[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 7774-7776]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                    TRADE BILL AND BULK DATA PROGRAM

  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I am glad the Senate voted yesterday 
to take another step forward on the important trade legislation that is 
before us. This bill represents an opportunity for Republicans and 
Democrats to stand together for the middle class, so I hope our friends 
across the aisle will allow us to seize this opportunity. I am 
optimistic. We all know that trade is important for American workers 
and American jobs. We all know that by passing this legislation, we can 
show we are serious about advancing new opportunities for bigger 
American paychecks, better American jobs, and a stronger American 
economy.
  We want to process as many amendments as we can. The Republican and 
Democratic bill managers, Senator Hatch and Senator Wyden, have done a 
great job managing this bill in a bipartisan spirit thus far. My hope 
is that, with some cooperation from across the aisle, we can vote on 
some amendments today and complete our work on this trade legislation 
today.
  I appreciate all the hard work from both sides that got us to the 
point we are today. Let's keep the momentum going so we can finally 
pass a bill that Republicans, President Obama, and many Democrats all 
agree is good for the middle class, good for the economy, and good for 
our country.
  Let's also move forward in the same spirit to finish our work on the 
other two important issues on the Senate's to-do list. I will speak 
about one of them in a moment. But the point is, we have to get our 
work done, however long it takes. With bipartisan cooperation, we can 
get it done as soon as this afternoon.
  On the issue I mentioned, following the attacks of September 11, the 
United States improved its laws and legal authorities in an effort to 
better understand the terrorist threat and, rather than treat it as a 
crime to be handled by civilian prosecution, to combat it as a matter 
of warfare--not as a crime but as a matter of warfare. But that does 
not mean Al Qaeda and its affiliates stood still. The terrorist threat 
metastasized under regional affiliates such as Al Qaeda in the Arabian 
Peninsula, al-Shabaab, Al Qaeda in Iraq, and AQIM.
  We have all seen the advance of the Islamic State in Iraq and the 
Levant, which, despite coalition air attacks and Iraqi military ground 
operations, actually seized Ramadi last weekend. Although ISIL has 
broken from core Al Qaeda, it is emblematic of how the threat continues 
to evolve.
  Last week, the Director of the FBI explained how ISIL, operating from 
safe havens within Syria, is now using social media to radicalize 
Americans by making contact through Twitter and then directing them to 
encrypted venues. Moreover, through the publication of online 
magazines, Al Qaeda and ISIL are able to radicalize recruits and reveal 
the tactics needed for small-scale attacks here at home. These tactics, 
along with the information gained by terrorist networks from the 
unlawful disclosure of classified information by Edward Snowden, 
challenge counterterrorism officials in their efforts to detect 
terrorist plots and terrorist communications.
  This all comes at a moment of elevated threats to the American 
people.
  Let me read something the L.A. Times recently reported. This is what 
the Times had to say:

       Alarmed about the growing threat from Islamic State, the 
     Obama administration has dramatically stepped up warnings of 
     potential terrorist attacks on American soil after several 
     years of relative calm.
       Behind the scenes, U.S. authorities have raised defenses at 
     U.S. military bases, put local police forces on alert and 
     increased surveillance at the nation's airports, railroads, 
     shopping malls, energy plants and other potential targets. 
     Driving the unease are FBI arrests of at least 30 Americans 
     on terrorism-related charges this year in an array of ``lone 
     wolf'' plots, none successful, but nearly all purportedly 
     inspired by Islamic State propaganda or appeals.

