The communicators. Congresswoman clarke, thanks for being here. I want to start with the smart cities caucus. First of all what is it and how do you envision smart cities . Guest we decided to establish a bipartisan smart cities caucus. Originally darrell issa was my cochair. Its now congresswoman from indiana susan brooks. We knew that already technology is a major part of our lives. Its the utility that we can use to make sure that we are economically feasible going into the future, that we are efficient in our use of energy, and it enables us as a society to be far more productive than our 20th century industrial age. We were looking at the fact so much of what already exists in society is connected, and what our smart cities caucus does is it looks at four different areas of how communities are connected. One is connectivity. The other principle being sustainability. The other being mobility. And then the workforce. And how all of those components Work Together to make sure that in the 21st century our some society is given the opportunity to really reach its full potential utilizing the technological advantages, advances that weve had in this age. Host you refer to it as the utility. Do you see it as utility like plumbing and electricity and streets and things like that . Guest its something we use but its more of an infrastructure, right . I think for many we look at particularly communities that are already wired, broadband has been deployed, ways in which we can maximize on that infrastructure to again help build a better quality of life for our citizenry. When we talk about smart cities caucus, i always say slash smart communities. This can be applied in suburban and rural areas, provided we have the appropriate infrastructure built out in those areas. Host do you see congress having a role when to funding smart cities . Guest i think we do. I think that we can incentivize our partnerships with the private sector, many of which already have a lot of that infrastructure built out in different parts of the country. But there are gaps, and in order for us to be fully integrated and fully utilizing and maximizing technology and all of its permutations, its important that we partner and incentivize private sector engagement. Host before we introduce our guest reporter, one final question on this. What about your district in brooklyn . You consider it a a smart cities . Guest absolutely. We are at the very beginning of filling out a smart city. We were fortunate very early on to convert our old telephone booth infrastructure into wifi kiosks, and there strategically located across the city of new york. That in and of itself provides a means of communicating that sets out sort of a predicate for what can be done with sensor technology, how we can regulate our lighting system. There is so much that can be done just from that platform alone. We are looking at how we can integrate into the use of that Energy Source that will be sustainable. There have been some entrepreneurs who have talked about how we can connect solar to the use of those kiosks as well, and so it really has a footprint in the city of new york that gives us, i believe, a great edge in terms of fully integrated all of our needs into a a smart city. Host joining us at the table is joe marks, cybersecurity reporter for the washington post. Are we in smart cities caucus edition with china, and how are we doing . Guest i dont know. I think we have competition with ourselves. I think china has done far more investment. Of course they are statesponsored so its a lot easier when you have one guy who is making all the decisions. Here we have 50 states. We still have a lot of work to be done in terms of national infrastructure, and so to a certain extent i believe that we are behind in terms of the buildout. Do we have the knowhow and the ability . Yes, we do. Do we have the technology and the ability to roll it out . Yes, we do. What we have to get is the will to do so. There have been stories recently about cities not being capable of protecting the data they already have. Ransomware attacks in baltimore and atlanta and other places. Should we be concerned about cities gathering orders of magnitude more data, some of it about citizens . Guest we have to build up the capacity because in the foldable link in the United States is an attack on all of us. Notwithstanding the fact that there are certain parts of the country that have far more a robust cybersecurity protocols. Any weak link creates a portal in which anyone can invade, whether its the pentagon or its your local municipality. Should congress be doing something to ensure there are better cybersecurity standards as these things are built out . Guest absolutely we have talked about cyber hygiene and the fact we should be retrofitting, but we should have those securities baked into the technology that we are using. And so we have to continue to push for that. We have to continue to be vigilant about that, because you will say this is what we want to accomplish, and then someone is looking for shortcut. Its that shortcut that create the vulnerability that makes us all vulnerable in the end. Host congresswoman clarke, just to follow up what you asked about this information and its potential for getting loose, should cities have that kind of information about themselves . Guest they are going to have to. I mean, thats the only way to really address local concerns. We should be mature enough at the state of our department in the Technology Space to be able to protect peoples information, to be