tv Politics and Public Policy Today CSPAN May 2, 2016 1:00pm-3:01pm EDT
watching the television, watching a lot of folks, mostly poor folks, mostly people of color and black folks in particular, being sort of overwhelmingly abandoned and left to literally drown by our government. and what we felt from that was that there was no sense of accountability, that nobody was sort of worried about the threat of letting black folks down. to that end, we created -- or they created. sorry, not we. i've only been there a year. color of change as an organization that is meant to build and change what power looks like in black communities. we want to change the written and unwritten rules that govern our systems and structures. we want to challenge the sort of profiteers of pain. so, in other words, when our communities suffer, who's cashing in?
and we use a form of citizen lobbying, so we have about 1.2 million members that we engage across the country in different activities to hold government and corporations accountable to us. and most recently, we launched an initiative. it's been around for a while, it's called i'm color of change, which allows different grassroots groups and organizers and folks to start their own petitions in order to scale up and build digital power around their movements, and it will be relaunched shortly as organized for -- and, again, it's a way to develop black leaders and digital organizers in the 21st century movement for black lives. so that's a little bit about us. some of the campaign work that we've done is around -- we did a campaign around the american legislative exchange council. we saw that they were sort of this -- this is an organization that drafts conservative model legislations that are meant to sort of hogtie or limit the part of government. we saw that they were behind a
lot of really bad voter id laws, around weakening labor unions, and around some standard ground laws as well as weakening environmental protections. this was a group that mainly operated in the dark, had a lot of corporations that were a part of them. so we did a lot of work to kind of like bring them out into the light and to get, i think, around 50-plus companies to die -- divest from alec. another campaign that we are part of or some other work we're doing is around media accountability. so we do this work. we launched a report earlier last year called not to be trusted. it looked at the role of local news in perpetuating the myth of the super predator that we heard from dr. henning earlier, around the role of media as sort of functioning as a p.r. firm for police departments and not just condoning but building the case for overpolicing and surveillance in our communities.
and what we found in new york is that we saw some of the stats that were presented earlier, but what we found in terms of reporting is that significantly by around 25 percentage points, black crime was being overreported in the news, and white crime was being significantly underreported. what we wanted to do in that report is to kind of show or illuminate, you know, how these different narratives get created around our community that then justify policies. so there's a couple of frames that we like -- or that we want to push back on through our news accountability work. one, we want to sort of disrupt this frame around black people being the problem, and we've heard that from a lot of folks discussed today so i won't go into detail about that. two, this idea that disruption is wrong, which we also heard about. and, three, this sort of frame that safety equals overpolicing. and so that's some of the stuff that we look at in our media accountability work. and then most recently, we started pushing companies like coca-cola to divest from the
republican national convention not because it's republicans, but because of some of the racist, misogynist rhetoric that we see being perpetuated and we believe that corporations have a responsibility not to provide oxygen to that space. so we recently were able to get coca-cola to divest. we're working on a few more companies. that's a little bit about us. we work in this model which will come into play as i talk a little more about how we're thinking about surveillance. respond, build, pivot scale. so what this means is like in the moment, when something happens, sort of responding to a movement moment. what is the change that we need to see? what is -- you know, when we feel sort of anger or frustration at what we see happening in our communities, what are the ways that, again, we can change the written and unwritten rules? how can we make sure these things don't happen again? so we offer a sort of rapid response action and ways for our members to engage. building. again, we leverage the sort of citizen lobbying.
we also work inside and outside, negotiating with corporations at times, leveraging a sort of media strategy, building mass action in order to make our communities and our fights unignorable by media, by corporations, by government. pivot. looking for opportunities to make the case for change. another example going back tot alec example, when we were doing work around this, we were actually focusing more on voter id laws and some of the stuff that was happening around weak knee labor unions. -- weakening labor unions. in the middle of us doing our campaign around alec is when tray von was murdered, and we learned that the sort of laws that protected his killer, the stand your ground laws, were also alec backed. so it was a moment for us to start a conversation about the role alec was playing in a new way, different from what we were talking about. finally, scale, how can we sort of scale up our movement and again move beyond this like one
moment to a full-scale movement for change. so that's a little bit about what we do. so i want to talk a little bit how we think about surveillance in our work. i think it was kind of interesting. we heard a question earlier around how do we get this sort of information around encryption, around other things? how do we get it to your communities? and what was said was that it's already in our communities and we're already thinking about it. and i would definitely echo that and say this isn't also a recent phenomenon. as we learned that the story of surveillance is not new, neither is the story of resistance to surveillance. recently over christmas break, i was with my family in savannah, and we went to this church that was called the first african baptist church, one of the oldest churches in the country from the 1700s. it also had an underground railroad underneath. when you went into the pew and you saw the different chairs, there was like little sort of
encryption. i believe it was a dink rub, but like carvings in the side of the pew, and it was a way of telling people the underground railroad was there. it was like the original encryption. even when we talk about songs that were used during slavery in order to talk about where people should go, in brazil, where you take a martial art and disguise it as a dance, again, these are different forms of original encryption are things that our community have done because we know we've lived under this veil of surveillance going back, you know, for a very long time. and so the question is not like how do we get people to sort of think about surveillance in our community but more like we're having these conversations. are you listening? you know, are we having these conversations collectively? what does the conversation look like at the policy table versus at the kitchen table in our communities? and so the way that we think about surveillance again looks very different. so often in this community we hear -- and i was kind of
surprised i didn't hear it more, but we hear a lot around this sort of mass versus targeted surveillance. typically when you talk about targeted surveillance, that's when often times it's talked about policing and black communities. and all of that targeting. and then mass surveillance is usually a conversation in which black folks are not often included. so i kind of looked up the traditional definition of mass versus targeted surveillance. so mass surveillance is the intricate surveillance of an entire or substantial fraction of a population to monitor that group of citizens. whereas targeted surveillance is the monitoring of pre-identified events or people of concern or importance. last week when i was on a panel, it was said that mass surveillance is to be given the benefit of the doubt while targeted surveillance is operated under a presumption of guilt. and i think, you know, for black
folks and for people of color and for poor people, that line between mass and targeted surveillance is not real because in either scenario, we're disproportionately targeted. and also when you see the way that the media narrative and the police narrative is perpetuated around surveillance, it's very much wrapped in this idea that your behavior triggers surveillance when what we've heard throughout the day and what's more real is your identity triggers surveillance. so, you know, some of the different triggers we've talked about over the course of the day, but again it's, you know, what's defined as probable cause. we see time and time again things that compose sort of collective identity, and it's interesting because we heard someone say that there's like
sort of more protocols around the government that they should have learned quite a bit from what happened when martin luther king, and i'm sure they have, but i think it's probably more around how to conceal what they're doing versus, you know, changing up some of the things they're looking at. but in any event, when we look at these different triggers, whether you're talking again about mass or targeted surveillance, again, the disproportionate impact is the same. i look at your mode of transportation. earlier this month or last month rather, we found out that the maryland transit authority had been listening to audio of folks' conversations for three years and that this was also happening in, i believe, san francisco and in another location. but really that most buses and public transportation are equipped to listen to audio. according to the sort of public transit authority or the national transit authority, 60%
of the people that use public transportation are people of color. many of them are people that live at or below the poverty line. again, this is another example of mass surveillance that's very targeted in its impact. when you talk about monitoring people's cell phones, black and brown folks, according to pugh are much more likely to use their cell phone to do all of their work, to access the internet in every way possible. so, again, who's caught up in that dragnet more often? it's those folks. it's poor folks. when you think about social media, again, black and brown folks are the faster adopters of modern technology. twitter has been particularly important in helping to organize around the movement for black lives. so when you go on there and that's where you're drawing your surveillance from, who's coming up in that dragnet more often? it's black folks. so again and again, we begin to see that, you know, all of these different things that compose who we are and our identity are also essentially this sort of probable cause that leads to surveillance. so that brings us to the