  I ask unanimous consent to have the article printed in the Record at 
the conclusion of my remarks.
  We need to recognize that terrorist tactics and the nature of the 
threat have changed and that at a moment of elevated threat, it would 
be a mistake to take from our intelligence community any--any--of the 
valuable tools needed to build a complete picture of terrorist networks 
and their plans, such as the bulk data collection program of section 
215. The intelligence community needs these tools to protect us from 
these attacks.
  I would like to quote the observations that someone intimately 
familiar with this program made in the aftermath of the unauthorized 
leaks of classified material by Edward Snowden.
  ``This program does not involve the content of phone calls or the 
names of people making calls,'' he said. ``Instead, it provides a 
record of phone numbers and the times and lengths of calls, metadata 
that can be queried if and when we have a reasonable suspicion that a 
particular number is linked to a terrorist organization.''
  He then described why the program was necessary.
  ``The program grew out of a desire to address a gap identified after 
9/11,'' he said.

       One of the 9/11 hijackers, Khalid A. Mihdhar, made a phone 
     call from San Diego to a known Al Qaeda safe house in Yemen. 
     NSA saw that call, but it could not see that the call was 
     coming from an individual already in the United States. The 
     telephone metadata program under Section 215 was designed to 
     map the communications of terrorists, so we can see who they 
     may be in contact with as quickly as possible.

  Let me say that again: ``as quickly as possible.''


[[Page 7775]]

       This capability could also prove valuable in a crisis. For 
     example, if a bomb goes off in one of our cities and law 
     enforcement is racing to determine whether a network is 
     poised to conduct additional attacks, time is of the essence. 
     Being able to quickly review telephone connections to assess 
     whether a network exists is critical to that effort.

  He concluded by noting this:

       The Review Group turned up no indication that this database 
     has been intentionally abused.

  ``[N]o indication that this database has been intentionally abused.''

       And I believe it is important that the capability that this 
     program is designed to meet is preserved.

  The person who made those observations I just quoted was President 
Obama, and he made them just last year--just last year.
  Unfortunately, there is now a huge gap between the capabilities the 
President rightly recognized as being necessary for our intelligence 
professionals and the legislation he is endorsing today. The untried--
and as of yet, nonexistent--bulk collection system envisioned under 
that bill would be slower and more cumbersome than the one that 
currently helps keep us safe. At worst, it might not work at all due 
to, among many other problems, the lack of a requirement for 
telecommunications providers to retain the data to begin with--no 
requirement to retain the data.
  Last week, the Obama administration briefed Senators on the current 
bulk data program under section 215. Senators were impressed with the 
safeguards built into the current program, and they were impressed that 
there had not been one incident--not one--of abuse of the program. But 
many Senators were disturbed by the administration's inability to 
answer basic, yet critical, questions about the alternate bulk data 
system that would be set up at some point--at some point--under the 
legislation the administration now supports. The administration could 
not guarantee whether a new system would work as well as the current 
system, and the administration could not guarantee whether there would 
be much, if any, data available to be analyzed under a new system given 
the lack of a data-retention requirement in the legislation.
  Despite what the administration told us just last week about its 
inability to guarantee that this nonexistent system could even be built 
in time, it did an about-face earlier this week--sort of. The 
administration had the Director of NSA write that the nonexistent 
system could be built in time if--if--the providers cooperated in 
building it. And, of course, they are not required to.
  The problem, of course, is that the providers have made it abundantly 
clear that they will not commit to retaining the data for any period of 
time as contemplated by the House-passed bill unless they are legally 
required to do so. There is no such requirement in the bill. For 
example, one provider said the following: ``[We are] not prepared to 
commit to voluntarily retain documents for any particular period of 
time pursuant to the proposed USA FREEDOM Act if not otherwise required 
by law.''
  Far from addressing the concerns many have had about the USA FREEDOM 
Act, the administration in its letter only underscored the problem. It 
said the only way this nonexistent system could even be built in time 
is if the providers cooperate. But the providers have made it 
abundantly clear they will not cooperate, and there is nothing--
absolutely nothing--in the bill that would require them to do so.
  This is just as cynical as the letter from the Attorney General and 
the Director of National Intelligence that assured us they would let us 
know about any problems after the current program was replaced with a 
nonexistent system. Let me say that again. This is just as cynical as 
the letter from the Attorney General and the Director of National 
Intelligence that assured us they would let us know about any problems 
after the current program was replaced with a nonexistent system. Boy, 
that is reassuring.
  This is beyond troubling. We should not establish an alternate system 
that contains a glaring hole in its ability to function--namely, the 
complete absence of any requirement for data retention.
  I have begun the legislative process to advance a 60-day extension of 
section 215 and the other two authorities that will expire soon. This 
extension will allow for the Intelligence Committee to continue its 
efforts to produce a compromise bill we can send to the House that does 
not destroy an important counterterrorism tool that is needed to 
protect American lives.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

