking down the power grid for you know, because there is not a matchup between capability and intent. there are actors out there in iran, north korea and the article mentioned that don't have the capability and then there are actors out there that have the capability, russia and china but people don't believe they have the intent. this to me is in now and we can go back to the cold war metaphor, you know right now i think russia has however many thousands of nucl

much is the same kind in terms of power. i think that nsa has more power in terms of capability is but in terms of the terms we wouldn't sell our sells short. >> and the expertise and technology to bring to bear for the sectors where we have response to the and we think we've made a lot of progress on that regard. >> well, my time is up. i think that senator feinstein, this shows some of the issues are here. we can't stop the threat we can only stop ourselves. this is why i think we need to have a robust new legislative framework, and we have to the conflict these issues and instead we've just remained foggy and keep punching. thank you. you had in our cyber task force. i thank senator rockefeller for his interest and i think that you are both absolutely correct. i think we need to get cracking on that. our own view is there is kind of won overwhelming issue where there is a difference of opinion and that is whether the standards mean something or they are purely voluntarily in the dot com area and this needs to get resolved and moved. i thi

federal government, through the department of homeland security, advised and supported if you will by the nsa can work with the private sector to make sure that the private sector is defending itself and our country against cyber attack. to me, we spent a lot of time on this. right now because of the remarkable capacities of cyber attackers and the extent to sch they can attack privately owned and operated cyber infrastructure for either economic gains or to literally attack our country that we need to ask the private sector to make investments to defend themselves and us, then i'm afraid a lot of them are not yet making. is that your general impression? in other words, bottom line do we have a vulnerability at this moment. does the privately owned and operated cyber infrastructure of america have a vulnerability to both economic thievery and perhaps -- and strategic attack? >> well, sir, both the chairman and the ranking member cited the national counterintelligence executive report we issued in october, which called out both china and russia as our primary concerns and particularly with res

we are now putting that on hold while -- because of the budget constraints of the nsa. we have to look at all the other projects, and we could not simply -- we felt we could not simply start cmrr and upf, the uranium processing facility, at oak ridge, and we felt there was more compelling reasons to begin that. we're looking at ultimately the plans. we can consolidate. the footprint is there. there can be other parts of this. we are looking at, as we look towards a new start and beyond new start, and working with the defense department as to what our requirements to fill the defense department, so as that works out that will be folded into it. so we'll essentially begin to complete the engineering design add then and then try to figure out how to reposition. again, because what is different as you all know is that we have severe budget constraints and we do have a deficit. >> but you are not real clear as to what -- what additional actions the administration would expect to take to meet its needs, the needs it was expecting to meet through the construction of this cmrr?

nsa has a unique role. we don't want to trigger the privacy and civil liberties issue. if nsa goes overseas and collect that information and gives that two people domestically and they can use it operational but they can protect folks. verizon has capability when it comes to their network but they need more threat information. >> anyone else? >> i agree with that and the intent of the bill is to harness the capabilities n capabilitiessa. it is also a testament that senator rockefeller and senator ryan -- feinstein -- we have had many debates on the issue in the outcome is that it should be within the secretary of homeland security's jurisdiction to be the prime facilitator. i think that is a testament to quite a lot of discussion and debate. >> there is a method for getting nsa support and it has been used for years when the fbi needs a level of sophistication. they just submit the request and it gets approved by the attorney general. this could have a with nsa support to dhs. we don't have to wrestle for that issue. how we capture and codify is a way would you don't hav

. >> we are working closely with the nsa and their concerns on our part and theirs too.h th it sounds like you are aware of. they are fully committed to meeting our needs. we're trying to work with them. they are important programs and we need to carry forward with them. i will provide you more detail for the record. we have a weapons council that meets regular with nssa and representatives as well as ours. they are deeply engaged in the issues. >> you do have concerns? correct? >> yes. >> finally let me commend your leadership on the adoption issue. we did have the chance to discuss it. i share the concern that you raised. i think it does need to be addressed. you've been successful at passing it in the house said. it doesn't seem to come out of the senate. i think the one thing i indicated to you, i want to work with you to see if we can actually try to get something done on this issue this year. >> thank you. mr. courtney? >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you to the witnesses. secretary panetta, again, i want to thank you for visiting the shipyard back in november. you had a c