discussion and why we're here. so the surveillance of the movement for black lives. so alvaro said something interesting today. he said it was once illegal to be a black leader in america. i think, you know, we still say that it's being treated as illegal, and we see that in a number of different ways. so we began to see incidences across the country of how that was playing out. and so we decided to take essentially one component of our identity that's being surveilled, what you believe in and your habits and activities on social media, so two components really, and focus in on that for the purposes of the project that we're launching that we'll talk about in a bit. part of this was driven -- we hadn't really done surveillance historically, but we just heard too many incidences of what was happening across the country in terms of surveillance. we heard, you know, out of chicago we heard about stingray usage earlier today. i had to step out, so i'm not
sure if he talked about it or not. but there was an article where they also talked about how teachers unions were being surveilled as they were planning around the chicago public school strike. we heard it in new york about, you know, people being sort of identified and pulled out of line during protests with guns held to people's head, people being -- mothers being torn away from their kids, people being referred to across the country by their handle and not, you know, their actual name. protesters in minneapolis being catfished by security guards or police at mall of america. we heard multiple stories in ferguson that sound like something out of the '60s of people being taken for night rides, sort of randomly picked up in one location, dropped off somewhere else, someone while shopping in walmart being singled out not engaging in their constitutionally right of
protesting, but being singled out as a leader and harassed and arrested. so as we started hearing these stories and layered on top of that, more media coverage, which talks about, you know, police officers referring to black lives matters and people in the movement for black lives as terrorists, people, you know, talking about this so-called ferguson effect where the existence of activists fighting for equity has, you know, prevented police officers from doing their job and caused crime to go up, which again, you know, these kind of like false stories. it began to feel clear to us that these things are not in isolation. you know, and even though cointelpro has been dismantled, what we're seeing is actually worse, and we think it's a very explicit form of surveillance that's happening in all different levels and that it's connected. so we wanted to work together to basically centralize all of the
work that's happening in our communities and be able to protect activists and ensure that we can engage and ensure safe activism. so some of the things we're wondering is how are local police departments -- are they acting of their own volition, or are they working in connection with federal government? if so, how are these different governments collaborating? what does that look like? what are the tools that are being used, and how can we protect ourselves? there's a number of other questions, but those are just some of some. so what we created was called the project for secure activism, which is not a sexy name, so we're taking recommendations. if you can find like an acronym for glow, because i'm a fan of glow, if you can make that into like a -- just let me know. holler at me. so through that sort of deploying national and local rapid response campaigns, i talked about our i am color change platform. we've launched campaigns supporting the mall of america
activists, looking at targeted surveillance in the nypd, the prosecution of activists in l.a. and oakland. and we've also launched a campaign around stingrays and calling for a public registry of stingray devices. we're also looking for opportunities to do campaigns based on facial recognition, license plate readers, et cetera. but basically what we want to do is again be again to like build this public narrative around what surveillance looks like while giving people an opportunity to intervene and take action. we're also engaging in this sort of collection and archiving of anecdotes and stories from activists as well as continuing to leverage research on tools of surveillance not being surveillance and practices. for phase two, we started to build and convene a network of attorneys of color to provide on the ground support to activists. around requests and ongoing needs. we have a partnership with a joint analyst organization. we hope to gather more. groups working on tech research,
encryption and activist groups. then within this, we've been doing submission of event and individual foia requests. so we've done, you know, specific events like protests across the country which i know a lot of other groups are also doing. but specifically working with different individuals, and our goal was not to just work with like individuals that are maybe well known, but those that are more sort of behind the scenes that are less known by the general public but that are on the radar of police. we're looking for folks that have been doing this work for a long time and then a short period of time. what we want to do is build this tapestry of what activist surveillance looks like in our communities. then for phase two, again, continuing to pivot and stay on top of changing events, moving forward with our ongoing campaigns and we're actually working towards filing a lawsuit and exploring whether we can do sort of a class action one on behalf of the movement for black lives or what that potentially looks like against the government. all of this is sort of leading
up to creating and launching the sort of public interest site. we know that different folks are doing some of this work out there. we really find that a lot of it is not focused on sort of racial justice or activism in the same way or a lot of stuff is not necessarily palatable. like i always think of that quote from denzel washington in "philadelphia" where he's like tell it to me like i'm 5. i often feel like i sit in these coalition rooms and i know i'm at least a semi-intelligent person and i can't understand what you're talking about. so how do we build these tools that are easily accessible in a variety of different languages so folks that are doing this work, whether it's house sitting in solidarity efforts or whether it's in all different languages or production in some communities from surveillance, how can we translate this into different languages so folks are able to engage in activism? again, sort of deploy actions and tactics towards driving larger systemic change, and continue to push this narrative around what surveillance looks like in our communities. and we hope to basically -- we're hoping to sort of launch this.
i'm not sure if it's going to happen, but around the time to sort of commemorate the 50th anniversary of the founding of the black panthers as well as the anniversary of the assassination of fred hampton, which was also another sort of by-product of cointelpro. so in terms of some of the information that we've been able to find and obtain, like i wish i had all of this stuff to tell you guys. but unfortunately it's been this really hard-going process for us and super challenging, which is sort of the challenge behind, you know, the way foia is constructed and we suspect intentional by the government. so in the first round, dhs told us that they could only search e-mails if they had specific e-mail addresses. we were working with a journalist who said that was absolutely not accurate. so we were able to go back in and challenge that and say they should be able to look through e-mails using key words. we had key words like sort of black lives matter, freddie gray. originally they said that those key words weren't coming up, which to me sort of flagged that
maybe it's one of those situations where even if they're not -- they're probably using another term for black lives matters is what i suspect but would love to hear from other folks that are doing foias. if they've had that similar experience. we've also gone back and forth with them and have received different notices around how they're trying to process. another one of our foia requests said it had to be referred to ice, and this was our foia request regarding chicago, st. louis and minneapolis, regarding the monitoring protesters and the use of stingray fusion and facial recognition technology. and we've heard different reasons around why it was referred to ice, so some say this is actually a good sign. it's them doing their due process, and others have said it's possible some of the people that are coming up under the dragnet are also on the radar of ice and that there's a connection there. so we're exploring that as well. and then finally we've heard regarding some of our requests on communications in minneapolis during the jamar clark protest on use of stingray that
releasing that information would invite risk of circumvention, and we also received notes on some of our new york foia requests that we couldn't get the data because there were still open investigations. so we've been fortunately working with some really great lawyers that are helping us to refine these foia requests and put them back in, and we sort of keep plugging away at this. and as we begin to put in requests on individuals, also making that data available to both them and the public. so that's a little piece of some of our work, and i'm out of time. so i'm going to end. okay. one question. [ applause ] >> i was curious based on your experience and the experience of these people reporting to you what your experience has been
with black police officers and more racially diverse police units. is that a laudable goal? does it help? does it help remove some of the inherent biases, or do these folks tend to take on the institutional biases of who they work for? >> yeah, i mean i think that's an interesting question. there's definitely when you look at certain police departments there's huge disparities in, you know, the demographics of the police department versus the demographics of communities, and certainly that's a problem when you know 60% of the community is black, let's say, and 80% of the police force is white. however, i think it's still this sort of institution of power that we're targeting, and what that means, and as we saw in baltimore with those police officers, it was, you know, a very diverse group of police officers. and i think what it is, is we're not sort of saying why people can't be police officers or that's the issue. it's what this sort of badge has
historically meant in terms of sort of tormenting and targeting our communities and really challenging that. so i would say diversity of police departments could be a step, but until there's some changes around the way the police departments do business, we'll continue to see, you know, more of the same regardless of what the faces look like. [ applause ] >> what a day. our last presentation is from matt mitchell, who runs crypto harlem. we've heard some ideas about the fbi versus apple encryption debate. we got to hear about it from the general counsel of the fbi this
morning. now we're going to hear another version of that debate and how it relates to the concerns that have inspired this conference. so we're hearing from matt mitchell. matt, thanks so much for being here. >> okay. [ applause ] >> hi, everyone. thanks for sticking around, okay? all right. i'm going to get my slides up, and then we'll start. so just give me like five minutes of your precious time, okay? thank you.
