Panel I of a hearing of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee

August 3, 2004 Tuesday

HEADLINE: PANEL I OF A HEARING OF THE SENATE GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE

SUBJECT: ASSESSING AMERICA'S COUNTERTERRORISM CAPABILITIES; RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE 9/11 COMMISSION

CHAIRED BY: SENATOR SUSAN COLLINS (R-ME)

PANEL I WITNESSES: JOHN BRENNAN, DIRECTOR, TERRORIST THREAT INTEGRATION CENTER; PHILIP MUDD, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CIA COUNTERTERRORIST CENTER; LT. GEN. PATRICK HUGHES, DHS ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR INFORMATION ANALYSIS; JOHN PISTOLE, FBI EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR COUNTERTERRORISM AND COUNTERINTELLIGENCE;

LOCATION: 216 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D.C.
SEN. RICHARD DURBIN (D-IL): Thank you very much, Madame Chair, and thank you to all of you who are testifying here today.

Madame Chair, let me join in the chorus of those who are praising you for calling this hearing. It is unusual for us, having decided to go about our own business back in our states and with our families, to return to Washington. I know Washington's glad to see us; we're glad to be here.

I can't think of anything more important that we could be doing at this moment in time than considering the 9/11 commission report and our response to it. But let's be very candid and honest about the situation and the circumstances that we face. We have to make certain that we are driven more by 9/11 than by 11/2. This has to be about 9/11 and the tragedy that came to America, and not about a pending presidential election. We have to make certain that the decisions that we make here and the process that we follow is one that is extremely serious. It took some 20 months for the 9/11 commission to complete its work. The fact that many are urging that we finish our work in a matter of hours, I think, will not do justice to the task that faces us.

And let me be specific: Mr. Brennan, you gave high praise to the president's announcement yesterday and talked about TTIC and what it has achieved. If I'm not mistaken, it was January of 2003 when TTIC was originally created, and I believe you were brought to head it up in March of that year. Is that correct?

MR. BRENNAN: The president announced its creation in January. I was brought into help design it in March. It was stood up on 1 May of last year.

SEN. DURBIN: And I'm happy that that happened.

I cannot see a dime's worth of difference between what the president endorsed yesterday and what TTIC did-or was created to achieve over a year ago. And I look at the way that your agency is presently being managed, and I salute you for all that you're achieving, but I think you would concede that there have been some fundamental barriers and obstacles which you have faced, not the least of which is the fact that it is a pick-up team that you are using to run this agency. It consists not so much of dedicated staffers but those who have been loaned to you by other agencies, assignees from other agencies, like the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. And according to a Congressional Quarterly report, last night, the White House had hoped to have 300 analysts at TTIC. A March 2004 report stated it only had 123: 18 from the FBI, 12 from the Department of Homeland Security. They'd expected the FBI to produce 65 and Department of Homeland Security to assign between 30 and 45.

And the simple problem is there just aren't enough good people. You have had to pick up staff from other agencies to try to move forward. You have reached less than half of the assigned staff level that you had hoped for. And I think that is an indication that as we talk in glorious terms about creating boxes and moving them around an organization chart, in the final analysis it's a question of having talented and creative people in these agencies doing the work.

And a second issue, and one that troubles me-and I raised it at the last hearing-is this whole transfer and sharing of information. If the 9/11 commission said nothing else, it said we have to reach the point where we are sharing this information. As Mr. Mudd said, this is a war of speed. The information has to be shared.

Currently, TTIC, as I understand it, the analysts there access intelligence only from their own agency's databases, according to the center's director. That means CIA analysts must request FBI analysts to check FBI databases and report if they find anything of interest. That doesn't sound like an efficient way to protect America.

And so if what the president is suggesting is more of the same, dusting off the old press release, we're not getting anywhere.

I think what the 9/11 commission challenged us to do was to give more authority to this national counterterrorism center by way of budgeting, by way of staffing, so that we can start forcing some merger of not only talented people, but valuable information.

I'd appreciate your response, Mr. Brennan.

MR. BRENNAN: First of all, I have to correct the record in terms of access to information within TTIC. We have CIA analysts in TTIC who are able to access FBI case files through their electronic databases and systems. We have FBI analysts who are able to access the CIA's operational traffic. So what we're doing is trying to ensure an integrated structure there. And you're absolutely right, if they only had access to their own individual systems, that wouldn't work. That's why we in fact have designed a system not to do that.

SEN. DURBIN: So is there full integration of the databases, then, of FBI and CIA?