               [From the Los Angeles Times, May 19, 2015]

       White House Steps Up Warnings About Terrorism on U.S. Soil

                           (By Brian Bennett)

       Alarmed about the growing threat from Islamic State, the 
     Obama administration has dramatically stepped up warnings of 
     potential terrorist attacks on American soil after several 
     years of relative calm.
       Behind the scenes, U.S. authorities have raised defenses at 
     U.S. military bases, put local police forces on alert and 
     increased surveillance at the nation's airports, railroads, 
     shopping malls, energy plants and other potential targets.
       Driving the unease are FBI arrests of at least 30 Americans 
     on terrorism-related charges this year in an array of ``lone 
     wolf'' plots, none successful, but nearly all purportedly 
     inspired by Islamic State propaganda or appeals.
       The group's leader, Abu Bakr Baghdadi, drove home the 
     danger in a 34-minute audio recording released online 
     Thursday. He urged Muslims everywhere to ``migrate to the 
     Islamic State or fight in his land, wherever that may be.''
       The audio was released with translations in English, 
     French, German, Russian and Turkish, signaling the militants' 
     increasingly ambitious attempts to draw new recruits--and to 
     spark violence--around the world.
       U.S. officials estimate the Sunni Muslim group has drawn 
     22,000 foreign fighters to Syria and Iraq, including about 
     3,700 from Western nations. About 180 Americans have gone, or 
     tried to go.
       U.S. counter-terrorism officials initially viewed Islamic 
     State as primarily a regional security threat, focused on 
     expanding and protecting its self-proclaimed Islamist 
     caliphate in Syria and Iraq, rather than launching attacks 
     abroad.
       But the analysis has shifted sharply as gunmen inspired by 
     the group, but not controlled or assisted by them, opened 
     fire at the Parliament in Ottawa; at a cafe in Sydney, 
     Australia; at a kosher grocery in Paris; and, on May 3, in 
     Garland, Texas.
       In the Texas case, two would-be terrorists apparently 
     prompted by Islamic State social media messages tried to 
     shoot their way into a provocative contest for caricatures of 
     the prophet Muhammad. Both gunmen were shot to death, and no 
     one else was killed. Islamic State later claimed 
     responsibility for the assault, the first time it has done so 
     for an attack on U.S. soil.
       James B. Comey, the FBI director, warned this month that 
     ``hundreds, maybe thousands'' of Americans are seeing 
     recruitment pitches from Islamic State on Facebook, Twitter 
     and other social media, as well as messages sent to 
     smartphones of ``disturbed people'' who could be pushed to 
     attack U.S. targets.
       ``It's like the devil sitting on their shoulders saying, 
     `Kill, kill, kill,''' Comey told reporters.
       The United States has entered a ``new phase, in my view, in 
     the global terrorist threat,'' Jeh Johnson, director of 
     Homeland Security, said Friday on MSNBC.
       ``We have to be concerned about the independent actor, and 
     the independent actor who is here in the homeland who may 
     strike with little or no warning,'' he said. ``The nature of 
     the global terrorist threat has evolved.''
       That poses a special challenge for U.S. intelligence and 
     law enforcement agencies, which spent years desperately 
     trying to penetrate and understand Al Qaeda's rigid hierarchy 
     and top-down approach to terrorism.
       Now they are struggling to detect and prevent lethal 
     attacks by individuals--such as the April 2013 bombing of the 
     Boston Marathon by two Russian-born brothers--with little or 
     no outside communication or support.
       The administration has sought to stiffen homeland defenses, 
     and intelligence gathering, in response.
       This month, U.S. Northern Command boosted security at all 
     bases in the United States. Officials cited the May 3 
     shooting in Texas, specific threats against military 
     personnel and the increasing number of Americans 
     communicating with Islamic State supporters.
       In March, a group calling itself ``Islamic State Hacking 
     Division'' posted online the names, home addresses and photos 
     of 100 U.S. troops. The group wrote on Twitter that it was 
     posting the apparent hit list ``so that our brothers residing 
     in America can deal with you.''
       More armed guards have been deployed at federal buildings 
     across the country, and