let's try this again. >> control l. >> control l? i did it. cool. okay. hey, it's working. i'm not going to move around too much. i promise. i'll try not to. yeah, yeah let's do it. nobody will see that. let's rock, okay? so i'm talking about apple ios and why that matters to us, especially because this is called, you know, color of surveillance and a lot of times we think this issue has been kind of beaten to the ground. >> sorry. >> no worries. cool. all right. can you hear me? yeah, we did it.
okay. i can move around now. this is better than ever. hey, everybody, this is more my natural style. so some breaking news, okay? so fbi explains to congress how they broke into the iphone. that's interesting. so the fbi worked with a third party to break into the iphone, and originally people thought that it was this israel-based startup, you know, called cellebrite that i know from teaching people about technologies that can be used to read your phone, they make a box that you can use for forensics, and you can connect an android or an iphone, and it will pull the information off of that. and very quickly make an image of a phone. so while you're sitting in your car with the headlights of a cruiser behind you on, your phone can be copied and given back to you, and it can be used to look at who you call the most or pictures or whatever, but not encrypted phones. but we found out that that company actually didn't -- you know it was good for their stock and good for their p.r., so i probably wouldn't say it wasn't me either. but it was them. all right.
but whatever method that this company used, the fbi in trying to be more like hey, look, nothing to hide here, are telling people in congress what the methods were which is kind of scary, because you don't want to even hint how you did it because it allows other people to follow and do the same thing, okay? national journal. and then, boom, today, right, a leaked copy of what may or may not be a draft proposal of a new encryption bill. it hit the internet like this morning, and all, you know, nerdy crypto internet was up in arms freaking out about this, but rightfully so. basically it says you're allowed to encrypt. we're not trying to take away end-to-end encryption from the world. u.s. companies, encrypt your hearts out, but you have to be able to un-encrypt if we ask you to? what? that doesn't make any sense. and so that is what the interweb said as well. this is julian sanchez's post. i thought was pretty awesome.
we just needed a few more weeks to tweak our crypto legislation. ta-da. in case you don't know, a woman was asked, you know, to work on this painting, to kind of fix it, and that's what happened. it was like a -- instead of restoring the picture, it just got totally cartoonized or whatever. that's an internet meme. i mean, yeah, people were really hopeful that this bill would have some really intelligent things to say and change stuff, and it seems again this was just a leak, and then a pdf a couple hours afterwards. hopefully this is a big april fools joke, it's not actually a bill, and someone from the hill uploaded it. but hopefully this is not the case. who is this person talking to you? that's me, looking handsome in a suit and tie there. i'm matt mitchell, and i'm a security researcher, and i'm a hacker, and i'm also basically an activist because i work with activists.
and i'm a journalist because i used to work in newsrooms all the time, and i trained journalists on operational security and information security. information security is what tools to use to protect yourself. operational security is how to use those tools. i also do an event in my neighborhood, which is harlem like my hat says. i've lived in harlem for almost two decades and i do an event every month. it's a three-hour surveillance clinic, but for your phone, laptop, you got questions, we got answers kind of thing. i get hackers, i get govies, i get the nerds and the folks from the communities to show up. we have a cross-section of everyone. i also used to work in a bunch of newsrooms and do a bunch of other stuff but that was like a whole lifetime ago. so where are we now? the u.s. says that it may need apple's help to unlock -- sorry, may not need apple's help to unlock a phone and that was because, you know, we don't need your help. we got help from someone else.
this is actually something we should all be worried about because this means another company, not the company that designed the phone, is trying to get in. so if you get locked out of your car, you go to the dealer and they're like we'll send someone over. the dealer can open your car, right? or you can ask me, and i can smash it with a brick or hit it with my elbow. so there is no one who is not apple who is going to have a very delicate and fine-tuned approach to opening an apple phone. they're going to do it in a pretty crazy way, a dangerous way, and hopefully a way no one finds out about because it can be replicated. apple has a reason to make sure no one finds out. what this is. they're apple. their engineers wrote this. they were like if i was going to break in i would have broke in eight years ago as opposed to some third-party company that just gets a contract and has been analyzing it from the outside. okay? so that was a dangerous situation. and there's another thing that's happening. so you see here it says fbi helped unlock an iphone in -- arkansas.
department of justice continues to push apple to unlock an iphone in brooklyn. i think james baker brought it up, my daughter was murdered. we don't know who did it. you know, she died on the operating table. we were able to save her baby, and the baby died. it was a super sad, double tragedy. but she used to use her phone all the time as a personal journal. there's reason to believe we could find out who shot her from looking in her phone, can you please help? this is after apple unlocked the iphone in san bernardino. this is not like it's done. they use a third party. department of justice is not going to drop that case. they're still pushing apple to use their resources and their engineers to unlock this phone. and apple says i think that there's a list of like 100 law enforcement cases where they're like, hey, we're queueing up these phones that need to be unlocked. so we're going to see a lot more of these type of headlines in the news. kind of like basically the same thing. apple won't sue the fbi to
reveal what hack they used, but the fbi is saying here, director james comey said the iphone -- this 5c that is older kind of like -- it's a new iphone but it's like a cheaper iphone. that iphone can be broken. that's the only iphone that can be broken, right? so not the latest 5s iphones but anything from a 5c older, and we'll have to remember this later because it comes up, okay? can be broken by the fbi's third party that unlocked it. so, again, how did all of this apple ios versus fbi happen? there was a tragedy, a mass shooting in the united states, and that occurred on december 2nd, i believe, 2015. and in it, a holiday party was
disrupted by two people, one of them an employee, where the holiday kind of festive partygoers were attacked, ended in a shoot-out, and the two people were killed. it's kind of -- that picture over there, this is a picture of the crime scene. over there is a picture of the house of the suspected perpetrator. okay. and that's because the landlord let them in. this is like media running around, reporters in the crime scene, in the home. okay. boom, boom. timeline. going to keep moving. it's getting a little nerdy. so this is from the ios security document from september 2015. it's the latest one, and the iphone actually has two computers. it has a computer that runs the phone, and there's a secure enclave, a second computer that stores special data for the encrypto keys. and unlocking it. that's only the new iphones.
