I think that in his job he will be able to speak truth to power--which God knows we need it--and he will speak truth about power, which we also need.

I think Mr. Clapper makes a great point, that it does come in appropriations.

In fact, I think it's all been great, because here it is 2010, July 20th, and there's not been an attack on the homeland.

if there is a failure in or questions about the authority and the functionality of the DNI, then it's incumbent on Congress to look at the legislation, but not necessarily fault the DNI nominee for the failures of the legislative framework.

I think we would do well to approve General Clapper.

I believe that once again she's done a great service to the nation.

But what will your role be in this, as DNI?

I need a sense of urgency here. We're going to fund the research. We have a sense of urgency.

The oil producing act won't let you find out what another country does.

when Administrator Jackson asked BP to please look into the use of a different kind of dispersant, she was essentially blown off by BP.

there is BP security that is keeping people away from documenting the information.

I'm not being critical of you and I'm not--we're looking at public policy areas where we need to really tighten up so we don't screw up.

I'd like to know. I mean, that's the NOAA job.

There's a continuum of actions here. One is an outright ban. That, I think, has to be well founded on solid research.

I want the American people to believe that it has scientific independence and integrity. No gag rules. No muzzling. No selectivity of the information.

I'm going to either ban or limit the use of dispersants, could you have the power to act unilaterally?

Well, yes, and to go to our friends--where we should have learned--lessons learned from the Valdez, which was a horrific experience for our neighbors in Alaska; they used 250,000 gallons for the whole spill.

We look forward to looking at that legislation and perhaps being joined as an early cosponsor with you.

And, again, we're not bashing anybody, but here, as I understand it, EPA had concerns about the amount of dispersants being used.

It's unfortunately a great scientific experiment, but we're part of it.

I will repeat it, and I concur with you. We do not know whether we're going to end up with a new gulf war syndrome.

I believe that we must--that we're the research and the funding for research, because whatever we do, I'm going to be sure it's independent.

We need to know that seafood is safe, and the American public needs to know that seafood is safe for the simple reason that we want them to continue to feel comfortable buying gulf products.

Better information is needed to determine the window of opportunity and percentage effectiveness of dispersant application for different oil types in different environmental conditions.

The UK, as I understand it, banned dispersants. That gave me pause.