Drop them in the chat room. Voting is on everyones mind at the moment in with the coronavirus especially more voters than ever are trying mailin ballots are voting early and as we are talking about our usual voting methods so many things have moved to on line and people are asking will voting become digital as well . I want to start the conversation by asking why would you even want to on line voting and i will say im coming from Seattle Washington where we have a robust mailin ballots system and its quite easy. I think the appeal is enormous. In theory its largely been attempted in this country for military servicemembers and it could be used for people with disabilities who f dont have a lot of access to the polls. I think if we somehow had a robust on line Voting System that would drastically increase participation and the bigger question than how we would get there. This country doesnt have great numbers of people who show up on election day and many people are so engaged. They are more interested in then devote in an election. I would second what kevin just said. I think we need to keep in mind that there is a nontrivial number of voters who cant hand mark a paper ballot and are not able to effectively use the postal ballot and the mailin system as well with various constraints. We do need to keep in mind also there is an element of anonymity and we are going through a pandemic right now. We need to have backup plans not just one but several and a Digital Solution to provide that element of protection against different scenarios and provide access to people who have been disenfranchised and use the traditional method of voting. Its allus about access and as much choice as a weekend given to people in a responsible measured way and thats the big reason why we need to keep exploring. To keep things interesting i will push back a little bit. First of all i should say i work on access issues and its always my resumption that we want to increase options for voters so if we could find a way to allow for internet voting that is secure i think that would be great to offer that option to voters. Its not totally clear to me that would increase turnout. Again i think its critical to find ways to increase options for voters and to increase access but if you look at states that have more early voting in states you dont necessarily see huge increases in turnout and i think their issues why people dont have the turnout in the u. S. That many of us would like to see as other countries. At the same time theres no questionme that for some voters particularly those with disabilities this might be away in particular for the challenges that they we have easierto to vote. For the time being and im sure we will get into this discussion there is pretty much a universal opinion by Security Experts that we are not ready to do this and we need to be looking for alternatives right now thato cn help voters with disabilities and voters living abroad to ensure that they can vote in their votes will be counted. We will deftly come back to the issue of security but before we get into that i want to catch folks of that they havent been following closely how close are we to having on line voting and whereto is this happening alreay and who is at the leading edge of this . I can address that. As kevin previously mentioned currently several jurisdictions around the country have this optionro available. Primarily u. S. Citizens living overseas and a small number of jurisdictions voters who have some form off disability. I believe more than 30 states do allow some form of electronic for a subset or group of voters. Some are handled by facts or email some of which are not secure by any standard so thats something that needs to be kept in mind when you talk about security. What is the actual process of voting on the phone or on line look like . What does it look like from a user perspective . I would be happy to take that. There are a couple of different approaches. The traditional approach has been to use some form of web site and our approach has been the use of the smart phone application. From a Voter Perspective the process is the same as you would do for any absentee voting process when you register in your jurisdiction as an absentee voter. There is a federal form and theres also a state form so you can do either. Your county or local clerk will do a little bit of vetting when you send out information at once that is applied theres an option on the phone for which method you want to choose who you can choose the postal mail or you can choose facts in some jurisdiction and you can choose electronics in some jurisdictions where electronic options would be email or mobile. You get an invitation and depending on the channel if its mobile youd be asked to download a nap and you show authentication using your mobile number and email to match and then you are prompted into i. D. Verification. You take a picture of your government established photo i. D. Or passport and you are asked to move your face so if knows its real and you are not taking a picture of another picture. They make sure your i. D. Is valid and of everything is matching with the Voter Registration file then you are at abbott and stored in a secure location and with the help of credentials you can use a fingerprint of face i. D. Or a wearable and at that point you are ready to receive your ballot using your ballot on the phone and you can mark your ballot and acts as the interface or if you need to blow up the forms you can do that and once you are ready you choose in many states will ask you to sign an