able to have the proper protocols in place to make sure that we are monitoring and making sure that no nefarious uses of personal data is happening in our city, and our state, and it. We are not there yet. Theres no doubt about it we are not there yet. We are going to need the assistance of a cybersecurity workforce, and thats again part of the smart cities caucus, is to establish a workforce that is committee, that is focused, that is welltrained and constantly learning what it is to protect. Everything needed, infrastructure, with a workforce commensurate with that. Do you think congress is commensurate with it . Obviously there have been some hearings of Mark Zuckerberg and others in the past what people question whether congress has the technology and cybersecurity savvy to really legislate in this area. Now were inviting companies will be in charge of smart cities to collect lots more data about citizens. And we ensure that is been done responsibly . Guest i think we have an obligation to do so. We are not a a monolith in the legislature at all. You have large bandwidth from younger folks who have lived their lives through every usage of technology, to some of the more seasons of members who still are on flip phones. We are not going to rely on the flip phone crowd to set those protocols but we can and we do have the capability through other member separately studied this, many who are very fluent in privacy issues, in cybersecurity issues. We have number of members who were in the cia and the fbi. We have access to the information we need and to the technicians that can help us to craft what is important, and we have to create the type of protocols that grow with the rapid growth in technology protocols. And so i think we are capable of doing it. We just have to have the will and the bipartisanship behind it. Smart cities as they have been implemented in china, theres often kind of a hazy line between the use of the data for Public Safety and for surveillance. I know especially with facial recognition and policing. I know youve expressed concern about the way facial recognition has been used in the United States in Public Housing and at the border. How do you ensure you get the good stuff from these connections and not the bad stuff . Guest again, its all about how he regulate things, how you legislate things, and how you create policies that are in keeping with the balance of your society. So Law Enforcement i think has a unique role in terms of the utilization of technology. It can be used for good. It can be used for bad. The hope is that as we are becoming more enamored with the use of technology, that those who would use for bad would be out as outliers, but the practice is these are how, this is how were going to use this technology and under the circumstances. You know, a child is kidnapped. Now you can get footage that shoots from one location to the next location to the next location far quicker than the Human Capacity to send that information along. On the other hand, you dont want to have a situation where you are babysitting a child and the information that could have come to a Police Officer doesnt, they dont recognize you and you unfortunately end up with an incident that takes someones life, right . So its all about how we use technology in a smart way and how we set the protocols, how we train the workforce to use it. Is there a concern though that technology is just developing too fast for the lawmakers and the regulators to keep up with its implications . Guest i think, again, who the regulators are, who the legislators are. There are so many folks who have already really delve into this space and a very apprised of how the technology is evolving, how it is being used, and now to put guardrails around it. We need to access those folks. We need to move into the four so that that expertise is something that is treasured and that we maximize on. Host representative clarke, do you hear from people or do you have a fear of the socalled big brother syndrome . Guest i dont work i dont have a fear of it. I think that its important, however, that we set up guardrails, that we recognize privacy as a very important part of this conversation around the use of technology and that we acknowledge it or in the same way folks in the eu have. They have set up really great protocols around managing data. We have yet to make that step here and the United States. As a matter fact, i consider our nation to be the weakest link, because we havent. Those conversations we aubrey having on the hill because its very, very important that we not make profit the driver, you know, with the deployment of technology, the use of personal data, but the wellbeing of Civil Society is at the core of what we trying to accomplish. Host impeachment acquirer, electionyear common. Is there a political will to pass cybersecurity or privacy legislation . Guest i hope there is. We have to do our job. The house of representatives has passed over 252 pieces of legislation already in this congress, and they have got over to the senate and their languishing there. I think we can all of this at one time. The legislature is built that way so we have committee assignments, we have members working on various pieces of legislation. We can maximize our time but when you really partners, and the legislative body only works when both chambers are working. Unfortunately, thats not the case right now. One of the biggest pieces of cybersecurity legislation members have try to get through our semantics on Election Security including funding. Thats