tv Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on 5G Technology Impact CSPAN May 14, 2019 12:06pm-12:32pm EDT
of the purple heart are supporting this legislation. again, it is going to be important for us to get this bill passed out of this chamber and force the senate to do the right thing' provide justice for those who served in that conflict and who are still suffering from cancers, heart disease, from skin ailments because of exposure to a chemical they had absolutely no idea was unsafe. with that i yield back. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair now declares the house in recess until 2:00 p.m. toda
this initiative was the fuel that organized europe. in a he coherent direction. and ultimately defined what 5-g is today. the u.s. should launch a similar initiative focused on 6-g, if we don't do so, china will. thank you for the opportunity to address the committee. like forward to your questions. >> mr. harrell. mr. harrell: thank you for the opportunity to testify today. it's a privilege to be here on such a distinguished panel. i have submitted a written statement for the record, i ask to be entered into the record. that same i thought i would use my introductory remarks to make a couple of discreet comments on issues raised during the first panel. as i came out through the first panel, the success for the united states in the race to 5-g will depend ultimately primarily on the invs.ments we make here in the united states.
as my colleagues on this panel have stated, it is undeniably true that they have benefit interested a variety of unfair and at times illegal state financing, economic espionage, and other illegal practices, we also need to recognize away competitor. as is china. they spent $15 billion last year in r&d spending, ranking number five among all technology companies globally. it has 15% of the standard essential patents related to 5-g technology, an issue that senator coons brought up earlier. it offers a a product that has come through today many foreign companies -- boat the lead and development of the technologies that sort of will be built around 5-g as assistant secretary can krebs said, we
are not going to win this race. it is important we confront china internationally, we need to focus at least as much on the investments we make here at home. on that note, i would like to commend recent steps by the fcc and the trump administration to try to speed the deployment of 5-g technology here in the united states and encourage investment. earlier this year, last month, the fcc announced one of the largest auctions of spectrum in history which will occur later this year across a range of different bands that can be used by 5-g, it also took regulatory steps to ensure that the many tens of thousands of actual tours -- towers that need to be built domestically to roll out 5-g can be built without facing extensive local government regulation. second i want to comment on the espionage threat, which has come up repeatedly throughout this hearing.
it is abundantly clear to all of us here in the united states and many of our allies away equipment presents a very serious espionage threat, both in the united states and to our allies. i do not need to repeat the many statements that nigh micolleagues on this panel and assistant secretary krebs and others have made. the only point i would make if we think about espionage, and chinese espionage here in the united states writ large, yes, rahway's y's -- development of technology globally is a significant espionage threat. i think we also need to think about the espionage threat rose posted by another issue of interest to this committee, which is the fairly low standards of data privacy here in the united states. we spend a huge amount of effort thinking about the risk of chinese hacking, which is a very real risk and a a growing risk that must be addressed.
it is also quite possible for commercial actors, including chinese front companies, to simply purchase vast quantities of americans' personal data which they can can exploit for espionage purposes. i would urge members of the committee to think about data privacy as a national security issue as well as a domestic polish shoe. finally, i'd like to make a closing remark on the international diplomatic mpaign that mr. stier talked about on the prior panel. i commend the trump administration's recent six-month diplomacy globally to try to make clearer to foreign governments what the stakes are and the costs that countries ill face if they deploy huawei equipment at scale. i agree with dr. krebs' statement that he we also need to think about companies to
deploy non-huawei equipment. for many of these countries, particularly in europe, they have stark memories of having fallen behind the united states in the deployment of 4-g. and as a result, lacked much of the innovative ecosystem that has served the u.s. so well. i think they arer reluctant to slow down the deployment of 5-g overseas because of the long-term economic costs they face. we need to be thinking about what can can we do to help our allies speed the deployment of nonhuawei 5-g as we continue to draw the contrast women between their equipment. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. as i understood the first panel it seems to be the policy of the united states is to tell our allies that when it comes purchasing 5-g programs material for 5-g systems, there are certain criteria that we
want you to meet before you purchase it. did you-all get that? everybody said he yes. senator graham: part of the criteria is to change the communist chinese government. seems to me that one of the concerns we have is the way china does business. do you agree with that? so we are telling the world, asically, you can't buy huawei communist, chinese-owned equipment even if it's a private company and still have the same business national security relationship with the united states as you did before? seems to me curate we have. aren't we telling them if you buy these systems you'll be shut out of intelligence
sharing? >> senator, i might take that one. toint think we have been that blunt just yet. we certainly hinted. senator graham: i think that's -- maybe i misread the first panel. do you get that, dr. clancy? dr. clancy: i think we like to approach to to risk management because that allows us to not single out specific countries or companies. the effect is perhaps the same. senator graham: the point is, i'm trying to do two things here. bring clarity. if you are an ally of the united states, we are pretty much telling you that if you buy these systems, your relationship with the united states will change fairly cra mat economy -- dramatically. you bring up problems, the other panel did also, we are not giving people good alternatives. they are not going to stay stuck in time forever. there are two things i have gotten out of this hearing. i support the policy of the