the 5c is not under this. the 5c has an older processor. so you have a very, very new iphone, it has an armed v8 processor they call the a7. that one has the secure enclave. it's safe. the fbi cannot hack this. this is a security researcher named morgan, and he works on helping, you know, human rights defenders, and he's the one i talk to all the time now because it seems like the human rights of americans are under attack. boom. this is dan guido who wrote a really good paper, possibility capabilities of apple to help the fbi, and you could check that out later. boom. okay. that is -- okay. this is jonathan z. he basically wrote the book literally on hacking and securing iphones. these are people who have a lot of great things to say about this but i'm running out of time so i'm jumping quickly through these, okay? boom. this is geo, kind of known as tom cruise, kind of like
criminally insane hacker who has hacked almost every iphone that came out except for the iphone 4 because he retired out of boredom. this is professor matthew green, and he's a crypto specialist from john hopkins. these are two security researchers who are always presenting new mobile phone problems and holes, right? i put those up there because we are always finding problems and holes in mobile phones. the fbi's case was basically saying that only apple could unlock this phone, but actually there's tons of people that can unlock this phone. there's a whole industry of people who can unlock this phone. so what does that to do black and brown folks? this is a study that basically says african-americans overindex on technology use and mobile use. when you look at smartphone ownership, especially young, african-americans overindex. latinos as well, especially when you look at the younger people get, the more they have. if you look at the demographic differences between iphone and android, this is where you start
seeing some interesting trends. iphones not so much. androids heavily owned by african-americans and latinos. this is important to remember. okay. on the other side here we have a chart showing how many -- you know, basically black twitter. we know it exists. we understand that that's a thing and you know, african-americans overindex on the use of twitter. this is a thing here on the other side which is a research study that focused on latinos. basically says that latinos own lots of cool tech and smartphones and more even than let's say the trend is growing higher than african-americans. so we see brown and black folks owning tons of smartphones, but they tend to be android phones because, you know, it's just an economic issue. and this is a recent study that came out from pugh on smartphone use, the important thing to focus on is 12% of african-americans and 13% of latinos are smartphone dependent, so it's like i need
my smartphone to live. but going back to this issue about what operating system and type of phone you use, this shows that a percentage of android users versus iphone users that encrypt their device. if you have an iphone that's running ios versions 8 or 9, your device is automatically encrypted. you should obviously move to 9.3. it's the latest and greatest, especially if you turn on two-step verification. you'll get an encrypted icloud. which is very good. on android your device is not encrypted by default unless you the latest version m. you to go into the menu and go to settings and security and encrypt your device. so we see that android users don't have encrypted devices and ios users basically do by default have encrypted devices. we see the brown and black folks tend to have these androids, so their devices are easy to grab,
and they're not encrypted. then the iphones that we do see in communities of color are like the 5cs and the older iphones and they're the ones that are susceptible to this new hack that the fbi have in their back pocket. but not the latest and greatest most expensive iphones, which you tend to see less of in communities of color. this is more stuff about operating systems and ethnicities. another thing you see is sadly when you do encrypt your android phone, it slows down the performance of the phone. so you have this population that loves to use this type of device, but they're stuck with devices that are not secure and not looking out for their privacy as much as the most expensive versions. and if they do happen to learn to encrypt that device, the device itself seems to run a little slower if it's not -- if it's not a google device or samsung or certain manufacturers, especially older android devices, you try to force them to encrypt and they're very slow to use. all right.
going back to the case of this mass shooting, fbi found that the shooter's phone was destroyed. the shooter's wife's phone was destroyed. the only phone that was available was a 5 c, which was a work phone. most people don't actually use their work phone for that much, and why would you use your work phone to plan a horrible, horrendous attack, when even steve in i.t. has access to everything going on in that phone. so it's just -- you know, so during the course of this, apple engineers were going back and forth. and if you look at jonathan z's twitter and he wrote a really good paper on this, basically saying we've been working with apple -- i'm sorry -- with the fbi on this case from the beginning, and what we told them was this phone is automatically backing up everything to icloud, and as we get those backups, we're going to give you
everything. but the engineer shared that the backups are pretty boring. there's almost no pictures, there's like no notes, no e-mails, and this looks like the kind of person who doesn't really put much on their phone. the backups go back until october, i think, 18th of 2015, and the attack had been on december 2nd. so everything before october 18th, the fbi has tons of data on. just a small window of time, and why would the person suddenly change their usage of their phone? so it just seems kind of like a not sincere gesture to say, look, we need to access this phone and apple is the one that needs to get it. this phone has all this important information on it. other thing about the phone was, the fbi the san bernardino changed the password on the phone breaking the backups. when asked why do you do that, the fbi actually asked us to. here's the proof in the memo. there you go, that broke the backups. apple is like get us the phone, we'll see what we can do. they turned off the phone an
that made it game over. so at that point the only way to access this phone would have been to guess the password and no one knows whether if you guess over ten times the phone would wipe itself which is an option you can turn on or not, right? which is the whole why this whole case was brought. basically what i'm trying to say is it's suspicious to think or probably not genuine to think there's going to be a smoking gun, no pun intended, of evidence, some cache of data in this phone. maybe just trying to create a legal precedent to have this company that creates great crypto and tech to open up this phone. for marginalized folks, people of color who are aggressively surveilled and overpoliced, it's difficult to find some kind of bastion of safety when the device in your hands are not encrypted by default, perform slower when you encrypt them and seems like there's just the kinds of phones able to be unlocked by the fbi are the phones people of color use, the
older iphones and so forth. recently a harvard study written by a lot of great people who tweeted the fun my meme up there, are we really going dark. is encryption stopping us from having evidence that we need on crime scenes, you know, lost children, you know, murderers and things like that? and it's like actually, no, because we live in an amazing world full of computers and technology and facebook can serve you an ad you'll click on with 89% accuracy. there's a lot of information and law enforcement tools available, some of them we're trying to create sur comvent and prevent against to solve crimes. if you think the only way to solve a crime is to get to the phone itself, you would have to say there's tons of data that says it's not true and this study shows it's not true as well. okay. so i'm done. hope i wasn't too fast. any questions? [ applause ]
>> final questions from the audience? really? >> wow, i'm good. >> okay. >> so it appears that the there's an arms race going on that the apples of the world are trying to stay ahead of the hackers in the government. so far, my impression is that the apples are winning. a, is that true, and b, is that likely to remain true? >> i would say that it's not actually true. we, like, for example, at the end of last month, there was a study done that showed that there's a hole in -- like, for example, there was an update, i think a couple weeks ago because there was a hole in i-message, i message, professor green and
others, found there was a big hole in there. it could have been exploited and used for bad. they updated it and fixed it. that's been i-message. since its inceptionion until a couple weeks ago. a security found a couple days ago there's technology in i message which uses java script which makes it susceptible to a hole. there's always going to be people, tom cruises, gia holts of the world who are going to be really great at finding holes in your stuff. they're going to be ahead of the companies. hopefully you can buy their research or convince them not to use it for bad, right, and the government is going to be behind those people. so hackers are always going to win. companies are always going to catch up and plug that stuff. the government is going to be last on the scene. it seems like that's where we're at. as consumers, people who care about our privacy, our best bank is to go with the companies and hope the government doesn't try to explain crypto, how to lock things up.
you know, how they should operate and use stuff because it's going to change the arms race and the companies working to protect our data will be running with weights on them. >> the feinstein bill. >> yes. >> what were you expecting to see that you were surprised what it actually had with the content of it? >> okay. how about what i wasn't expecting to see. okay. i didn't expect something like -- encrypto analysis, trying to break good crypto, there's this idea of a trap door, things only go one way. so if encryption is sound, gravity will allow you to roll over a trap door and slide down 300 feet but it's not so easy to get back up, right? to say you can somehow reverse encryption shows a complete ignorance of understanding that you didn't speak to anyone in the field to write it. i thought maybe that kind of stuff wouldn't be in there
because it's mythical and borderline crazy. you know, again, we don't know what that really looks like. the leak today, who knows what that is, right? hopefully the new bill is going to come out tomorrow and will look awesome. >> please join me in -- >> okay. [ applause ] >> i am going to be brief. i -- part of, i think, what -- why i was so excited to work with professor butler on this conference is to start a
conversation about the color of surveillance. and i -- so, very briefly, i think if there's one thing you an do, if you care about these issues, it would be to follow and collaborate with and reach out to the organizations, many of which were represented today, many of which were not represented here today, that are working on this issue. if you are on twitter, if you go to our twitter account, @georgetowncpv, you'll see a follow list. i'll give you an oral follow list. you should reach out to cypto harlem and matthew mitchell, you should reach out to brandon anderson at the swat app, reach out to colorofchange.org. you should reach out to the center for media justice where they're working to kick some butt. you should follow upturn's equal justice newsletter. you should follow the aclu.
you should follow stop lapd spying. and you should follow lucy parson's labs. and if you want to come to more of these events subscribe to our news letter just at -- google georgetown privacy center. i hope this has been useful for you. i'm so thrilled to see so many of you here. i want to pass it over to professor butler. but before i do that, i just want to say thank you again to the folks who have made this possible. dean schraeder, ford foundation, open society foundations, media justice fund and media democracy fund, pardon me. all the folks here at georgetown. a lot of hours went into making this conversation a success on behalf of special events, on behalf of av, on behalf of facilities, on behalf of communications, this was a lot of work.
and so before -- i want you to join me in a round of applause for professor butler. a round of applause for all the people who made this possible back in the av and outside. [ applause ] with a bit to do that i'm thinking about that and that number was $45,000. that's the number. they conducted in 2012, it's 600,000.
they went from 600,000 in 2012 and the professor is absolutely right. that's since 90%. if we are firm on what it is. we can create change. i just wanted to go out with a kind of anthem because the first song my mother made me learn is we shl overcome. that was the anthem of an earlier civil rights movement.