[[Page 7776]]

     Homeland Security officials have quietly urged more security 
     at privately run facilities and infrastructure that could be 
     targeted, including shopping malls, railroads, water 
     treatment facilities and nuclear power generators.
       ``Since last summer we have ramped up security at federal 
     installations across the country, and we have increased our 
     outreach with critical infrastructure operators,'' a senior 
     Homeland Security official said in an interview.
       Authorities have urged companies to conduct more ``active 
     shooter'' drills to ``heighten awareness and make sure people 
     are leaning forward with security protocols,'' he said. The 
     official was not authorized to publicly discuss internal 
     communications and security measures.
       Defeating Islamic State will take not only the ongoing 
     military operations in Iraq and Syria, U.S. officials said, 
     but stronger international efforts to block foreign recruits 
     from joining and to cut the group's financing networks. 
     Officials acknowledge they also need better messaging to 
     counter a barrage of polished videos, social media and 
     Internet appeals from the militants.
       ``It's a long-term challenge,'' Brett McGurk, deputy 
     assistant secretary of State for Near Eastern affairs, told 
     CNN. ``We have not seen this before. And it's going to take a 
     very long time to defeat them.''
       Still, attacking Western targets is not the group's top 
     priority, as it was for Osama bin Laden, according to Seth 
     Jones, a former U.S. counter-terrorism official now with Rand 
     Corp., the Santa Monica-based think tank. The group is far 
     more focused on the battleground in Iraq and Syria, and 
     establishing ties to terrorist groups in Libya, Yemen, 
     Algeria and elsewhere.
       Without a strong hand to help direct and organize attacks 
     abroad, they are ``likely to be less sophisticated,'' Jones 
     said. ``You actually need a lot of training to conduct a 
     Madrid-style attack or a London-style attack. Those kinds of 
     bombs are hard to put together.''
       Most of the 30 Americans arrested this year were suspected 
     of aiding or trying to join Islamic State. Many were 
     approached on social media or on chat programs designed for 
     cellphones.
       In March, for example, a 22-year-old Army National Guard 
     specialist was arrested at Chicago Midway International 
     Airport as he allegedly attempted to join Islamic State in 
     Syria. The FBI said he had downloaded military training 
     manuals to take with him and told an undercover agent he was 
     prepared to ``bring the flames of war'' to the United States.
       That same month, a retired Air Force avionics instrument 
     specialist was indicted in Brooklyn, N.Y., on suspicion of 
     trying to travel to Syria to join the group. Prosecutors in 
     Brooklyn also have charged three other men with seeking to 
     link up with the militants.
       And on Thursday, the FBI arrested a former interpreter for 
     the U.S. military in Iraq, now a naturalized American 
     citizen, who had tried to travel to Syria from Texas. In June 
     he had used Twitter to ``pledge obedience'' to Islamic State.
       ``As a numbers game, it is pretty easy for ISIS to reach 
     out to a very large number of people using a very robust 
     social media presence,'' said J.M. Berger, a nonresident 
     fellow at the Brookings Institution, using a common acronym 
     for Islamic State.
       ``I suspect we should see more plots going forward,'' he 
     added.

                          ____________________