I think it is important to clarify, because there is a lot of confusion in this discussion, even in this hearing.

I think one of the problems we have to think anew here is, is that this is an international phenomenon.

There are places our power doesn't reach. We can't regulate something that's over in Berlin or Swaziland.

I just think it is important. That shows the complexity of this issue. You have to really do it in a granular way.

I would appreciate, to the extent you guys can give us suggested language or proposals or outlines of legislation, that is what we are looking for.

I think innovation is going to be an absolute key to this.

I agree with that. This is a very difficult issue to grapple with, because basically we are balancing two provisions of the Constitution, provide for the common defense and ensure domestic tranquility, and the First, Fourth, and Fifth…

I think that is a very important point, because a lot of the publicity and discussion and testimony at the time of the original San Bernardino case was we only want this for one phone. We are not talking about one phone. We are talking…

One of the things, frankly, that really bothered me about the Apple case was that we had all this excitement and publicity about a great American company that went on for months and months, and then the FBI said never mind, we figured out…

I do not like commissions, but I signed on to Senator Warner's bill to set up a commission to really look in depth at this issue involving the technology community, the law enforcement community, and the intelligence community.

I think we need more information, frankly. I commend the chair for setting up this hearing, but I think this really needs some deep thought by a lot of people because it is really, in many ways, new territory.

I just want to again sort of clarify. You can tap phones now, right, Apple iPhones, if you get subpoenas, Mr. Vance?

Because you can't hack a sextant.

Well as I understand the history of the Ukraine hack, one of the first things they did was change all the passwords so the operators couldn't get back into their own systems, and then they put malware in.

Speaking for myself, not the other co-sponsors but speaking for myself, I truly believe that the next significant event, and when I talk about a significant event, I mean a really significant event, will not be a kinetic event, but will…

I do not want to go home to Maine after a disastrous attack somewhere in the United States on our critical infrastructure and explain that we did not try some various options.

I hope this legislation will be helpful to you in focusing on this particular aspect.

As Senator Manchin mentioned, we are asymmetrically wired, so we are asymmetrically vulnerable.

I'm just afraid the refugee crisis we're seeing now is a precursor to a much more serious one caused by those regions essentially becoming uninhabitable.

the best description of Russian foreign policy I ever heard was that they were like a hotel thief who goes down the hall, trying every door until they find one that's open, and then they go in.

I think that may be what we're talking about here, is, if you have a structure that is overly bureaucratic and rigid, the policy will be slow, cumbersome, and itself not responsive to immediate problems.

But, by writing them in and requiring that they be established, isn't that almost a contradiction in terms?

I'm very supportive of this concept, as a general principle.

this is a national security measure. It is a national security measure. It is about protecting our country. The preamble of the United States Constitution--which establishes the reason this country was founded, the reason the Constitution…

I ask unanimous consent that Amanda Bennett, an intern in my office, be granted the privileges of the floor for today. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.