writing in the new yorker on may 23rd of this year jane meyer reported the nsa has three times the budget of the cia and the capacity to download every six hours of electronic communication equivalent to the entire contents of the library of congress. they also developed a program called thin thread that it abels computers to scan the material for keywords and collect the billing records and dialed phone-number the everyone in the country. in violation of communications laws at&t and verizon and bellsouth open their elektra records to the government. at the height of this insanity, stocks in east germany for those of you who saw that film alive of others, at the height of the insanity, spying out of one of every seven east german citizens. the united states is now spying on seven. you can now go to jail in the united states simply for speaking. in late july environmental activist jim christopher was sentenced to two years in prison for his repeated declaration that environmental protection required civil, nonviolent disobedience. one wonders if the same judge would have put rosa parks and

we're taking the nsa and using it to the extent we can within the framework for the bill to protect our civilian cybernetwork. >> understand the department of defense basically supports this legislation. what i can stand at least it does, and is that your understanding as will? >> i think not just basically. i think wholeheartedly. >> in terms of the privacy concerns, those concerns met with a privacy officer, but in terms of the information, where there has been a threat, that information when it is submitted to a government entity is protected. >> right. the content is not shared. >> tell us more about that. >> content is not shared. the information shared requires minimization. it requires elimination of personally identifiable information, all the things necessary to give the public confidence that their own personal communications are not being shared. so it's the fact of the intrusion, the methodology, the tactic used, the early warning indicators, all those sorts of things are to be shared but not the content of the communicate itself. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> th

for example, the nsa scandal revealing the bush administration spied on american citizens without the warrants of the criminal law says is required and calls felony if you do, the only person to suffer any consequences from that scandal is someone named thomas ham, a mid-level department of justice lawyer who found out the busch administration was doing this and called eric at the "new york times" to tell him this was going on. he was a grand jury convened, subpoenaed, lost the job, couldn't afford lawyers, went bankrupt, had serious emotional and psychological problems as a result of that persecution. all of the people who broke the law have been completely shielded, wrote books, became rich. only the person who exposed it has been suggest of subjected to any form of sanction and punishment, and that absolutely is a expressing power saying if you expose things we're doing that's criminal and wrong, you will be the one who will be punished using the law to do it while we shield ourselves. >> hi. i hope you both have time to answer this. first, professor, i came down from occupy burg -

have been penetrated to the point of capturing source code or business plans or innovation or research and development. every one of them. i remember going back to my experience at nsa in the early '90s about how easy it was. let me give you a way to think about it. if you are in a wireless world, it's data in motion, you have to be in the right place at the right time. if you are in the wired world, it's put in a safe. in the wired world it's digitally stored. the whole paradigm drifted. i want to make a couple of comments about the bills debated on the hill. first of all, thanks to the members and senators who had the courage to put this forward. it's time. we need it. it's over time in my view. i want to say thanks to the gentlemen to my left and right because they do the heavy lifting. members can do -- can set the trend, but somebody has to write it all down. when i looked at the bills, my view is they're absolutely necessary, but both of them, the one in the house and the one working through the house and the one in the senate side are insufficient. both necessary but insufficient. they're two framing arguments for concern. there are privacy concerns. we can't

so, for example, the nsa scandal that revealed the bush administration was spying on american citizens without the warrants, the criminal law said is required and that the law calls a felony if you do. the only person to suffer any consequences from that scandal is someone named thomas tam who was a mid-level department of jus us the lawyer who found out the bush administration was doing this and one day called the new york times to tell them that this was going on. he was -- a grand jury was convened, he was continuously subpoenaed, he lost his job, he couldn't afford lawyers and had serious or emotional and psychological problems as a result of that persecution. all of the people who broke the law have been completely shielded, went on to write books and get very rich. only the person who exposed them has been subjected to any form of sanction and punishment. and that absolutely is about, um, expressing power and saying that, um, you know, if you expose any of the things that we're doing that are criminal and wrong, you will be the one who will be punished using the dressings of law