united states to tell the allies don't go down this road with china. but i also think it's incumbent upon us as congress to push alternatives that will not trap our allies into old systems that will advance the cause for all of us. does that make sense? is that our two goals here, mr. harrell? mr. harrell: i think those are the fundamental two goals of the u.s. policy here. senator graham: dr. clancy? dr. clancy: i agree. >> the problem we have, i must the problem child on the panel, i apologize, mr. chairman. huawei's all over europe, and the 4-g networks the europeans used depend on huawei. it's too expensive to rip it out. that's part of why they are balking. to mr. harrell's point, you can deploy 5-g faster if you layer it over 4-g initially. dr. lewis: we need to hold the line but it won't be black or white. it will be a path to move them
away from huawei. senator graham: do you agree with the concerns expressed in terms of our national security if they do deploy 5-g, chinese technology, that the concerns we have all talked about are heal? dr. lewis: huawei's been a problem for its whole existence, yes. senator graham: i don't know what to do other than try to find a way to move forward. pretty clear to me as long as china is china, we feel threatened. in this space. we are telling our allies don't make -- go down this road. don't make us pick between doing business with you and having to compromise our systems. seems to me that this should be a national security, economic priority of the congress and the trump administration. with that, senators feinstein. i'm r feinstein:
reluctant to say this because i don't have the knowledge that all of you do. it's my understanding that part of the difficulty is huawei equipment is 20% to 30% cheaper and often comes with generous leasing or loan terms. huawei is able to offer lower prices because of support from the chinese government. i believe that's a fact. i don't know how we fight the 5-g situation, but it seems to me that the learning lesson ought to be taken up by 6-g. and that we ought to understand that the world we are playing in is a very difficult world. i don't think, if a country in europe can can get 5-g for 30% less than in the united states, they see a necessary incentive not to do that.
but i would hope that as people look at the next generation we approach it differently, learn from the problems herer. would you comment -- here. would you comment on that, mr. lewis? dr. lewis: thank you, senator. i was talking to an executive from a european tell could he involved in a bidding pros sest with huawei. he said they offered them close to a 90% discount. i'll use his words, because they were desperate to get into our tell communications -- telecommunications core. we can can make assumptions about why huawei is desperate and where they are getting the conmoney. you can can lay out the case chairman graham did, this is nothing you can can do without risk. china has a massive global espionage campaign f you use huawei it will only accelerate that.
>> i'll note the free hand of capital market doesn't work well in the face of heavy hand industrial policy that's what we are facing. how do we maintain our view of not picking winners and losers here in the united states, and in terms of federal subsidies, and be able to compete against an adversary who is doing that. dr. clancy: your point about 6-g is excellent. that's a big starting point in terms of where we need to make investments now. and not necessarily in the same topdown, heavy-handed way you see in china. there are investments in r&d that could create an environment where the u.s. emerges as a leader in the patents critical to the standards process that could then form the basis of 10 new start-up companies that could one day compete with huawei. >> i want to pick up on a beginning comment that dr. clancy made about the way to push back on china's industrial policy, which is one of the factors giving huawei an
advantage here. i could not want to dismiss huawei as a competitor, but one of the factors is clearly below market funding and a variety of unfair practices. clearly this week we have an ongoing trade negotiation with china. . mr. harrell: given the chinese and the trump administration did not reach a trade agreement last week. and president trump has increased tariffs on china. we don't know where that trade negotiation will go. but certainly that is a vehicle that the administration can can and should be using to push for really fundamental reforms on this kind of chinese industrial policy writ large, of course, but maybe very specifically ith respect to chinese 5-g and telecommunications rollout generally. chairman graham: senator whitehouse. senator whitehouse: thank you,
chairman. to the panel for being here. cars are very dangerous things and they kill lots and lots of people. but there are superhigh utility pieces of equipment so we put airbags and seat belts in them and use them. bazookas don't have the same dangerer the utility so we forbid those. so question one is, is chinese 5-g more like a car or more like a bazooka? can you can safety around it or do you need to -- can you safety around it or do you need to try to prevent it? >> i'll go first, senator. in talking to some of our nato allies, they would tell you that 5-g does expand the possibility of chinese espionage, which is already rampant in their countries. they also -- senator whitehouse: car or bazooka? is it something you can add
safety features? >> no. dr. clancy: i would go with bazooka in that the effects of a cyber attack are nonlinear. with cars the safety issues are linear. they affect individual vehicles and passengers of those vehicles who are making informed risk decisions in theory about what to drive and how to drive. don't you have that with a global telecommunications. senator whitehouse: mr. harrell. r. harrell: when i look -- apologies. when i look how foreign governments -- senator whitehouse: i just want an answer. mr. harrell: for me a bazooka. for most governments looking at this it's a car. that's a fundamental issue we have to grapple with. senator whitehouse: just because your name is clancy, let me start with you. what if each of you, what is a plausible worst case scenario
hat we would face from the 5-g huawei risk? dr. clancy: the worst case scenario is part of a global conflict. china is able to completely control the internet and fundamentally cripple our ability to do command and control in a major combat operations. senator whitehouse: dr. lewis. dr. lewis: the worst case can scenario would be huawei dominance which would damage our ability to be innovative and chinese control of the telecom networks that would allow them to disrupt critical services. senator whitehouse: they could start writing programs and code and conduct their business in such a way american companies re effectively frozen out or -- dr. lewis: the 4-g leadership we had in innovation might shift to china. worst case. senator whitehouse: mr. harrell. mr. harrell: i agree with dr.
