United States Senator Dianne Feinstein

Feinstein to CFTC, SEC: Issue Final Rules Implementing Dodd-Frank

Tue, 15 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

Key deadline to limit excessive speculation in energy markets now 16 months overdue...

Feinstein Comments on Nomination of Judge Olguin for Calif. District Court

Mon, 14 May 2012 10:00:00 EST

Washington—Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today issued the following statement on the nomination of Magistrate Judge Fernando M. Olguin to serve on the United States District Court for the Central District of California:

“I was very pleased to recommend Magistrate Judge Fernando M. Olguin to the President for nomination to the District Court in Los Angeles,” Feinstein said. “Judge Olguin has built an impressive record of success in more than 10 years as a Magistrate Judge, including authoring hundreds of published opinions. He is a thoughtful and respected Magistrate Judge and he will be able to hit the ground running on the Federal District Court, which has the sixth-highest civil caseload in the Nation.”

Judge Fernando M. Olguin

Judge Fernando M. Olguin has served as a Federal Magistrate Judge for the United States District Court for the Central District of California since 2001.

Growing up in Azuza, Calif., Judge Olguin was the first in his family to attend and graduate from college. He earned a bachelor’s degree from Harvard University and a master’s degree and law degree from the University of California at Berkeley.

Olguin began his legal career as a law clerk to District Judge Carl A. Meucke in the District of Arizona. Following his clerkship, he entered the Department of Justice through its Honors Program, serving as a Trial Attorney in the Civil Rights Division and enforcing the Fair Housing Act and the Public Accommodations Act.

In 1994, he became the National Director of the Education Program for the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. The following year he joined the law firm Traber, Voorhees & Olguin as a partner handling civil rights and labor cases.

###

Feinstein: Train Teachers and School Personnel to Recognize Child Abuse

Mon, 14 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

Essential ‘that warning signs of abuse are identified, reported and acted on’...

Feinstein Statement on Former Mongolian President Enkhbayar

Mon, 14 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

Deeply troubled by his treatment and medical condition...

Feinstein Urges Terrorist Designation for Haqqani Network

Fri, 11 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

“Continues to launch sensational and indiscriminate attacks against U.S. interests in Afghanistan”...

Viewpoints: Legislation would restore water, balance to west-side Valley farmers - Sacramento Bee

By Thomas Birmingham — Wed, 09 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

On April 29, Shasta Reservoir, the primary source of water supplies for the Central Valley Project, was full. And yet farms and communities south of the Delta are being allocated only 40 percent of their water supply. And that's not expected to change this year, no matter how much water is sitting in Shasta. How can this be?

Before 1992, the Bureau of Reclamation was permitted to operate its south Delta CVP export pumping plant at capacity 12 months per year, enabling Reclamation to move enough water through that pumping plant to meet all demands for CVP water south of the Delta. But since 1992, more and more regulatory restrictions have been imposed on the operations of that pumping plant, so that today Reclamation is permitted to operate the plant at capacity only four months per year.

The human costs of these regulatory restrictions and the economic disruption they have caused have gotten a great deal of attention in Congress. On Feb. 29, the House of Representatives passed HR 1837, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act, and on April 26, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved a spending bill that directed Reclamation to develop a plan to increase irrigation water deliveries for CVP contractors.

Although both bills seek to provide relief to the San Joaquin Valley, the two bills represent fundamentally different approaches to the problem. HR 1837 would provide clear congressional direction on how to operate the CVP. The Senate appropriations bill, on the other hand, seeks to squeeze more water out of the existing regulatory framework that has tied Reclamation's hands.

The authors of these two bills, Reps. Devin Nunes, Kevin McCarthy and Jeff Denham and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, want desperately to address the human crisis created by chronic water supply shortages. The authors of the House bill and their colleagues on both sides of the aisle have worked tirelessly to bring the plight of the San Joaquin Valley to public attention. And no member of Congress has done more than Sen. Feinstein over the last decade to improve annual water supplies for farmers in the San Joaquin Valley.

Feinstein's efforts in 2010, for example, helped to persuade the Department of the Interior to devise the means to increase to 45 percent the allocation of water that had been disastrously reduced to 10 percent in 2009. Her actions in that year alone restored thousands of on-farm jobs for people who otherwise would have been forced to stand in food lines in Mendota, San Joaquin and other communities on the west side of the Valley.

Westlands Water District supports both HR 1837 and Sen. Feinstein's language in the Senate Appropriations bill. HR 1837 contains numerous provisions that Westlands would not have proposed if it had drafted the legislation, but it advances meaningful reforms to federal law that will restore balance to meeting competing demands for water.