the blood of the nsa the blood of children tortured in syrian prisons, means that we cannot talk to president aside. we have two say vey clearly in this places freedom and democracy, in important ways. we have to say a side must go. must be brought to justice and we have to say very clearly that the european union faces an enormous challenge, an enormous questi. are we a discussion or are we capable of defending the values of which the european union has sent out? and for that reason to, we see clearly that our reaction to our global partners our reaction to russia and china must be a clear signal from the e.u., that if russia and china want to cooperate with us and we went to cooperate with them, and they china and russia ministries at the values that we respect your thank you. >> the next speaker has one minute commissary. >> translator: madam president, ladies and gentlemen very many members quite rightly asked what exactly can the european union do. but the question should be put to ourselves. if we were in the council's position on the commission's position, we would also be wondering wh

people working in the f.b.i. and nsa that are going to prevent iran from tacking. >> wait a minute. but the federal work force grew under the wight white by more than 100,000 and deprow more with obama care. >> more growth to come. >> who creates the wealth in the society. it is the private secretarior. not the public. the private sector should get the benefit and not government workers. >> why the president's new budget could hit you in the drug store. that's next. distill all that data. make information instinctual, visual. introducing trade architect, td ameritrade's empowering web-based trading platform. take control of your portfolio today. trade commission-free for 60 days, and we'll throw in up to $600 when you open an account. like a ramen noodle- every-night budget. she thought allstate car insurance was out of her reach. until she heard about the value plan. dollar for dollar, nobody protects you like allstate. dollar for dollar, 2:30 in the afternoon, a lot to do, and you've hit the wall. but you got to get stuff done. so take 5-hour energy. just open it up, knock it back,

the cia and nsa collected overseas under looser authorities because they're not affecting united states citizens. we have the responsibility of doing the intelligence gathering in the united states, understanding is american citizens we are attempting to protect. we have to do it under the constitution and applicable statutes. the sharing of that information and working together has gone light years since september 11. having been through a number of battles over the years, the focus on the mission trump's just about everything else. what is difficult is coming up with an organizational structure to address cyber in all of its manifestations. fraud schemes are now on the internet. the dissemination of child pornography and the like have integrated to the internet and the field of cyber. cyber intrusion, the exploitation of information is in the cyber arena. how we address that is going to be a huge challenge in the years to come. " we are about to run out of time. i am going to ask you three brief questions. you can address any piece of this that you like. you have such a serious job. w

to read a statement i have about the possibility that a military arm of the government, assuming the nsa, will come to be the gatekeeper of of information. there are concerns about privacy. the comment was made by another member on another committee of looking at this issue and we purposely left that open for the administration because we understand the sensitivity. i'm understand, but we have to understand the perception in which what is out there. this is what we have to do. i want to rescue this. we have to move quickly. there are a lot of bills out there on cyber security and there are a few people who have worked on this for years, but this attack could now be eminence. director mueller, this attack could be one month from now and we do not have the tools. you talked about the pilot program that our bill is based upon, the program that worked. then we need to deal with the issues of civil liberties. do you feel that we need to very quickly move forward with a small bill that gives you the authorities to protect this country? do you feel it threat could happen tomorrow or one month f

aphasia evidence regarding the massive abuse with a program called trailblazerser which at the time was nsa's flagship program, a multibillion dollar program. >> the government didn't like it when he gave unclassified information about it to a newspaper reporter and charged him. >> i face over 35 years in prison if i've been found guilty of all charges. >> running for president in 2008, president obama promised to protect whistleblowers. >> there have been more prosecutions of this president of whistleblowers and other laws than l of the other presidents combined. >> it's not just the fed's. that local charlie sheen police escort a police commander says he was demoted for talking about it and three other cops are sueing the city because they were retalliated against for blowing the whistle on faulty dui testing equipment defying order toss shut up on the witness stand. >> it's the right thing to do, whether it hurts or helps the government. >> the government throughout the charge against drake but he lost his high level career and now works in retail. >> completely shattered on a personal and