>> so professor said that when she looked at the room, she sees a beautiful crowd. she sees a diverse crowd. this is a crowd that is engaged in what martin luther king called the beautiful struggle. i see that same beauty in our diversity. i think if all of us work together, we are going to be all right. you are all invited to a reception outside. thank you so much.
>> tonight our road to the white house coverage continues in indiana. recently candidate donald trump is in south bend and ted cruz in indianapolis live on c-span. >> while congress is on break, it's american history tv in prime time normally seen weekends here on c-span 3. a look at the worst presidents in american history and the centennial of the national park service. here's a preview. >> this panel could be rendered moot by the next election. it would be good to have this in 2017. but as people saw my name on
this and the question was so, who is your whois? i should say i didn't address the question that way. we can get to that and we can throw out candidates, but what i want to talk about is what do we mean by worst? what do we mean by a bad president? i think when we think of great presidents, the criteria are pretty clear. we might quibble a little bit, but a small number that all of us would put there at the very top. you might call it bad presidents are bad in many different ways. and i want to go through a few kinds of bad presidents and see which of these really makes for the worst. there are first of all the
insignificant and forgettable presidents. as a historian of the 20th century, i'm like everyone else have trouble with all those 19th century which had the whiskers and the burn sides and which was which? you take someone like milliard fillmore and this was a research-intensive panel to go to white house.gov. this is what they said about him. milliard fillmore demonstrated that through methodical industry and some competence, some. not a lot, some. fillmore demonstrated that through industry and some competence, an uninspiring man could make the american dream come true. this is on white house.gov. this should be building him up.
one kind of worst president is the forgettable or insignific t insignificant. >> the national park service is the world's largest outdoor classroom usually. it's not just where an awful lot of americans learn something about history that they didn't learn in school. if you have been to the liberty bell or independence all or have been to yosemite or canyon lands, you know that there several million visitors from abroad to get their first lesson through the national park service. think of that on the rangers. it does create impressions and they come with little knowledge and open lives. they are empty vessels for which
they are doing something and it's a great responsibility to try to get history as right and balanced as possible. >> the panel discussion on the worst presidents in american history. some of the tonight's american history in prime time at 8:00 eastern. at 9:35, 100 years of the national park service. american history in prime time seen here on c-span 3. >> during campaign 2016, c-span take you on the road to the white house as we follow the candidates on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. >> tonight on the communicators. tim winter on the recent report
on the ratings system. the system intended to protect children from violence, sex, and profanity on tv has failed. >> there is no show on broadcast television, no series today that is rated appropriate for anything older than children. tv 14 is the oldest rating. even the most explicit rating. the tv networks rate the show and we learn that the adverti r advertisers who pay the bills rely on the ratings like parents do. there is a conflict of interest and advertisers won't sponsor mature audience and only content. and the system is incapable of doing as it was descended. >> watch tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span 2.
>> next, a look at new woochs to improving water flies. the director of the water direct and the chief of engineering and construction testified before a senate committee. this is about 45 minutes. >> we will come to order. i apologize for being a few minutes late. we had a vote at 10:00. that's our daytime job and we have to do it. the job conditions are still, they have and they have affected
many regions of the country. california and oklahoma have been affected. this morning we have witnesses from orange county, california promising new technologies and the u.s. army core of engineers. for the vast majority of years, oklahoma suffered from a devastating drought event and have nothing to do with global warming. as the drought reached the one of the in 2014, 60% of oklahoma was in the u.s. drought monitor's extreme category. 30% of the land area was experiencing exceptional drought. communities were rationing water and some communities were in the hardest hit areas and looked to reuse of wastewater and tapping unconventional sources or those of marginal quality for
non-potable uses to free up valuable fresh water. evaporating lakes and ponds searched for increasingly expensive production. abundant rainfall to discussive flooding conditions occurred nearly a year ago that caused dangerous situations throughout oklahoma and greatly improved the water supply for the time being. our water splice are overtaxed with often failing infrastructure and these affect communities across the nation. it's not exaggerated to say that water supply issues toews a threat to the economies and people's quality of life. communities have started planning with business groups
and the energy sector on the local level to develop plans. they demonstrate that water as the key element focuses on unifying and developing near short and long-term liabilities. the severe drought conditions required us to look at the further ground water to address the overreliance on surface water and to build infrastructure in the pipelines to reliability and underused water resources. the city planning and regional planning has been the most efficient way of preparing to
address the water supply problems. there supportive roles for state and federal government to assist our communities and theres for the corporate citizens as well. for example, area in oklahoma, thehardest hit in oklahoma. their nitrogen plant, one of the largest fertilizer plants in north america uses the city of ennen's treated wastewater for implant cooling water. eventually this reuse project will fre up almost five million gallons of water each day and almost one half of ennen's total current usage and the federal government can have a to play in assisting the infrastructure planning among states and an example of that.
they are dating back to 1966 with chloride control studies beginning at the red river as early as 1959. they have and will provide new drinking water and supplies increased irrigation and improved downstream water quality. we are currently working with the district office to develop a reevaluation review and record a decision for the chloride plant in oklahoma. at one point reservoirs were less than 20% and now many are nearly full with multiple years supply. presently the drought subsided and plans must continue so that we know it's ago to be coming back. it's funny for me and this was an issue in oklahoma way back
when i was in the state. the big issue at that time was transporting the water from eastern oklahoma and to western oklahoma. that's one of the situations that made everybody mad. this is not just local to oklahoma. it's across the nation. >> i want to thank you so much for the hearing. we have contentious hearing and i don't think this will be such. we are going to discuss innovative technologies to improve water supply from my home state of california. i got into heated conversations. i was telling the chairman in my state because i do support the technologies. others just turn away and say it's too expensive or we shouldn't do this.
there could be water for growth and all the rest. this is a moment in time whether we believe climate change is causing this or not. the fact is we are dealing with the droughts. i know this issue is dear to me as i see what is happening. even though we had el nino this year, it didn't live up to expectations and it has done a lot to help us, but we know we are looking at long-term problems. we know between the stakeholders and the agricultural people and the fishing industry and the urban users and suburban users. we don't know the rules of the game.
i'm really happy to see dennis. you have been engaged in the development implementation of water supply technologies for many years. orange county, my latest notes say, me if i'm wrong. it's the 6th largest county in the nation. we have 2.4 million people just in orange county alone. is that about right? we are literally talking about making sure people can live comfortably and have the water they need. this severe drought forced them to declare a state of emergency. and again, even though el nino has done better up north, it's not doing that well down south.