affidavit and you sign on the phone and thats automatically transcribed on the affidavit and that is compared by the elections state Voter Registration system. You get a receipt so u. S. A voter can he pass protected and you can quickly chat and it has an identifier which you can use to audit your work and in parallel the jurisdiction gets a copy of your receipt which then is used to do an audit and on election day a paper ballot showing that you are voting on the phone is generating a paper ballot and the computer hand mark its into the system. In the background there is a ledger system as well on a network which set a postelection audit to give assurance of confidence and ensuring everything went through without any tampering. That is one of the ways the works right now. We will go over the verification process as well but i know that there has been a lot of mistrust over the last three years especially phone security. Im curious what the conversation has been like from voters. How do you make sure that voters feel secure in the system and i like to hear from kevin who has reported on this. I have talked to a number of people who have cast their ballots do this Voting System and pretty much to a t. They all had some difficulty in setting it up and overall with the experience. I think thats a distinct discussion of security concerns but purely in terms of figuring out they had a little trouble making sense to it. Voting is not easy anyway but they did enjoy it. I dont know if you want to get into the security issue as well but i do think there is enough ofof a consensus among security that its a much toughert nut to crack. I their Security Issues . A couple ofd things. If you look at polling on this in general if you ask voters if theyd like to be a look but on their phones they will say yes mention russia or security attacks essentially attacking our elections those numbers plummet. Th i think most people when they are thinking about voting are necessarily thinking about security but of course thats a great concern and when you raised with voters is a great concern as well. I think its worth noting the vect that we have moved dramatically away from voting over the internet away from a paperless Voting System and how much movementt there was mostly because of National Security warnings but also because there is a public desire to have the paper record that voter has seen before was cast in the machine. Record before was cast in and how important it was to people. R ive gone from something even the past two years 2016 i think, one in five voters have the verified voter paper record and that this election would beec 4 rate theres a dramatic move away from this and thats in part because of the security concerns that i have raised. If i could add a couple of things to that. We have also seen a lot of what was referred to in a lot of the feedback in the jurisdictions yes you asked the first question what people want to vote on their phone and not on line and the majority are in favor and if you asked them a question about eight people to get skeptical and if you follow up with a mechanism to vote the number shoots up again. That is an indicator that people are looking for a measure of trust and i think thats something that shouldnt be overlooked. Lets back up a little bit. Theres a possibility of interference with our election. What are the major security risks especially compared to traditional voting . I think the most alarming thing that i have heard talking with Security Experts is the idea that an on line Voting System can. Essentially a Central Place where ballots are cast. A worse Case Scenario of a particular voting machine being hacked on election day means that votes could be spoiled. If we are talking about a centralized hub and im just speaking in broad terms here every vote that was cast on election day which is essentially orders of magnitude more and third if there is not a paper record at the end of the day a separate independent recount the discrepancy might not ever be found which states have a couple y of weeks maybe four election results. It varies by law but every state has for instance several between november and january before we swear in the next president so thats a greater nightmare scenario i think than any i can think of with traditional paper voting. I think thats a good example and id have to agree with that. Thats a big concern and there are concerns about we hear from personal devices and how secure those devices are and im now aware attack it reaches everybody voting on their iphone to potentially have their vote impacted and i do think the point that kevin just brought up the deante about the paper record that voter has filled out by now and 2021 of the things that i think everybody has an election but one of the things that makes me feel a lot better is not all the ballots are in 96 of the country. If there is some kind of problem or some kind of doubt theyll be able to go back to that paper record that the voter herself has filled out and is viewed and confirmed and how she intended to vote and that should go a long way to resolving doubts about vote totals. The actual security and as you know all too well that perception is incredibly important in ensuring that her democracy works. So a couple of things to add to that as kevin mentioned. The whole idea of having you look at the designs of the mobile Voting Systems out there that something which has been addressed through the use of technology and generally every jurisdiction in the u. S. Has its own elections so even if you are using the system across