we then turn to our partners in the fbi and nsa because as director miller mentioned earlier, you never quite know what the genesis of the attacks are. it could be a crime. it could be a state actor. it could be an accident. it could be a disgruntled former employee. we work this as a triad. we make sure we are bringing to bear the appropriate technologies to bring things back on line as quickly as possible, and we make sure we have an investigation going to try to determine the source and the attribution. >> first of all, my job, i do not believe this. i mean, director clapper, what do you think here? there you are. is the president going to call you? >> the fact of the matter is it happens a fair amount now. when it comes to identifying the attribution of a particular domestic intrusion, it generally falls to us. what we currently do is we get ourselves and dhs at the table and we will put a team out as soon as we got the word. there would be a team. generally, we would lead the team. wherever the outages are, wherever the investigation leads us, we would have a team of ourselves, dhs

we dedicate in our budget tries to improve our technologies, our capabilities within the defense department, within nsa. but i would suggest that part of that consideration has to be, what do we need to do to make sure that the equipment, the technology that we're getting all of that has adequate protections against cyberattack. >> let me make a request for the record, if i may, since my time is starting to run out. two requests for the record. one is that if you could break out for me what in your budget is related to supply chain security? to the extent that you can make that specific to cyber attacks, specifically from the chinese, if you can go that far, i'd like to get that. >> i'll do that. >> and the second thing i'd like to do is have a discussion with whoever in the department of defense is focusing on health care reform for the department of defense. you are a very big buyer, i think you said $50 billion of health care, a lot of it gets delivered overseas. but a lot of it gets delivered here. that'sed kind of money that can make a difference in how people behave and there's a significant refo

pushback and i want to read a statement i have that the possibility that a military arm of government the nsaould become the gatekeeper. information from the marshall industrial sectors is a concern about privacy and when i see this i know that comment was made by another member on another committee and looking at this issue and we purposely left that open for the administration because we understand sensitivity. as much as i respect nsa we have to understand the perception of what is out there and just as an example the sopa issue and that is what we have to do. highpoint and i want to ask you this is we have to move quickly. there are a lot of bills out there on cybersecurity and there are few people i've worked with us for years and now it's time to move quickly because i want to ask you director mueller this attack could be a month from now and really we don't have the tools and we believe because of general clapper you talked about the pilot program and our bill is based on a program that works. and then we deal with the issues of civil liberties as it moves forward. do you feel we neede

the dense nuclear account $150 million for domestic uranium enrichment development demonstration research. you and i talked about this a number of times before. it's interesting you included under nsa rather than the nuclear energy account, because i think it would be also appropriate understa that accou. is there a reason for that? >> no. that was signed by people more like you than by me. >> uh-oh. i see what you're saying. >> no. i'm just saying that you had to put it somewhere. appropriate to put it in an nsa budget and -- >> okay. we'd be interested in working with you on that and i think there are aproep trapriaters wa to know where it came from and the more information the better. with regard to enriched uranium, if you could talk for a moment why you think it's so important. obviously we freed it for nuclear power plants. at one point we had a majority of enriched uranium in the world produced by the united states. i think we're down to about 25% of the world's supply of enriched uranium now, and maybe place to start is where do we get now that we aren't producing nearly as much as we used to? >> there are two parts to this. one is the military side of the security side, we

that is why the budget request includes weapons activities and $1.1 billion for the reactor program. initially, it's nsa's work to pro vent nuclear terrorism, which is one of president obama's top priorities. includes 2.5 billion to include arms control activities. finally, the budget request includes $5.7 billion to continue progress and clean up the nation's cold war nuclear sites. the budget request makes strategic investments to promote our prosperity and security. at the same time, we recognize our country's fiscal challenges and are cutting back where we can. we're also committed to performing our work efficiently and effectively. countries around the world recognize the energy opportunity and are moving aggressively to lead. this is a race we can win, but we must act with fierce urgency. thank you and now, please, to answer your questions. >> thank you, mr. secretary. since i understand do we have votes and the 4:00 time frame, we'll try to stick to the five-minute rule, and that's for the members to be aware of. mr. secretary, our committee has long-supported -- and this has been very bipartisan -