we know that we can expect more droughts in the feature. we do face many challenges associated with this ongoing drought, including overtapped aquifers and water restrictions and the delta ecosystem and the agriculture. when you mentioned water in california, everybody's back goes up. there so many arguments going on over diminishing resources. i don't take sides between the jobs and the fishing industry and the jobs in agriculture. they are all jobs. i don't take sides. i'm trying to get everyone to the table and i believe and that's why i'm so proud and my chairman shares this, we need to look at ways to avoid these battles, and that means a bigger water supply. where do you tut it and that starts the march of the
courthouse. if we were able to move forward with recycling and conservation that makes sense, we don't have to fight over the supplies. we need to work to expand the pool. by using our water more intelligently and making sure we can tap into the technologies. we are very fortunate, mr. chairman, to have two excellent witnesses. they will offer thoughts on how they can help. they will explain how they converted wastewater into 100 million gallons a day of clean, safe drinking water enough for 850,000 people. particularly in israel where the water action sift is occurring. when women look and say oh, what are you thinking?
they should talk to the folks who have been living with this technology for a long time. i'm pleased the core is here for managing around california. they serve critical needs and the core must employ them to make sure they are operated and can meet the growing challenges. i think today we can look for the opportunities to invest in technologies and learn from the partners such as israel and they have confronted the supplies and i would say this. we have a chance to make history. to take a look at this. to start a new way of looking atwater supply. drought faces us and always has
and always will. we are not sure, but we cannot take a gamble on water supply. >> one thing that neither one of us mentioned and the significance of the water in terms of military, it happens that right now in the audience we have bill and several other from the city of lawsuit on and right next door to it. it's something that is critical because the needs of those too, we got to the point where they have to shut it down from time to time. that's a huge issue and you are observing a hearing where we love each other and don't have disagreements. that's rare. i hope you enjoy it. we will start with three witnesses. >> remember this moment. >> we had three witnesses.
help me pronounce this. the first vice president and chief emergencying construction and senior science and technology adviser. we kk all three of you here. we will start with you and work down and try to keep your opening statements close to five minutes. you are recognized. >> ranking member boxer and other distinguished members, thank you for the opportunity to present information about the u.s. army core of engineers and activities related to drought and drought technologies. i like to provide information on the actions whereby to drought and touch on technologies that
we are investigating. drought of course is a deficiency and precipitation and usually over weeks and months and years resulting in water shortage causing impacts on vegetation. it's a lot more complex than a lack of water. drought is a common related phenomenon and every year in some parts of the u.s. affects our water supply in many other aspects of our well being. the core performs activities consistent with the congestionally authorized purposes for each two missions are flood mismanagement and water supply. keep in mind that most dams in
the area are authorized for flood management. senator boxer mentioned that the core operates about 30 dams and 17 californians. 17 of those are mostly for single purpose flood risk management. 13 are multiple purposes. generally speaking, the core will not construct a project for water supply, but may include the purpose and a project constructed primarily for one or more of the three main missionaries of the core of engineers which are flood and storm damage risk reduction. number two, commercial navigation and three for the ecosystem restoration. the water supply authorities recognized that the states and nonfederal entities have a primary responsibility and a development and management of their water supplies.
they have the responsibility of the states and the court does not own or sell water. water supply storage and a core rez power may be for nonfederal entities that may request that they study and consider additional storage water supply. the they are controlled by water control and include reservoir rule curves and were appropriate and includes drought contingency plans. the purpose of the plans is to provide a basic reference for water management decisions and responses to a water shortage and a basin due to drought. the core is working on methods and web tools to assist in noting the projected droughts and how will this impact core projects.
the results of this work will serve as a guide for developing the strategy to update the plans. the climate published in 2014 are reported that the climate is changing and projected to continue to change. the expected change includes warming temperatures resulting in precipitation patterns and increasing heat waves and change in snow patterns and droughts. two current efforts that we have under way to try to assist with our ability to manage climate prepareness and to implement methods to update the plans to account for climate change. a second is to enhance rez toir information to assist in climate preparedness by helping to
identify current and future reservoir volumes to affect food and water supply. a third we have ongoing is the foreca forecast for research which is a pilot study that would use the river forecasting to inform water management decisions in a manner which reflects current and forecasted conditions. the results may indicate whether it can be applied in operations of certain projects. in summary, the combinations of water control manuals in a deviation that we can have with the manuals provide a great deal of flexibility to respond to short and long-term needs based on best available information with science based on each project's purposes. thank you.
>> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chair uh. ranking member boxer, i am the first vice president of the board of directors of the orange county water district. i am honored to appear before you to discuss the most pressing issues of our time. a provision of a and reliable water supply. the district is located in mountain valley in southern california and provides ground water to orange county including 19 cities serving 2.4 million people. since 1933, we have taken pride in advancing sustainable water supplies. we live in a desert. the main source of surface water continues to decline. imported supplies from northern california and colorado are restricted. we recognize that to preserve the economic and social vitality, the challenges of ground water depletion and unreliable supplies demanded a
solution. this grew into the ground water system which is a joint between my district and the orange county sanitation district. it takes tweeted wastewater that purifies it using an advanced process. this treatment process produces water that exceeds all drinking water standards and we are producing 100 million gallons a day. our next and final planned expansion will provide 30 million gallons a day. it was during your term on the senate appropriations committee that you were able to secure towards the construction over a-year period. $20 million in federal funding
leveraged in state, local, and private funding to provide for the $481 million construction. we greatly appreciate that. there is no-side fits all solution. they establish a found augz to build to sustainable water needs and i encourage them to include funding for water reuse. our district is exploring more than 50,000 acres a year for the seawater and enough water for more than 400,000 people from the proposed huntington beach project as a way to increase local water supplies. the proposed project will be built by poseidon resources and the project is scheduled for a final hearing later this year. if approved by the coastal commission, my board will move forward with the wrch agreement
and the largest hurdle we face is the economics of ocean desalinization. conservation through reduced demand will not solve the overall need. in order to supplement the program, my district entered into a collaboration with the u.s. army core of engineers who have been a great partner to leverage the investment that the core made in the construction of the prada dam on the santa ana river. we recognize conserving water that could be recharged for future use. this alternative would be to lose the supplies down the santa ana river. senator boxer, you were instrumental in assisting us with the army core and we have accrued the water due to your
efforts. mr. chairman, we appreciate your efforts from an orderly passage from the word. we have provided the suggested policy to facilitate enhanced conservation and our recommendation to the committee arises from the experiences over the past few years working with the core to implement a long-term agreement to store water with the public safety in an environmentally predicted manner stated a clear statement to have water conservation activities needs to be made a part of the reauthorized word. we need to ensure that costs are allocated by guaranteeing that o.j. the cost attributable is allocated to the local water agency. theability to facilitate may seem like an obvious solution,
but we need a strong statement and again i thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. >> thank you very much. mr. price? >> ranking member boxer and members of the committee, kevin price, senior science and technology adviser to the middle east research center. my passion has been the abication of new technology to reduce the risks of drought and assist in resolving conflict around the world. i will focus on desalinization and water reuse. early in my reclamation career, i was responsible for the research portion of the science and technology agreement with israel.
during a trip i was i was asked why someone from the u.s. was attending. i explained that the problems and solutions would be important to the u.s. and it faced similar problems in the future. i currently work for metric, an international institution created in 1996 as part of the middle east peace process and hosted. they include the palestinians, jordanians and israelis as well as the u.s. department of state. they address water and peace. this is done through training and wrch. there is a distinction that must be meat. water purrifications is a number of things. frameworks describe what needs to be removed from water and this means suspended particles
and very large molecules through helping the particles to still to each other. this will not work with non-conventional sources. a major portion is dissolved and not suspended in the water. this is a fundamentally different process. this is also a critical component in water reuse. no longer is it necessary to think of drinking water and impaired water as separate. they are all water waiting to have the contaminants removed. among the 21st century technologies and humidification and deionization and forward osmosis and a bunch of other technologies that people continue to develop. the lessons learned in israel have consequences for the u.s.