multiple jurisdictions that data would be logically separated so theres no single place where somebody can come in and audit the vote. Thats one. The second one is there is a paper ballot being generated here so the key difference here is as a voting person i have to have trust in the paper ballot and the machine is not going to be thrown away or something bad will happen to it. Something small and inconsequential when people say here with some of the new technology you literally get 100 assurance that not only did your absentee ballots make it but it was counted and tabulated and that should not be overlooked. That technology has a way to give us more trust than what we have an existing system. There is a perception i agree. There are a lot of conflicting thoughts out there so that is something which over period of time and thats why its very importantt to make sure technology is a rolled up overnight by the slow and gradual process where you can expand access beyond the small group of people. I do think, if i can note here thereve been a couple of studies of Security Papers on foes in the m. I. T. One found that the server would be able to control the total results if i understand that correctly. There at least is security researchers disagree on that point. That is essentially a misunderstanding of the nature of the system. If you could correlate that kind of track as well i have to trust as a citizen whats happening in the election and whats happening behind the scenes and if the militia factor decides to throw away all the paper ballots or we t recently saw and california people who voted dont even know so the reality is it exists in the voting as well and ultimately there is a perception that is created that is foolproof and that system has so we shouldnt ignore those and i think if you have adequate control and take action at every the riskcan minimize to a level that the system becomes usable. Thats what we need to focus on in a digital system just like the same approach with the in person voting s system. I just wanted to mention the california example that instance where for to drop docs they empty drop boxes regularly in california and they generally have video cameras. If their bar codes on the paper ballots so they are able to Contact People and the bar code keeps track of the ballots and they are able to Contact People whose ballots may have been lost and obviously thats an exceptional circumstance. So you are talking about limited impact on the kind of attack and inability to recover. I think we still have a lot of questions and in the examples that kevin and i gave. We have a lot of experience with voting on paper and with security measures around paper ballots and a builtin a lot of resiliency and the systems to ensure if there are problems where able to recover and that would minimize problems. I have this concern generally, because there arent enough standards and regulation and oversight in our election systems, but we dont have any standard nationally. I shouldnt say we dont have any National Standards for internet voting. So we have private vendors who are selling methods of voting to Election Officials. I dont know ifia Election Officials really have any thing to judge them on. There are no standards that these are being stood against parade theres no notification system. So at the end of the day what youre left with is, Election Officials basically having to rely on the representations of the vendor for which there is really no check. With the vendor is telling you is true. Are there standards that they have satisfied . I think its ada real problem. I think most people agree they think were ready for internet voting or not, that we really need to have clear standards before we come anywhere close to having any significant number of people voting on these issues. Host i would guess the average its pretty low in academician every Election Officials would independently verified, security either. So what might those regulations look like . How is a bridge that gap to see what is adopted is actually secure . There are some standards that were putut out by the overseas Voting Foundation and connection, working with Security Experts. They say this independent standards out there. Frankly i think if were going to do this in the United States, it should be Something Like the National Standards of technolog technology. Which helped design the standards abuse for Voting Machines that are in place. Put Something Like this togethe together. But at the end of the day, it seems to me that there are at least three things set the standards need to satisfyo part one is to ensure the privacy of the voter, right . Close of the steps that might be taken to authenticate the voter. How do we ensure with their privacy is protected . With the secret valve United States. Thats one of the reasons this is such a big security challenge it is not like banking. We need tono make sure that people cannot buy or see how other people arere voting. When you to ensure 22 authenticate. Have a system or anybody can go in and but for anybody. Theres a bit of attention there. Then of course, probably most importantly, we need to ensure the integrity of that vote. We need to ensure that every step of the process when a person is trying to vote on their phone to when it arrives , the election offices that it actually represents the vote that the voter intended to cast. And somehow do that without the voter or anybody else, certainly anybody else being of the sea and confirm with the voter how they intended to vote. These are complicated things to