Insightful with respect to the wall and if we have time at the end i will be happy to take some questions. Let me start with kind of what weve been spending our time on at the department the. This is the operational policy challenges of the department so the first challenge i want to discuss its counterterrorism and as joe and others now counterterrorism was the Founding Mission of the department and it continues to be the cornerstone of what we do compared to 2003 when the department was established the terrorism threat today is more challenging and more decentralized and diffuse and arguably more complex. We are more concerned about the foreign fighters who leave this country and others have traveled to another and take up to the fight and link up with a terrorist organization. They are concerned about the terrorist organizations adapted and skilled use of the internet to publicly recruit and inspire individuals. To prevent the travel of the foreign terrorist fighters the secretary represented the United States in an unprecedented interior ministry session at the United NationsSecurity Council to discuss the problem of the fighters and to encourage the implementation of un Security Council resolution 2178 including through the enhanced information cooperative expertise and other bilateral security programs. And we are also making security enhancements to the Visa Waiver Program which currently allow travelers from 38 countries to travel to the United States without a visa. Last year we added additional elements to the Electronic System for travel authorization. Application will also maintain the substantial economic benefits. On the domestic front we are working closely in a collaborative way with state and local Law Enforcement and coordination with the fbi to quickly and efficiently chair. Cochair intelligence with joint Terrorism Task forces. Weve stepped up to counter violent extremism through Greater Community outreach in the face of the very slick internet appeal of other terrorist groups its imperative that we strengthen the communities that have the ability to reach out to individuals who may be particularly vulnerable in the recruitment and might be prone to turn to violence. In 2014 the held over 70 meetings, roundtables and other events in 14 cities across the country and the secretary personally participated in a number of meetings meetings in a variety of locations. Cybersecurity is the second area i want to emphasize that has emerged in recent years. Its become one of the departments and frankly the entire administrations top priorities. One internal reflection of that is that the secretary has expanded our regular Intelligence Briefings that we have for Senior Leadership to include greater threat. This ensures the Senior Leadership across the department has a deeper awareness of the current security concerns in the cyber realm. At the recent data breach in the office of Personnel Management highlights the fact that the federal cybersecurity isnt where it needs to be. At the same can be said for Many Networks in the private sector including systems that operate parts of the critical infrastructure. Weve been working with a renewed sense of urgency across the inner agency to encourage full implementation of the system which is a basic layer of Cyber Protection that we make available to all federal civilian agencies and departments. We are also expanding the National CybersecurityCommunications Integration center. That is the governments 24 7 of how the. What we say more about that. There are the departments and agencies and the private sector entities that have regular dedicated liaisons and well over 100 private sector to collaborate and share information on a routine basis. The shares cyber threat assistance to victims of cyber attack and in this fiscal year alone theyve shared over 6,000 bulletins, alerts and warnings and responded onsite to the 32 incidents that over double the number of onsite responses for the prior year. Its also the place we manage the einstein system. Let me say that our ability to improve cybersecurity is to limit the statutory authorities. We try to get the legislation to address that and specifically agree congress should expressly authorized program and eliminate any remaining legal obstacles to its deployment across the entire government. We must share cyber ferret indicators cyber threat indicators in a manner that provides principles and criminal liabilities and the chair of these indicators and also protects privacy. And third we need a National Data breach reporting system. What we now turn to aviation security. Much of our Homeland Security counterterrorism efforts continue to center around aviation security. We are constantly making adjustments to respond to new threats and to try to stay ahead of our adversaries. For some of the changes in the threat environment we started requiring enhanced screening of select overseas airports with direct flights to the United States. Weve also prioritized the expansion of pre Clearance Operations at foreign airports. But declared that allows customers of Border Protection officials overseas to screen passengers bound for the United States at the front end thereby protecting the plane as passengers and ultimately the country. We now have 15 preclearance sites overseas in six Different Countries operated by more than 600 Law Enforcement officers and active cultural specialists. The most recent was set up last year and since that time alone weve already screened more than 500,000 passengers and crew bound for the United States and a bridetobe who denied individuals that were found to be on the terrorist screening database and the database. We are now entering into negotiations to extend the preclearance observations and intend to foreign airports. Before the area that i want to highlight his immigration, which of course is a huge and multifaceted area and one that they say weve been spending a lot of time on recently. Im going to talk a bit about Border Security. With respect to Border Security we have continued the trend increased to the border today the Border Patrol had the largest deployment of people, vehicles and aircraft, boats and equipment along the southwest border in its 90 year history the nations longterm investment Border Security produced significant positive results over the years may i have your attention please. This next panel is to be on privacy and National Security we decided to create a name in the program so if you look at this hell do we secure our borders and at the same time sure that information about you is not shared in a way that is inappropriate to that function. And its a real balancing act and the person who is going to negotiate that act today is a good friend and colleague who is going to be moderating the panel a congressman from texas, senior partner at the law firm here in washington, d. C. Who has the legislative Public Policy group, the congressman served four terms in the u. S. House. Hes a former captain of the u. S. Army and a Ranking Member of the House Committee on Homeland Security committee. During his term in congress, the congressman worked with folks from 9 11 from both sides of the aisle which is hard to do these days as you might imagine on capitol hill. He is a graduate of the university of texas school of law. Its a great pleasure and honor. Thank you for all the hard work that you do in organizing this event every year. But for 9 11 of us would be here who wouldnt be having the conferences, we wouldnt be having jobs and responsibilities that literally change the economy of the country in many ways. This morning i wanted to open up the subject matter with a brief video clip from the last republican president ial debate. You