in drought-plagued areas near the sea. the water supplies have been limited from the creation. it had to learn how to conserve through public education and reducing losses and appropriate pricing. because the need was so immediate, the membrane technology and they would decide to move forward. this is only technology that already workings. the real issues are broader such as who owns the water and the cost of water and whether or not it's appropriate for crop and
who will subsidize. by developing as part of the water resources, israel was able to develop the industry that can compete internationally. it is important to note the differences between israel and a state like california. not only is the control of water highly fragmented, the state is larger than israel. they have a population of around 8 million miles. 164,000 square miles. the opportunities of water are greater than in california. some of the lessons i learned in reclamation, for generating reclamation and broad boundaries generates unexpected ideas and proposals. innovation should follow related to risk taking and project size and funding at low levels that is bash higher levels of
inconsistent funding. they have strong technical reviews combined with freedom to accept risk anded is itting the unknown. if research is to solve problems and meet needs with strong transfer must exist to pull innovations from the laboratory. the demonstration provides the opportunity to involve all parties at an early stage. this concludes my remarks. more detail can be found in the written statement and i would be pleased to answer any questions at this time. >> thank you all three very much. let me restate that in oklahoma, the legislative goal is to have the naturally occurring chlorides. the modable studies dating back many, many years. designs have been completed and we are talking about over 40 years ago. 1978 was one of them. yet a single project has not
been constructed in area six despite the core spending throw.1 million over ten years. my question would be to you, mr. dalton. all these stories and designs. why is the core asking for another project to determine feasibility and building projects to reduce the core and the red river. >> the chairman and that study that we are looking at now for area six, we started out as you mentioned in the opening remarks looking at an evaluation of what was completed for that study. i think it was around 2005 or so and we looked at it and started
revising the study or updating the study and at that time we ran out of money. and since that time, we have been looking and talking with the state and county for a nonfederal partner. >> there have been studies. they completed studies over 40 years. i'm looking at my situation and how do i go back and ask them to spend money for a new study when we have gone through all of this and spend millions and not a shovel has been in the ground yet. did you listen to the can testimony and do you think this is technologies and this is moving right now in the areas like what i referred to in
southwest oklahoma that might be able to benefit from these? >> yes. chlorides can be removed by desalinization. >> in terms of reducing the cost. >> in the past 30 years, it had a dramatic improvement. >> was anything going on right now that we may be overlooking in oklahoma? >> i could discuss it, but i am not aware that they kept up with the technology? >> have you kept up? >> i am not familiar with exactly what chloride removal we are looking at for this particular project. it is something we looked at as part of our other project, i believe. overspecifics on that, but i would like to respond to is that
we don't know how much is required to complete the study and how much more work is required. as far as talking with the nonfederal sponsor or citizens, that has been done and there has been a number of parts of the study that have been completed. what we need to do now is determine what needs to be done to provide you with the work that we think is remaining and the cost. that would be helpful and i remind you and everyone else that next week, senator boxer and i plan to start the mark up. and so we need this stuff now. i want to make sure that anything that can be done and these projects, the kind of projects we are dealing with in
this bill we want to stay on top of this thing and yes, i would like to be sure and i'm sure that the core has a lot of research and all of that. to make sure there is not something looming that would cause this problem. that's what this is all about. our tension is to not let these things slight. we should be doing that every two years. senator boxer? >> thank you. that is music to my ears and i hope can avoid on either side amendments that don't belong there and we have shown we can do that. do you view desal as a component of a water supply system? i have a few questions and i will ask you and give you the time. do you think it should be a component and is cost a concern
as you explore the condition to your water supply system? accounted loan programs help address the cost issues? >> senator boxer, the answer is yes to all those questions. we are looking closely at having those sources. we have the santa ana river and we have the replenishment system and that would be the third leg of the school. desail inization could help with the cost of that. we are fortunate in that there innovations taking place in that arena with the membrane technology and we are looking forward to breakthroughs. >> can you explain what that means? membrane technology. >> it tefrs to reverse osmosis.
you are pulling the molecules across a membrane and the private section is developing a membrane called graph in. we are looking at the effect of it because we are very excited about the innovations and we want them to have world ride impigations and drive down the cost of the water. the water that we produce in our ground water system, the cost is about $850 an acre foot where as the cost of desal nated water is about $1200. it's about 50% more expensive. >> i would note and i think my colleague agrees. everybody needs clean water. when you are faced with a situation where maybe you have a
water emergency, the cost diminishes because we need it. it's the staff of in so many ways. we are trying to work to get a lot of my legislation in this. so far it's great. we are looking at reauthorization of the act and if we can put that in the bill, an act we already have that includes desal projects and drought resilient guidelines to help communities deal with drought. that would be helpful. i hope we can support new grants and change or modify to better support. those four things would be a
good start for us. >> one of the bigger challenges we have is the division of the water and this would be a new plant. that's over $100 billion. we need it. a loan program would be a premendous help. >> the chairman and i worked together to get that continue and it's based on what would allow to you leverage funds and get interest-free loans. would that be helpful as well? >> interest-free? we could use that. >> it's extremely low interest. basically the interest rate is set based on the chance that you might default. it's very low. especially orange county it can get out of trouble. how hard that was.
let me turn to mr. price. do you think the u.s. should have a greater roll n water supply technology development because you discuss in your written testimony. the in developing desa linization. the investment declined and they are not participating. is that a correct reading? >> that is correct. one of the ways i invest getted was talking to one of the professional editors and to get a feel for how the number of publications have changed over probably the last 30 or 40 years. basically the u.s. was a leader in the science of desalinization. was it a drop. and it's ten times less in publications than it was in the
past. that's probably due to the federal funding more than anything else. >> thank you. i don't have any other questions for the panel. i want to again say to my chairman this is an area where i think the work of this committee could really spark an entire new effort to rekindle the new technologies if we were looking at the ways to deal with desal. it's right there. i think a little spark from this committee could drive change and alleviate one of the biggest problems that we face as a nation. we always have had these issues and i know oklahoma when you think back in history, the problems that oklahoma had and california over the years with drought. we could -- this is like buying a really good experience policy and while we are doing it, become a leader in the world in
these technologies. i'm excited to work with you and i think the committee can light a fire under this desal and recycling and the kinds of things we like to see happen. >> i think that will happen. the timing couldn't be better. there is a simple answer to this, but when you are talking about researching, you have barbara and me and the big ocean and we have the little red river. is your research and technology and all of that, was that equally applied to both or do you concentrate in area as a more advanced technology in area than the other or is it the same? >> the technologies remain the same. it's a lot less expensive because it takes less energy because there fewer salts. >> well, mr. dalton, we will submit a question for the record
to get new details on how to make chloride control construction a reality in our area 6 that we are so concerned about. anyway, the timing is right and we are getting into the bill and that's what this is all about. it has been a problem in my state and that solves a problem instead of delay it. we are anticipating that. any other comments that you would like to share with us, while we don't only have the two of us, we have the staff and they are very interested in this issue. any other comments you want to make? in that case, we are adjourned. thank you very much. >> thank you so much, everybody.