do. Sue back if i could add to that. I agree about the problem of the standards that is something we have been advocating for for a while. Earlier this year almost like in the appeal for all the agencies to welcome that. And at the same time, the process of piloting and trying the solution is that standards process. Because in the past there has been an attempt unfortunately to prevent or delay needs to be actuated. And secondly, people look at the piloting, the idea of remotely ratifying the order, which is one of the challenges outline. From a few years ago. Thats actually been addressed based on standards which have beenen created. That is been successful in other industries. We brought it to the election space. So that is whats happening, bit by bit, stepbystep. Minor was a formal standardization process for just like the one that exists for hardware in person Voting Machines. That would definitely benefit the space. And also helping, controlling some of the contradicting that is out there. So back sorry to judah jump in . No you goo ahead, you go ahead. With the pilot i wonder if we can go over some of the path and how its gone. I feel it kevin is not reported on them it does it have anything to do with what youre about to jump in with . Sue asked sort of. I wanted to note the trajectory that online voting has had in the u. S. Recently. If you count faxes online voting for military and overseas voters, in some areas i might be earlier. Its where voters can send a ballot as an email attachment. Technically thats voting online, in a house for a while. Its important to note thepo trajectory recently in recent years there is sort of a surge mention all the county starting in the mid terms to use votes there are couple counties outut west. Which ended up prompting a couple months ago, several federal agencies, issuing a warning about online voting. And they only that, i can say they only did that because of whats involved. Because they feared a more Widespread Adoption quickly. We could be some online disagreement whether online voting can never happen, or a decade or so before we can do so safely. The consensus they are was that they were afraid of it spreading anymore that had in warning against more widespread adoptio adoption. Hole as your original question if you do not mind repeating back. Sue back at think will answer that a bit. But the pilots look like and how they have gone. I feel like weve been circling this question of trust. And to really test whether any online voting platforms truly work and are secure. Researchers need to be able to independently test for vulnerability. Wei know the West Virginia trial in particular they facein criticism. Serious, whator will it take to create more transparency . From what you all have seen, what might you recommend. And then are you doing anything to try and improve that . Sure. Were kind of at the forefront and will be first Elections Company to officially roll out public bounty program. And the intention there was to have some form of formalized process for individuals andce other entities who are curious to do research. For constructive feedback on their own method of doing that. One of the challenges which applies uniquely to this space is the notion of a live infrastructure which is being used as elections are happening. And there is test or replica infrastructure. And the onlyy difference is it does not have live voters on it. So that is l essentially in the community dont try and back this on the live system. Because on a live system if anything happens we have to treat it as hostile. That is essentially what happened in the incident you were alluding to. Its not possible for the system is a Good Intention or intention of somebody is trying to do something malicious. That would get reported to the customer. And its up to the customer to do exactly what theyer want. So that is something which is a source of contention. Period is a lothe of information out there about the system. There are forms available. So there is ample opportunity for individuals and organizations to do constructiveve research. And aid the process in a constructive manner rather than attempting to stop. You want to jump interacting . Goahead. I do think it is worth pointing out that theres an investigation into commas i have reported a university of michigan student whos looking into, who is researching security. There was a program at the time but only after the investigation started, updated the terms on hacker one to include, its prohibited to target or look at a live election system. That is not correct. We pointed that out. Sue back it is i archived. [inaudible] there was clarification posted. The past system information has been there from the beginning. This was a live election. The system reported to the customer as you would expect a normal system to do. And beyond that, is not in our. Ontrol and so, if someone does not want to follow the guidelines, then it is not some thing we can control. As to the customer and make sure the system remains safe from all attempts. So, if you try to tamper with the live election system, then the system has alright to fight back. I dont think it is controversial to say for the terms to say that no tampering with the live election. Think that is understandable. I do think its worth noting both are not the published terms at the time the student was referred to the fbi. I just want to add that is not accurate. It literally is. It was one year after. [inaudible] my only thought is, i have a problem with using a system during a live election and using that as an excuse