largely been stuck in the senate. Leader mcconnell there has said less than 250 million towards Election Security, no mandate behind it is that sufficient to protect 2020 . Guest its not sufficient, not from the information we gathered thus far about how there are vulnerabilities. The challenge is you have 50 different, 50 odd different election systems because its governed at the state level. And so we have to do far more than say were going to allocate funding without restriction, without targeting its use for securing our election systems at the state level. We have to look at each state with even able to accomplish a standard for what is important. We cant even agree the stage that 81 should have a paper trail. So when youre at that stage we cant even agree that we should have a written record or a printed record of people voting, you know if a long way to go. What are the things you folks on terms of Election Security is deep fakes. How concerned are you this can be an issue in the 2020 election, these videos that look incredibly lifelike are doctored . Guest i think its a threat to Society Overall because deep fakes are deep fakes, right. To the naked eye you cant really tell a difference. So we know that in the last election there was a lot of meddling in social media. Imagine if the words that were put out to dissuade people from voting came with a video depiction of it and it showed someone that is highly revered making a false statement or taking action it didnt actually take. It has implications beyond just, beyond just a fictional depiction of something. They can psychologically create a real problem for americans. And so its important theres a disclaimer that indicates the individuals this has been tampered with or visit been altered, this has been modified, this is for your entertainment. There should be a watermark of some sort so that people can distinguish between what is real and what is not. Deep fakes could also be weaponized. The Biggest Issue has been in sort of the revenge space. This is happening regularly. We are creating in peoples lives have, it is ruin peoples reputations, where you go to repair reputations . I think its important we passed legislation and that is getting ahead of things. Because right now its not widely distributed in the context of sort of socially acceptable social media. Its basically relegated to the margins right now in the dark web, but at some point it can become very prevalent, and its important that the American People know that these are deceptive uses of video and Technology Trade what is your deep fakes accountability act got bipartisan support . Guest it does, he does. So im hoping we can move it because i think when youre talking about elections and trying to create an election that has integrity, once you move into sort of the video depictions that are deceptive, were not in a totally different space and trying to get back to a place where we understand truth as truth, becomes even more of a challenge for us. Host congresswoman clarke, you are also vice chair of the energy and commerce committee. Whats your take on Silicon Valley and the social Media Companies . Guest well, i think that they so dont want to go to generalized, but but i would sy with the building much more healthy relationship with the American People. I think that many have been driven by being preeminent in their space, and with that preeminence comes a certain level of arrogance and abuse. And that is not in best interest of the American People. I find that many of these firms are not selective of the diversity of the people of that country. And when youre talking about developing algorithms and a whole host of other things, if youre only coming from one perspective, you are taking into the system discrimination that is going to be very hard to unpack baking once it is baked into the system. You talk about finding the right advisors to help move toward a more connected, bigger data future. Are there particular people or groups and around the Tech Community you look to to advise you on that . Guest well, i mean, everything from the Energy Sector to the tech sector. These are to the banking sector. These are industries that it had out of necessity to protect their infrastructure, whether its banking or its our oil and gas or our electricity grid. There we will find a lot of folks. Also within the Tech Industry itself. They are building it, so as they build it we should be having some level of discourse so that we understand what the implications are of what is being built and how it is being deployed and what it means for Civil Society, and in academi. There are a lot of young folks who are looking at the defense industry, looking at helping our country. These are folks of the wherewithal to advise, to bite us with the level of literacy that we need that only to look at what we have before us right now, the way things are going in the future. One thing that is often paired with them moved to smart cities are 5g wireless networks. Their supposed be magnitudes factor than the current wireless infrastructure. Are you concerned about the security of 5g networks, and is a Trump Administration doing enough to give wally and of the Chinese Companies out of those networks . Guest no, were not doing enough to keep wally and other nefarious actors out of our networks, but i believe that we have what it takes to be able to do so. Its interesting because i even heard some of the folks into utility space, the electric sector, talking about 10g. We are at 5g 5g now, but theres always