>> this afternoon at 4:00 eastern, c-span will be live in a discussion about mining and their distribution. federal lands policy and how other natural resources are handled in the process. hosted by the cato institute. an open primary where registered voters can decide whether to take democrater or a republican vote. 57 delegates are at stake. donald trump is campaigning in south bend. we will have live coverage at 7:00 and at 7:30, c-span will be live at a rally at the indiana fairgrounds. donald trump is leading senator
in the state. while congress is on break, it's american history tv on prime time. a look at the worst presidents in american history and the centennial national park service. here's a preview. >> this panel could be rendered moot by the next election. it would have been better to have this in twepd 17. as people saw my name on this and the question was, so, who is your choice. i should say i didn't address the question that way. i probably can throw out candidates, but i want to talk about what do we mean by worst or a bat president? when we think of great presidents, the criteria are
clear. we might quibble a little bit, but there is a small number that probably all of us would put at the very top. you might call it the formulation like bad presidents are bad in many ways. i want to go through and see which of these makes for the worst. first of all, the completely insignificant and forgettable periods and as a historian of the 20th century, i'm like everyone else have trouble with the 19th century which had the twiskers and the burn sides and milliard fillmore could be the
worst. this was a research-intensive panel to go to white house.gov and this is what they said. milliard fillmore demonstrated through methodical industry and some competence. some. not a lot, some. fillmore demonstrated through industry and some competence, an uninspiring man could make the american dream come true. this is on white house.gov. it should be building him up, i think. one kind of worse president is the forgettable or insignificant. >> it is described as the world's largest outdoor classroom. it's where an awful lot of americans learn something about history. they didn't learn it? school. if you have been to the liberty bell or independence hall in
philadelphia or if you have been to yosemite or canyon lands, you know that there are several million visitors from a brud to get their first lesson through the national park service experience. think of the weight of that on the rangers. it creates impressions and they come with very little knowledge of american history. so they are empty vessels from which they are pouring something. it's a great thing to get history as right as possible. >> the worst presidents in american history. some of the tonight's american history in prime time at 8:00 eastern. at 9:35 a look at 100 years of the national park service. american history tv and prime time normally seen weekends here
in to share information with third parties. the internet caucus advisory committee hosted the discussion. it's folks, welcome to another congressional internet caucus advisory committee briefing. thanks, everybody, for come for this recess briefing. we'll try to do this quickly in one hour. and explain this issue from a pro and con perspective. the briefing in case you're in the wrong place, it's the new fcc privacy rules for broadband provider, what will they mean by privacy? this is hosted by the congressional internet caucus advisory committee. and it's chaired on the house side by congressman bob goodlatte and anna ashoe. so we are super supportive, appreciative of their support and the fact they allow us to host these in a fair and balanced way with them.
in a fair and balanced way. and their ability to say, we don't care -- we don't care where our particular perspectives are, but we want a good debate, pros and cons, on these issues and let, you know, congressional staff decide where they come out on the issue. so before i get going, just a few little bits of housekeeping. if you want to follow the conversation on twitter, the hash tag for today, #fccprivacy. and you can follow us at @netcaucusac. that information is on your list here. we don't have any upcoming events, but we'll notice one in a week or two. so the next one is on the transition for the department of commerce and internet governance. keep on the lookout for that. let me introduce, we have pros and cons on the particular issue. let me just introduce quickly my panel. right to the left here is jim halpert.
he's with dla piper, which is a law firm here in town. he's a partner there. next to him is debbie matties. she is vice president of privacy at ctia which is a collection of wireless and cellular phone companies. next to her is katerina kopp. director at center for democracy and technology, which is you great private and i and civil liberties firm, nonprofit in washington. and next to her is laura moy who is a visiting professor of law from georgetown law school. all their twitter handles are on the page. so why are we here today? yesterday, the federal communications commission and the federal communications commission proposed a rule governing privacy issues related to broadband services. and covering broadband service providers. they are basically updating a law from 1996, which incidentally is the same year that the congressional internet caucus was created. so 20 years ago, the telecommunications act of 1996 act was passed which governed
the privacy of telephone service and also the congressional internet caucus was created that year. incidentally, the top song on the billboard was the "macerena." i don't remember what phone i had but it wasn't portable. it was a very, very different day. and the congressional internet caucus was created that year to bring more attention to internet issues. so this is really interesting collision of old and new and what are we here for. so the fcc had a notice of proposed rule making. they want to do a rule to update these privacy rules for telephone providers. now what they call broadband service providers and our panel will explain that, and then debate the pros and cons. so we'll go through a lot of material very quickly. the rules governing privacy for broadband service providers they include folks that provide your cellular service, not the phone itself. but the service that i get here
which is t-mobile. your -- over your laptop or desktop, which in my case at home is verizon fios but here house public wi-fi. so those are the types of services that we're talking about, and broadband service providers and these rules are covering them. let's go to the first question and jim arrived just in time for the people out there who, you know, the gnawing question is like that name sounds really familiar. jim halpert, where do i know that from? you're probably googling jim halpert and the first thing that comes up is that guy from "the office." jim, so we get this out of the way, so you're not bugged through the briefing, jim is named -- he's the inspiration for jim hal pert from "the office." >> that's right. you'll find that much less exciting than the actor. for what it's worth, i had dinner with the real andy bernard, another childhood friend who was in town for a world bank economic conference. but let's talk about how this arose first.
>> yeah, yeah. >> basically, fcc has been trying to find a way to impose net neutrality requirements on internet access providers. after a couple of attempts it decided to classify them as common carriers. and just by virtue of providing broadband service. when the -- when the original cpni law was passed the providers were considered independent internet information services and were not regulated at all by the fcc. this new classification, through a quirk in the way that the federal trade commission law works, are outside the authority of the federal trade commission. so before this net neutrality order, internet access providers were regulated in the same requirements as anyone else in
the internet echo system or any other business. it's just the fcc rule changing the way for purposes of telecon, then all of a sudden we have a change of authority over internet access server. >> so this is the aka, net neutrality? >> right. so what is -- what is -- what is the commission proposing? basically proposing a private si regime that includes notice, like telling people, consumers, what their privacy rights are. a choice, whether you can opt in or opt out or keep them from doing that collection. and then security. which is like how -- you know, are you going to keep my data secure when you collect it? what is the rules specifically looking like, and what is the cpni thing that people are a hearing about? >> we don't know about the text, because it's not been released but based on discussions it
sounds like what the fcc would do is to require enormously long lists of information to be provided to consumers, by way of notice of what the data practices of the internet access service is, and then set up a multi-tiered set of permissions, degree of opt in or opt out, that would be required for the internet access provider to use information that it had obtained by virtue of providing this service to consumers. so there would be a very unusual opt-in consent requirement for any disclosure of information to a third party. we'll talk about that how that may be less unusual. but certainly for internal uses of information for purposes, for example, of advertising or marketing, that would be sharply
restricted, unless requiring an firm opt in consent, unless the marketing was for something that was related to communication service. so, an existing service that the consumer required. there would be an opt-out for that sort of marketing. so that the default rule would be opt in with an opt out rule in place for marketing, communication services or marketing those services through an affiliate. >> if i can jump to laura. so for the average consumer at home, what does it mean for them, what does it mean for their privacy? what companies are they interacting that they'll be covered by this rule and kind of what is so unique about broadband service providers that we need such a rule? >> okay. all right. i'll try to take those -- i'll try to get to all of those. and just give you a little bit of background here, before we start talking about consumers and exactly what this means to them, i think it's
worth talking about what the objective is with respect to consumers of the law in the first place. so, you know i think this is something that we could probably discuss at length because i'm sure there would be differences among us panelists. over what the primary goals of the statute are here. but basically, the section of the communications act that governs common carrier privacy, the privacy obligations which in the past were phone providers now include broadband providers, essentially it had two goals. one was to protect the privacy of information that consumers have to provide to carriers to get service. so that's like, you're talking about common carriers, you're talking about companies that where their primary function is to carry the customer's communications from one end to the other. and so in that context, if you're making a phone call or
browsing the internet or using any online service, you have no choice but to provide certain information with the carrier about the traffic. so with a phone call you have to provide information about the phone number you're calling, the length of time you're talking on the phone, et cetera. and with internet traffic, it's kind of similar. you have to provide information about -- that enables the broadband provider to route the traffic from one place to another. the customer pays the carrier for service. and has to provide information about their communications in order to get that service. and one of the goals of the law is to protect that information. basically to make sure that the information isn't then being used for other purposes other than to direct the traffic or to direct the calls. without the customer's approval. then the other objective is competition based objective where one of the -- you kn