for not allowing more openness and testing of the system. My thought would be maybe we should not be using the system and a live election yet. I know for instance in washington d. C. They tested the system and decided to withdraw after fighting there were problems with that. I think unfortunately weve got things a little bit backward when we are talking but using the systems. After that, this is not the first time the system was used. There were close to 50 elections a system had been used in. So following the prescription you described is never the intention thats the whole issue with pilots for it if we dont do these more well calibrated pilots in the real environment, real field. Each of these pilots have been significantve learning. Not everything can be tested in a lab. Until we keep doing this process until we support this process has been quite a few criticisms for ready to implement the technology. What do you all make of this process . I was imagining Security Issues rolled out with them does that decrease the overall public trust if theres anything we should be doing tort repair that over time. We should notew be using them half the time. As kevin mentioned there is really universal whether its the fbi, i warning that was put out a blunt language. Many others saying were not ready to do this. Im always concerned about voter confidence. And about scaring voters unnecessarily. But my own view of we are not ready to be using these systems in the right direction, i dont think we should be doing. , because it was should be doing is setting up some kind of National Standards first. Betting these systems, it is a great idea. But not for use in actual elections or we are putting the actual votes of citizens at ris risk. So firstly, this technology is being piloted. It is an improvement over the existing system. What he existing option for the citizens overseas . Email or fax. Nuts topoftheline Security Systems out there. Whether you agree with it insignificantly safer than that. Other reasons we discussed earlier, not everybody has an opportunity to use the traditional system. So what we are saying here is less just ignore those orders however small or big they may b be. I think that is unfair. The technology is here. It is being slowly piloted and tested through different scenarios. If its piloted i think we need to usead it, you need to have the voters vote. On the question of theres the agreement are not safe enough. I think that is not true. There are lots of people who are security practitioners with large amounts of time who have been working in different aspects of our industries. On the Technology Make this safe is here. What is being used in different aspects, you just bring it here when it is being tested in a graduated manner. I do not think we should review that its not possible that it will never beve possibl. And regarding the immediate narrative and the elements of public trust, i think i would put this on kevin since he represents the media here. A lot of times the media does not have reporting these things in a manner. [inaudible] if its detected in a system that does not mean that its going to be compromised. In this actually put out a document this week on how such political vulnerabilities exist in the traditional system. Then we should not be affected. I think folks in the media should also, i would say look at that aspect of how some of these new technologies, ones are reported. That can also clear constructive in educating the people what really is important here. It should not be fear mongering but at the same time we should present the facts to the people. Strachan at kevins reporting annoys talked with many experts about this. And that is the reporters job. Think a lot of substantive recording, can over emphasize sometimes danger at the expense of realistic use of a system. That said theres not both sides here with the National Academy of science report. The peerreviewed, and mit report the joint assessment of four government agencies. The consensus there too many potential vulnerabilities. There is not enough guaranteed waste security to conduct an election online. The consensus is unanimous. I cannot in good faith, as a reporter, try to present them as t equally valid ideas. It is that simple. Sue back i do not want to speak for kevin. But i would say that internet voting is never possible, i did not mean to imply that. But i also dont think that seeing there are challenges for voters with disabilities or boaters who are overseas. Or that there are some systems that are not as secure as we would like. Means that we should have systems that Security Experts are warning are not secure being used in live election. Its a little bit like their people unfortunately in the United States who have trouble getting medicine or drugs that theyhe need. I dont think there are too many people would argue that we should have a market where drug drugs, that are not approved by the fda. That should be sold for people forha use. With regulation and the testing. Thats what were seeing here. We are using systems where there are no standards and there is no independent authority that is testing to ensure that they are secure. But we have is vendors who are saying that it is secure. And i dont think that is enough for a live election. Since you brought the up the aspect of medicine, i would assure you the whole idea of Clinical Trials how critical that is before medicine is approved or not. And what is essentially happening what theyre doing is essentially the same. It is a small group of people. These have been carefully