lewis. china dominating the whole ecosystem. senator whitehouse: the need risk. mr. harrell: the national security risk is real particularly with the denial dr. lancey talked about. that said, i think that probably there are going to be ways to partially engineer around some of that risk. so you wouldn't see the total shutdown in a worst case scenario. senator whitehouse: let me close out with an a appreciation to csis for the work that they have done in this space. they had a brief lapse of judgment and let me be the democratic co-chair of their latest cyberer report before president trump was inaugurated. they do report to the incoming president. unfortunately doesn't seem to have much effect because i don't think the administration has come to us with any legislation. i can't resist seeing dr. lewis here both to, a, express my
appreciation, and also to express my hope because chairman graham has been very thoughtful and attentive and interested in these issues that we can find a way to break the logjam to address the larger cyberer security issues and potentially the 5-g is a piece of that, with some legislative package. and what stops us is nothing of any merit. what stops us is, i think general alexander used to say, i think he was exaggerating, he used to say i respond to 137 congressional committees on cyber. so even in it was only 37 instead of 137, that's still probably 35 too many. we get into a system in the senate where as soon as one committee pops up and says i'm going to do something, the committee staff 69 other committee said that's our territory. even if they are not doing anything, it's the proverbial dog in the manger problem. we get all jammed up. then on the other side, we had a happy moment when tom was
over there, i think was a very solid pro, and we had to dan coats, our former senator, there you go substance and politics and we'll get something going. but nothing organized has emerged out of this administration to deal with cyber legislatively. that's a shame because somehow or other there is a gap here. i think the chairman would agree. there is a gap here and we need to fill the gap. whether csis can can help us do that, or the chairman's leadership can can help us, or the administration will finally decide they are going to do something legislatively on this, somehow we have got to, to use a phrase the chairman used in anotherer circumstance, cross the rube conhere and get to draft -- rubicon here and get to drafting legislation. senator graham: i echo what senator whitehouse said. i'm no expert but senator whitehouse understands the threats we face from cyber attacks. a couple years ago we tried to incentivize the private sector
to harden critical structure in a fashion that if you met the best business practices and invested and did the things to protect your infrastructure, you would be given liability protection. we all believe the regulatory system is not going to be able to keep up with the threat. you've got hardening the critical infrastructure here at home that's mostly private sector based. now we have got developing technology called 5-g that if china dominates this market we may not be able to do normal business or function militarily. we are sitting around looking at each other. we have a bunch of bills being introduced. it's going to take administrative leadership, the trump administration working with the congress, to deal with both problems. i promise senator whitehouse we'll restart the conversation about how to harden critical infrastructure here at home. understanding the private sector's our best bet. they have to do it meaningfully. when it comes to the 5-g
problems we are facing, it's not enough to tell our allies, no. we have to do more. we have to offer a better alternative than what china has on the table. thank you. we'll leave the hearing opened to receive information. a letter senator feinstein wants to introduce. we'll leave it open for input for the next three days. thank you. [captions copyright national able satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. isit ncicap.org]
new hampshire republican judd gregg and north dakota democrat kent conrad both served as chair of the senate budget committee. they'll be testifying today at 2:30 eastern time on c-span3. and saturday, former vice president joe biden will hold a campaign kickoff rally in philadelphia. live at 1:00 eastern here on c-span. you can also follow our live coverage online at c-span.org or use the free c-span radio app. >> this week our online video library marks a milestone. a quarter million hours of content. all c-span programs since 1987 are available in our online lie blunt rochesterry. you can view them all for free at c-span.org. tojournal continu. this is representative john garamendi, democrat from