have said senator paul opposition to the nsa collection of phone records made the United States beat her and more vulnerable. And so far as to say he should be called before congress to answer for it if we should be hit with another terrorist attack. Do you believe that you can assign blame for opposing the collection of phone records in the terrorist attack x. Yes i do because im the only person on the stage that is but is actually filed applications under the patriot act was gone before the federal Foreign Intelligence Service court whos prosecuted an investigation terrorist in this country after september 11 i was appointed by president bush september 10 of 2001 and the world changed enormously and happened in my state. I went to funerals, we lost friends. When you ask to be responsible for doing this you can do it and we did for seven years in my office. And i will make no apologies ever for protecting the lives and safety of the American People. We have to give more tools to our folks to be able to do that and then trust those people and oversee them to do the right thing as president and president and that is exactly what i will do. [inaudible] [applause] i want to collect more records from terrorists and less records from innocent americans. Its what he thought the revolution over. John adams said was a spark that led, and im proud of standing for the bill of rights and i will continue to stand i want to collect more and less [inaudible] governor make your point. When you are in the subcommittee blowing hot air about this you can say things like that when you are responsible for protecting the lives of the American People than what you need to do is make sure the you fundamentally misunderstand the bill of rights. Every time you did a case youve get a case youve got a warrant from a judge. Im talking about searches without warrants indiscriminately of all americans records and thats what i want to end. I dont trust president obama. I know you give him a big hug and if you want to do that again go right ahead. [applause] the hugs i remember those that i gave to the family that lost their family on september 11, and that had nothing to do with politics. Unlike what youre doing by cutting speeches on the floor of the senate putting them on the internet and a half within a half an hour to raise money for your campaign. And while still putting the country at risk. I think that you get the gist of the discussion. And although those points of view are represented on the panel today. I want to introduce briefly the panelists come up with the, but introduce them and they will do it briefly. First we have Laura Donohue at the professor of law at the Georgetown Law School and the director of the george thompson, National Security and the law. Shes the director of the center on Privacy Technology and she writes extensively in the subject area and we are always delighted to hear from laura. We have jennifer, the assistant assistant professor of law professor of law at the American UniversityWashington College of law. Prior to that was a senior counterterrorism counsel at human rights watch. Bob has been serving as the general counsel of the office of the director of National Intelligence for the past six years. Previously he was a partner at the firm firm behind the panels are prior to that served as the Deputy Assistant attorney general in the Criminal Division of the department of justice as well as the principal associate Deputy Attorney general. We have ron lead the former general counsel of the National Security agency at the nsa. He is currently a partner specializing in cyber cybersecurity and practicing issues and government contracts. We also have Dan Sutherland the associate Sharon CouncilNational Protection and Program Director at the u. S. Department of Homeland Security. The Senior NationalIntelligence Service at the National Counterterrorism center prior to that he was first office of the civil rights and Civil Liberties division of the department of Homeland Security. So we have a very distinguished panel and im going to ask each of them to briefly in two or three minutes describe what they view as the current and emerging issue in the debate with privacy versus National Security. And then we are going to open it up and have as lively a debate as you saw in the Republican National convention. Hopefully a little bit more civilized. I would like to do is highlight three areas that i feel in emerging technologies are bringing us constitutional questions in the United States. First is the impact of the digitization and the scope of the digital Storage Networks worldwide and third is the shift is to is the shift to the big data analytics. Lets start with the digitization. The Third Party Doctrine is out of date and it no longer reflects how the world works. We know this stems from maryland has a case in the 1970s. And in this particular case, there was a woman that was robbed, her purse was taken. The police went into his home based on the registered trade order the court found they have no interest in the particular calling records and its on this basis that face all the data program continued in the United States. The fact is as many of the judges suggested that the zero plus zero still equals zero. But we have cell phones that follow us around and that information requires a lot more information about us if we have no privacy interests and the numbers dialed and received then we dont have any privacy interests just because we have more records available. And id like to suggest this is wrong. Its not zero plus zero peoples fear of debate coach zero. The amount of information you now have based on people not just on their cell phone but all of the data that we generate on a dalia basis is a significantly different than the type of information in 1976 or 1978 when the case was decided. The second plaintiff of point is on the Global Communications and digital storage. We rely on the processes of the high standards have accompanied the collection of information on the citizens and on the domestic soil in the foreign intelligence act. The problem is the communications no longer stay with the domestic balance so it didnt make sense anymore if you had a bad guy in london traditionally you dont need to go to the courts to get a warrant now it happens to go to the United States the government would have to go to the courts to actually intercept the communications. A very strong argument for the 2008. The problem is that works two ways. If im sitting in this room and it happens to go internationally now it can be collected. So the data isnt territorial and found my bound by countries borders in the way that traditionally we thought about privacy protections and recommended the countries borders. If i make a document by my students it might be in the finland server. Finally that is international. So the understanding of the boundaries of the is the way to protect privacy is no longer adequate living forward. The third and final point that i want to make the frequently have seen in this era the number of surveillance programs that have come to life not just just for Terrorism Surveillance Program that was talked about after 9 11 but that section 215 metadata and exit of order 12003. Weve seen the collection of the email metadata and the undermining of all of these arguments is the principle that is necessary to collect all of the information and then to analyze it. There are programs underway involving large amounts of information. Why is this problematic . Particularly at the point in which there is a convergence between the National Security and criminal law so this isnt a new question in many ways in the country toward cook discussed this in details in his in