selected. The risks have been analyzed. And the determination has been made that these people have volunteered and have been given options to vote. And they picked thiss option. I think we need to keep that in perspective. And you know, the idea of standards is something we totally agree we have been pushing that. But we should also not forget this is an actual attempt to delay standards by the very people who criticize the whole idea of online voting. Lets keep that in perspective as well. At the end of the day, i think we need to keep the voters needs upfront. There are voters out there who are benefiting from this technology. They may be a really small group of people. But we need to keep their interest and elections in this country, technology is used primarily by the private sector. In the private sector is leading that part of innovation and pushing this technology so that more people have access. And they need to be more collaboration on that front. And lastly i would say you pointed out, kevin pointed out some of the reports. Many of those reports use in the whole idea of identity roofing the secure elements which are available on the smartphones, those were not even consider when those reports were written. So lets be realistic. Lets look at the cutting Edge Security technology that is out there. Thats actually being used by the military in that area. Thats being used by the other industries. And so, lets keep an open focus they are on that as well. But that is not the extent of what these reports are. They are robust and comprehensive. They are using technology paradigms, many of them are outdated in order to look at. s only been around for a few years. Yes but it takes into account ms. Standards. Something that is being successfully used for a decade in other industries. And its proven to be safe and secure. I dont think you are comparing apples with apples over here. Sue back that is not the only issue they found. Sue back im not exactly sure what you are referring too. The whole idea of using conjecture without actually using the system. The system is being used in the 70 plus elections. Tievery attempt to break into the system has been blocked, detected and thwarted. It has been thoroughly audited. More than 35 . Sue back i need to interrupt. I want to lease in time for attendee questions. I know you had talked about how this makes voting accessible otherwise is an option. Theres a question from Mia Armstrong what could be done to make online voting accessible to tech devices or things were unfamiliar with technology. That is a good question, mia. One of the jurisdictions we work with has the idea of curbside voting. They have adapted this technology to the ipad. So the ipad is brought to the voter parts if you are a boater with a disability you can request accommodation. An election official will bring an ipad to your home. And then you, and the privacy of your home they will train you and then you can privately mark your ballots. The muller lee are disabled worker, you can drive up to the county office and bring the ipad to your parking area. The whole idea of using technology for curbside voting. That is something which is being actively piloted by a jurisdiction with the focus of helping voters whoho are not tech savvy or might not have a personal smart phone. Cook it still is the great accessibility functions with live apps and other devices. Person folks it may have live in a city and have access to officials imagining there are folks that live in rural areas or folks who do not have Internet Access. How will that be resolved . That is definitely very important aspect as well. So what off the pilot projects its happening and that front, satellite and connectivity in these locations. And then having a shared device. This is been proposed by some of the native american jurisdictions where they have traditionally very difficult access from the postal system. And so that is one option that is being proposed. Similarly, internet and other forms of Internet Access using Microwave Technology is also been piloted in some areas. So definitely that is a challenge that needs addressing. But there are attempts being made to bring more access. Especially getting Broadband Access to other areas. Select another question. Want to hear from all three of you on this. Watching technology with online voting is far as securities are concerned to adding potential failure in the system . I am positive that are going to disagree with the sentiment. So will just going to lay that out there. I have again, my role here is a journalist. I talked to the Security Experts, i am not a technologist myself. I have never found in election technologist who found that addresses any of the fundamental issues with online. Oting its a ledger but does not address the fundamental issues of Software Based on online voting. So to address that, i think a lot of that comes from basic misunderstanding of the system. Try to laid out very, very simply, its not solving all the problems here. It is not a cure for everything. It is a solution we have used as part of the alert solution which solve specific problems. And the problems are, that is like a traditional centralized architecture with points of failure. Right now we have 64 running in our work for its incredibly hard for somebody to disturb that network. But given that is no longer a centralized system, number two, for the first time citizens audited their votes. Just as you had from the earlier description. Any citizen now once they have voted can go into the system, audit their work confidentially without