discussion about 10g. I have no idea, maybe you blink and everything disappears, i i just dont know where were going with that one. But it is important if were going to really build out a smart city that 5g 5g is usuale need to be able to access and to maximize on. The problem is we havent fully deployed broadband yet. The Digital Divide is always a concern and an issue, whether its a Rural Communities or what we call digital deserts in urban communities. The one thing we dont want to do is see any quality exacerbated because were unable to figure out or crack the code around how we make broadband and 5g ubiquitous in the treaty. Thats one of the things were looking at smart cities smart commute his caucus. Host we ask this of every member of cox who comes on this program. You own and wally for yourself . Guest no, i wouldnt. Host because of the security . Guest im just concerned about our lack of negotiation, our lack of intelligence, and the fact that we know that competition breeds contempt, right . And with these nations who are clearly looking to eat our lunch, im concerned. There has been some reporting of real concern huawei and its uses of technology. But they are not the only one. I dont want to stigmatize huawei. There are a lot of people who like their devices. I personally, you know, listen, people are talking about alexa, right, and amazon, and the fact that a lot of that technology is, when you think it is sleeping it is actually recording. So theres a lot that we have to unpack with personal technology within our homes, within our communities, throughout our Civil Society and that we secure it in a way in which our privacy and personal information comes first. Do you think congress is prepared to do that, given all of the difficulties . Guest listen, i think that there are enough folks with the wherewithal to do it. Now, whether were at that point right now i dont believe so. I think theres a lot more that we can learn, must learn, and we must collaborate with in order to really set the right protocols in place. The last thing we want to do is stifle innovation. The last thing we want to do is inadvertently put out people at risk. So its going to be important that we engage with its mit or we have enough around us. Even our national labs. We have the capacity to do it. We just need the will to do it. Host when youre you at hon brooklyn, do you hear from constituents about huawei, 5g, where to place the towers, Net Neutrality, do you hear about these things . Guest i i hear about Net Neutrality a lot in my constituency. The facial Recognition Technology rollout and the use and sort of the private sphere has become a major issue in my district. And so people are aware of the fact that we cant conduct business, we cant conduct our lives without interfacing with technology in all of its manifestations. What they are concerned about is how that managed in a way in which it adheres to american values, and that is the challenge we all face. Because we keep sort of moving the goalposts on what is an american value, and i think that we need to, you know, when you do make it clear not only to the American People, but to the companies that are developing technology what those values are and what our expectations are in terms of how we address our concerns. Recently there was a conversation with Mark Zuckerberg around ads, and there was some questioning about whether these ads that he accepted on his platform were truthful or not. We have to make we had to be definitive about the fact that we want the truth in america, right . And if thats the case are we willing to sacrifice the purchase of an ad in order to make sure that truth prevails . Back in 2016 you were one of the authors of a bipartisan report on the judiciary energy and commerce committees about encryption, which recommended that the government should not in any way impose any requirements on encryption or we can encryption. Guest what they wanted to do was build a backdoor so that you could actually get information through sort of a portal. The concern was, you open up that portal, anyone can get in, and were not at this stage where our fluency in encryption or technology for that matter would protect us, should that be the case. Attorney general wally barr has renewed that debate and said that it could William Barth and said it could lead to much more Child Sexual Exploitation when facebook implements into it encryption. Have you rethought your position and you think congress should rethink it . Guest i think so. We have to look at the dangers and the benefits versus the burdens in society. I think again hes uses of technology become more and more prevalent in society. What were going to establish protocols around. You know, of the protocols we use in everyday Civil Society the same that should be used for the pentagon . Unit, these are the types of questions we have to answer. Host representative yvette clarke, democrat of new york, vice chair of the energy and commerce committee, and also cochair of the smart cities caucus. Joe marks of the washington post, thank you both for being on the communicators. This communicators and all other episodes of this program are available as podcasts. For 40 years cspan has been providing america unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the Supreme Court and Public Policy events from washington, d. C. And around the country so you can make up your own mind. Create by cable in 1979, cspan is brought to you by your local cable or satellite provider. Cspan, your unfiltered view of government