Feinstein's language could result in dramatic improvements if implemented by officials genuinely interested in increasing water supplies. But the success of Feinstein's approach depends on the good will of these officials. Former Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt attempted a nearly identical approach in June 2000. It failed because of the disinterest of the officials who were responsible for implementing the program.

The ultimate question is, are we going to sustain irrigated agriculture on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley? If yes, changes to federal law will be required to stem the economic decline in the Valley until long-term efforts to implement a Bay Delta Conservation Plan and to build conveyance facilities are completed. Defenders of the status quo insist the law works perfectly and that any legislation to reform the law is merely an attempt by some greedy corporation or other to exploit natural resources. That is the argument that has been raised against HR 1837 by advocates who allege falsely that it is Westlands' attempt to steal water from the fish.

Farmers on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley do not want to steal anyone's water. They merely want to regain access to the water in a full Shasta Reservoir that they are paying for.

Thomas W. Birmingham is the general manager of Westlands Water District.

Feinstein Bill Increases Opportunity to Refinance Mortgages

Wed, 09 May 2012 12:00:00 EST

Senator Feinstein introduced the Expanding Refinancing Opportunities Act to help more homeowners refinance their mortgages. California currently has the highest percentage of underwater loans.

Feinstein Announces Confirmation of Judge Jacqueline Nguyen

Mon, 07 May 2012 06:30:00 EST

First Asian-American female to serve as a federal appellate judge...

Feinstein Statement on Foiled Airline Bomb Plot

Mon, 07 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

Washington—Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, released the following statement on the foiled plot to blow up a U.S.-bound airliner:

“I am very aware of al-Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula’s determination to strike at American targets. I congratulate the CIA for thwarting this reported plot by AQAP to destroy a U.S.-bound airliner using a specific type of bomb that is of new design and very difficult to detect by magnetometer. As I understand the device, it was similar to what Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab wore in his underwear on the thwarted Christmas Day plot in 2009.

“I recently travelled through Dubai and was subjected to three levels of intense security, including personal pat downs of my body. But the nature of this plot demonstrates al-Qa’ida remains determined to attack the United States and is a reminder why the TSA and other security agencies are extremely vigilant on airline security.”

###

Feinstein, Levin Statement on CIA’s Coercive Interrogation Techniques

Mon, 30 Apr 2012 12:00:01 EST

Washington—Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) released the following statement regarding claims by former CIA Deputy Director of Operations Jose Rodriguez about the effectiveness of the CIA’s coercive interrogation techniques:

“We are deeply troubled by the claims of the CIA’s former Deputy Director of Operations Jose Rodriguez regarding the effectiveness of the CIA’s coercive interrogation techniques.

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence will soon complete a comprehensive review of the CIA’s former Detention and Interrogation Program. Committee staff has reviewed more than 6 million pages of records and the Committee’s final report, which we expect to exceed 5000 pages, will provide a detailed, factual description of how interrogation techniques were used, the conditions under which detainees were held, and the intelligence that was – or wasn’t – gained from the program.

Statements made by Mr. Rodriguez and other former senior government officials about the role of the CIA interrogation program in locating Usama bin Laden (UBL) are inconsistent with CIA records. We are disappointed that Mr. Rodriguez and others, who left government positions prior to the UBL operation and are not privy to all of the intelligence that led to the raid, continue to insist that the CIA’s so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques” used many years ago were a central component of our success. This view is misguided and misinformed.

The roots of the UBL operation stretch back nearly a decade and involve hundreds, perhaps thousands, of intelligence professionals who worked non-stop to connect and analyze many fragments of information, eventually leading the United States to Usama Bin Laden’s location in Abbottabad, Pakistan. The suggestion that the operation was carried out based on information gained through the harsh treatment of CIA detainees is not only inaccurate, it trivializes the work of individuals across multiple U.S. agencies that led to UBL and the eventual operation.

We are also troubled by Mr. Rodriguez’s statements justifying the destruction of video tapes documenting the use of coercive interrogation techniques as “just getting rid of some ugly visuals.” His decision to order the destruction of the tapes was in violation of instructions from CIA and White House lawyers, illustrates a blatant disregard for the law, and unnecessarily caused damage to the CIA’s reputation.

Further, it’s worth repeating, as discussed in the Senate Armed Services Committee’s 2008 report, the SERE techniques used in the CIA’s interrogation program were never intended to be used by U.S. interrogators. Rather, the techniques – which are based on Communist Chinese interrogation techniques used during the Korean War to elicit false confessions – were developed to expose U.S. soldiers to the abusive treatment they might be subjected to if captured by our enemies. An overwhelming number of experts agree, the SERE techniques are not an effective means to illicit accurate information.