federal government through the department of homeland security advised and supported if you will by the nsa can work with the private sector to make sure that the private sector is defending itself and our country against cyberattacks? we have spent a lot of time on this and right now, because of the remarkable capacities of the cyberattackers and the extent to which they can attack privately owned and operated cyberinfrastructure for either economic gains or to literally attack our country, that we need to ask the private sector to make investments and to defend themselves and i'm afraid a lot of them are not yet making it. is that gin your general impression? in other words bottom line, do we have a vulnerability? does the privately owned and operated cyberinfrastructure of america have a vulnerability to both economic and perhaps strategic attack? >> sir the chairman and the ranking member cited the national intelligence at consecutive report that we issued in october which called out both china and russia as our primary concerns and particularly with respect to the chinese and the theft

money that we have in our budget is to improve our to the blaze within the defense department within the nsa but i would suggest that part of that consideration has to be what we need to do to make sure that the equipment and the technology that we are getting all of that has adequate protection against the cyberattack. islamic let me make a request for the record if i may since my time is starting to run out. one is that if you could break out for me what in your budget is related to the security and to the extent that you can make that specific to the cyberattack from the chinese if you go that far i would like to get that putative the second thing i would like to do is have a discussion with whoever in the department of defense is focusing on health care reform for the department defense you are a very big by writing to some $50 billion in health care to read a lot of the gets delivered overseas but a lot of it gets delivered here. that is the kind of money that can make a difference in how people behave, and there's a significant reform movement that is taking place and i just want to be

i want to read a statement that i have but the possibility that the military arm of government, assuming nsacould become the gatekeeper of information on the commercial industrial site there is to serve concerns about privacy here. and when i see this i know a comment was made by another member on the committee looking at this issue. we purposely left out of 10 for the administration because we understand the sensitivity as much as i respect and they, we have to understand the perception of what is out there, especially this issue and what we have to do. but my point i want to ask you this is that we have to acquit a lot of buildup there in the area of cybersecurity. there's very few people and now it's time to move quickly because this attack could be imminent. i want to ask you, director mueller. we really don't have the totals and we believe because of general, utah about really our bill is based on a program that were and then we do with the issues of civil liberties that moves forward. you feel that we need to quickly move forward with a very small bill that gives you the authority to p

the defense nuclear nonproliferation account $150 million for domestic uranium enrichment development, demonstration, research. you and i have talked about this a number of times before. it's interesting you include it under nsa rather than the nuclear energy account, because i think it would also be appropriate under the nuclear energy account. is there a reason for that? >> no, that was signed by people more like you than me. >> uh-oh. >> no. >> we're having -- >> i see what you're saying. >> no. i'm just saying you have to park it somewhere. it was certainly appropriate to put it in nsa budget. an i do think there are some appropriators are interested in knowing which account it's going to come out of and where it's coming from. i think a conditional loan guarantee would be a far better solution. but given where we are and needing to have a domestic source of enriched uranium, i think it's important we move forward. and the more information, the better. with regard to enriched uranium, if you could just talk for a moment about why you think it's so important, obviously we need it for our nuclear power plants. at one point we had a majority of the enriched uranium in the world being produced by the united s

the naval program. additionally it supports nsa's work to prevent terrorism. includes 2.5 billion to implement key nuclear security, nonproliferation and energy control activities. finally the budget request includes 5.7 billion to continue progress to clean up the cold war nuclear sites. the budget request makes strategic investments to promote prosperity and security. at the same time we recognize the country's fiscal challenges and are cutting back where we can. we're committed to performing our work efficiently and effectively. in countries in europe, asia and throughout the western hemisphere recognize the energy opportunity and are moving aggressively to lead. this is a race we can win. but we must act with fierce urgency. thank you and i'll be pleased to answer your questions. >> thank you very much, mr. secretary. let me start with five minutes of questions. i'm sure all members will have questions. i gather from the news that you heard yesterday when visiting the two new nuclear power plants have have been licensed in georgia. my understanding is the l