telling people what they voted. Similarly an auditor, group of citizens, that independently audit and election without actually knowing how somebody will vote. So there are some small advantages of using the system. As you said, it is not a cure forre everything. It helps provide audit capability which traditional system does not have could you do this without that . Yes if somebody could figure out the way to do it. It is definitely feasible that we not found a way to do these things in are manner that is reliable without using this technology. That is why we are piloting and testing it. That is part of oururon solutio. For the last couple minutes i went to give kevin and larry the chance to is there anything that we have not touched on or any final thoughts you have the share . My only final thoughts are that the security risks, seriously . Weve got all of the intelligence agencies, bipartisan intelligence committees in both the senate and the house. They are warning that the threat of nationstates attacking our elections is real. And so, i do not discount the possibility that we will one day be able to have internet voting that is secure. But i think what kevin says is correct. That any independent security expert says that theres still a lot of challenges we have to overcome before we can do so securely. Givenn how important our elections are and how important trust in those elections is, it is essential that before we start using the systems and actual elections, that we have National Standards. And there is both National Standards for what the systems have to satisfy. A testing system for those systems. And all that should be happening before using them in actual elections. I think we have touched on all of the major points. I think, it is important to highlight how difficult it is to audit and election in general. So obviously an audit on election system. For instance, we did not know publicly until the mueller report, that the gre, part part of the 2016 interference campaign is that it hacked to florida counties. We did not know until last year, we did not get a full audit of the equal book failure. Some suspected was hackers. The report did not find evidence of that. Federal report into that. That was in 2016. The audit was not until last year. So these things take a lot of time. And again, we are talking about states have so little election,rtify and that we would not likely be able to tell exactly what went wrong if something were to go wrong until its way too late. Thats when people say can bank online but why can i vote online . The main fundamental difference is banks can hold a little bit of a level of loss which theyy d do. Thanks c hacking attempts every minute. And then also, you can reverse charges and you cant really reverse a vote. With your joining us today, i want to say next weeks event will be a project and its on the firstme amendment 2. 0. That is at 11 30 eastern time rather than the usual noontime. Join us. The competition is odd. Be a part of this year cspan student video competition. Middle and High School Students in the start of a National Conversation by making a five to six minute documentary exploring the issues you want the president and congress to address in 2021. Be bold with your documentary. Show supporting and opposing points of view, include cspan videos, be a winner. This weather thousand dollars in total cash prizes including a grand prize of 20000 for the deadline to submit videos is generate 20th, 2021. To be informed by competition roles, and more information on how to get started at our website. Will be with us tonight with a hearing of facebook, google and twitter. Earlier today they testified on social media regulations before the Senate Commerce science and transportation committee. Watch that tonight starting at eight eastern on cspan2. Sunday at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on after words, the wall street journals gerald with his book we should have seen it coming on how the conservative movement has evolved since the reagan era. Hes washington bite Washington Post columnist. We grew up in a. We tell people to vote for summary they liked. The until i couldve voting for for 70 for president hes going to be booktv every night. That is not true with donald trump. People say he only has a 42 or 43 personal approval rating, so we cant possibly win. I just dont think that is true. He can win. I dont think he will but he can people who dont like him and dislike the way he operates still vote for him because they like us attitude. Watch book tv this weekend on cspan2. That is what gives us the confidence to sit here and describe the first ten seconds of the universe like we were there. It all started with a big bang. [laughter] is there song in there . I would not give a report or an interview unless they had read it. They had to read the book first before i would interview. For 20 years, book tv is indepth hosted americas top nonfiction authors ford indepth conversation with cspan2 viewer viewers. And on sunday, at noon Eastern Joint as for our live 20th anniversary special, or book talk with authors, your phone call, text and tweets. Go back to indepth moments. Select picture on the back, remember those days . Note. [laughter] but conceivably. What is in the book . The book was an examination of life at yale. Watch indepth sunday live at noon eastern on book tv on cspan2. Next, the Aspen Institute has a discussion on how the covid19 vaccine can be equitably distributed globally. This is 45 minutes. Hello welcome everyone to this important conversation that we will be