MR. BRENNAN: Well, you know, we --

SEN. DURBIN: If you're an FBI analyst and you see something that you think is of interest that needs to be followed up to protect America, can you get into the CIA database?

MR. BRENNAN: Yes, you can. The issue is what do you mean by an "integrated" database. We have access to these 22 networks and on those networks are countless databases and data holdings. What you don't want to do is to mix all of that together, because first of all, it's not mixable in its current form because individual agencies have designed their systems according to their own individual standards.

Now, what we are doing is bringing those systems in and networks in so we can design an architecture that allows us to search against them simultaneously. And in fact, we are doing that now. We're not at that stage, but you have to be able to do an integrated, federated search simultaneously.

SEN. DURBIN: I'd like to stick with this point because I think this gets to the heart of it. The question is whether or not we have an overarching architecture where we can some day hope to integrate these systems and to integrate the information and share the information.

If I am not mistaken, we are currently in the situation where the Border Patrol collecting fingerprints cannot share them with the FBI, some five years after they have been tasked to do it. So what we have is a lack of integration of this technology base and this architecture.

When I raised this issue in the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, OMB screamed bloody murder.

"This is our jurisdiction. You stay away from it. We're the ones who integrate architecture of computers." And so we did nothing.

And I'm wondering today, when we're talking about what you're doing and what we hope to achieve with the 9/11 commission report, are we finally tackling the bottom line here; that even after new titles and new boxes on the organization chart, we need the people and the architecture to make this mesh and work together?

MR. BRENNAN: Yes, sir. I think you're making the point that I made earlier, which is that there needs to be a national architecture, from a business process standpoint, as far as the roles and responsibilities of those different entities, but in addition, a information technology architecture. The U.S. government is the product of-again, the past 20 years of the revolution that has taken place in information technology, this Congress has funded individual initiatives in individual agencies. And so what we find right now are disparate systems, and we're trying to bring it together.

SEN. DURBIN: Can you for a moment understand my frustration? It's three years after 9/11. This is not a new idea or concept-that we would create this architecture. And here we are, three years later, almost three years later, saying, "Boy, we're going to have to do this soon, aren't we?" What has stopped us? What has stopped the executive branch? Is it Congress? Have we held the executive branch back from establishing this new architecture, so these computers can merge their information and make us a safer nation?

MR. BRENNAN: Senator, the architecture is so complicated. You're talking about multi-security level systems-top secret, secret, classified, unclassified. You're talking about something that touches all different government agencies and departments. You're talking about moving information from overseas and making sure that it can cascade throughout the government and down into the local-state and local level in law enforcement. You're talking about a very, very intricate and interdependent system that is not yet in place. It needs to be. The U.S. government needs to understand how we make sure information moves. But the bumper sticker comments about we're not sharing information doesn't take into account the complexity of the issue.

And when I look at the 9/11 commission report, the recommendation in information sharing is that information procedures should provide incentives for sharing to restore a better balance between security and shared knowledge. It doesn't address any of the issues regarding the technology challenges and the tremendous resources required, the policies and protocols and procedures that have to be put in place.

SEN. DURBIN: Mr. Brennan, with all due respect, three-two years ago, when we debated the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, I proposed this Manhattan Project to do exactly what you suggested. It was stopped by the OMB. It was not approved by the administration. It did not go forward. And today we're in the same conversation.

I really believe that unless and until we make a commitment, a bipartisan commitment, to get this done, we're going to continue to feel the frustration and be unable to offer the protection the American people are asking for.

Organization charts are important, but the bottom line: Who's working for the agency? What tools do they have to make America safer? And the most important tool, as I see it, from a technology viewpoint, is still something off in the future.

Now that, to me, is troubling. I hope this committee hearing moves us not toward a better organization chart-not only toward a better organization chart, but toward putting the people in place, as well as the equipment in place, the technology in place, to make it happen. I think that's the thing that troubles me.

The FBI, Mr.-I don't-I just have a short time. But the FBI computer system on 9/11 was decrepit. It was embarrassing.

I know efforts have been made, because I've worked with Director Mueller over and over again to bring more modern computer technology to the FBI. I think most Americans would be shocked to learn where you were on 9/11. I hope things are better today. Are they?

MR. PISTOLE: Absolutely, Senator. There-tremendous strides have been made. There's still ways to go, but the key is that everybody within the FBI and those people who are working with access to FBI databases have full visibility of the information that previously, as you said, prior to 9/11, simply was not there.

SEN. DURBIN: Thank you, Madame Chair.