federal government through the department of homeland security advised and supported if you will by the nsa can work with the private sector to make sure that the private sector is defending itself and our country against cyberattacks? we have spent a lot of time on this and right now, because of the remarkable capacities of the cyberattackers and the extent to which they can attack privately owned and operated cyberinfrastructure for either economic gains or to literally attack our country, that we need to ask the private sector to make investments and to defend themselves and i'm afraid a lot of them are not yet making it. is that gin your general impression? in other words bottom line, we hava vulnerability? does the privately owned and operated cyberinfrastructure of america have a vulnerability to both economic and perhaps strategic attack? >> sir the chairman and the ranking member cited the national intelligence at consecutive report that we issued in october which called out both china and russ as our primary concerns and particularly with respect to the chinese and the theft of int

forces and even with the threats of the future, including cyber t is going to be in part some large part dependent on our relationships, not just with other players, nsa, cia, dia and the like but relationships with state and local law enforcement and building up the state and local law enforcement's capacity to address that threat as well as ourselves. >> i also might imagine the 72 state and major metropolitan fusion centers for which the national intelligence policeman provides some funding to ensure which is the nexus for providing information upward from local level to the national community and downward, which are another instrumentality network that have grown since 9/11. >> thank you to the panel and mr. chairman, i yield back. >> thank you. mrs. bachmann. >> thank you mr. chairman and gentlemen, thank you for the work you've done on behalf of the american people. i know that my constituents are extremely grateful as well for the work that all of do you. i just wanted to note that it was a year ago when we had all gathered here in this room for the public hearing, and at that time, we all had our televisions on and we literally were observing

the bill requires grocers to charge customer. >> a nsa can blast of winter weather is causing problems worldwide. temperatures plunged to 36 degrees below zero in the you ukraine. the heaviest snowfall ever in bosnia where helps -- helicopters are being used to airlift stranded people. >> at the other end of europe, britain had its first snowfall of the season. more than six inches. heathrow said only half of the schedule flights were likely to leave today. snow continue to hit coastal areas in the sea of japan. >> nothing that severe in our forecast. let's get ready for rain. >> leigh glaser will let us know when to expect the showers to arrive. >> a new poll reveals while most voters in nevada supported mitt romney in yesterday's caucuses. >> get in on the oscar excitement, to to oscar.com. the oscars air on ♪ [ male announcer ] no one just hands you the title, most advanced technology in its class. it needs to be earned. earned with smartbeam head lamps. earned with vented temperature control seats. earned with an 8.4-inch touch screen. and if you're driving one, you know what it me

>> you know, it's something, initially i shared the same concern but when i went out to nsa and, and when i look at the people involved in that area not only at my past agency but other agencies as well i have to tell you we are attracting some very bright, capable, young people to those jobs and they're very interested, they're very capable and i have, with the investment we're making in cyber i'm absolutely convinced we'll attract the talent to make that work. >> i think our challenge as a nation, excuse me, general dempsey, is to get enough young people engaged in those subjects so we're training the people we need. >> i think the service chiefs will have a view on this as well and it's, it's actually exacerbated by the fact, i think you and i actually have had this conversation, about one out of every four young american men and women can qualify to get into the military based on education or physical issues or issues making really stupid facebook posts in their youth or something. we're all competing as you say. academia, corporate america and the military are all competing for t

obviously foreign policy would be important to you if you were to become president of the united states. your nsader calls you and says nato troops, american troops have burned a koran. there's a lot of upset people in afghanistan. what does president roemer do. >> well, they should be upset. it would be like we had a force in our country who decided to burn a stack of bibles or the constitution or the declaration of independence and as president, i would view it that way. i would call the leaders of the country immediately and i think our president has done that correctly. i would apologize profusely. they would be effects on the troops and particularly, the leaders who made that decision and we would pledge that would not happen again. >> a website sort of trying to support third party candidacy has some interesting sort of numbers in terms of what folks would like to see. you see ron paul there is number one. governor jon huntsman, number two, bernie sanders, number three. president obama, mayor bloomberg, buddy roemer, most online support. you're number six, but behind paul and huntsman and b