Misinformation Relating to the UBL Operation

Statement of Jose Rodriguez, former CIA Deputy Director for Operations, Time Magazine, May 4, 2011:

“Information provided by [CIA detainees] KSM and Abu Faraj al-Libbi about bin Laden's courier was the lead information that eventually led to the location of [bin Laden’s] compound and the operation that led to his death.”

This statement is wrong. The original lead information had no connection to CIA detainees. The CIA had significant intelligence on the courier that was collected from a variety of classified sources. While the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques were used against KSM and al-Libbi, the pair provided false and misleading information during their time in CIA custody. This information will be detailed in the Intelligence Committee’s report.

Statement of Michael Hayden, former CIA Director, Scott Hennen Show, May 3, 2011:

“[W]hat we got, the original lead information – and frankly it was incomplete identity information on the couriers – began with information from CIA detainees at the black sites.”

This statement is wrong. The original information had no connection to CIA detainees. The CIA had significant intelligence on the courier that was collected from a variety of classified sources. This information will be detailed in the Intelligence Committee’s report.

Statement of Michael Mukasey, former Attorney General, Wall Street Journal, May 6, 2011:

“Consider how the intelligence that led to bin Laden came to hand. It began with a disclosure from Khalid Shiekh Mohammed (KSM) who broke like a dam under the pressure of harsh interrogation techniques – that included waterboarding. He loosed a torrent of information – including eventually the name of a trusted courier of bin Laden ... Another of those gathered up later in this harvest, Abu Faraj al-Libi, also was subjected to certain of these harsh techniques and disclosed further details about bin Laden's couriers that helped last weekend's achievement.”

This statement is wrong. There is nothing in CIA intelligence records to corroborate this statement.

Other press reports have suggested that a third CIA detainee subjected to the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques provided significant information on the courier and his relationship with al-Qa'ida. While this third detainee did provide relevant information, he did so the day before he was interrogated by the CIA using their coercive interrogation techniques. This information will be detailed in the Intelligence Committee’s report.

The Facts:

CIA did not first learn about the existence of the UBL courier from detainees subjected to coercive interrogation techniques. Nor did the agency discover the courier's identity from detainees subjected to coercive techniques. No detainee reported on the courier’s full name or specific whereabouts, and no detainee identified the compound in which UBL was hidden. Instead, the CIA learned of the existence of the courier, his true name and location through means unrelated to the CIA detention and interrogation program.
Information to support this operation was obtained from a wide variety of intelligence sources and methods. CIA officers and their colleagues throughout the Intelligence Community sifted through massive amounts of information, identified possible leads, tracked them down, and made considered judgments based on all of the available intelligence.
The CIA detainee who provided the most significant information about the courier provided the information prior to being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques.
The three detainees subjected to waterboarding provided no new information about the courier. In fact, the CIA detainees who were subjected to coercive techniques downplayed the courier's significance, with some of those detainees denying they knew him at all, in the face of significant evidence to the contrary.
Detainees whom the CIA believed to have information on UBL’s location provided no locational information, even after significant use of the CIA's coercive interrogation techniques.”

###

Diplomacy offers best hope for Iran on nuclear arms - San Francisco Chronicle

By Senator Dianne Feinstein — Mon, 30 Apr 2012 12:00:01 EST

Iran and a group of countries known as the P5+1 countries (United States, China, Russia, United Kingdom, France plus Germany) are headed back to the negotiating table, welcome news that may lead to a breakthrough on Iran's nuclear program. Significant challenges remain to bridge differences and overcome decades of suspicion and mistrust, but these talks deserve our full support. A few months ago, talks seemed dead and chatter about Tehran's nuclear program centered on when, not if, Israel would attack Iran.

What has changed? First, economic sanctions against Iran are affecting the country's economy. Iran's ability to import and export goods has been curtailed, its financial sector is under pressure, and its currency is significantly devalued. The full weight of sanctions, including a European Union oil embargo, will be felt this summer.

Second, Iran is more isolated than ever before. Syria is in no position to help it, and Iran's traditional U.N. Security Council defenders - Russia and China - are curbing ties.

Third, prospects of an Israeli strike only increase as the weeks pass. While American support for our ally Israel is steadfast, such a strike could lead to a broader regional war. The P5+1, led by European Commission Vice President and High Representative Lady Catherine Ashton, drew Iran back to the table with a letter to Iran's chief negotiator, Saeed Jalili, offering to "engage seriously in meaningful discussions." Iran responded positively, which led to an April 14 meeting with the P5+1. The outcome was modest - an agreement to further negotiate on May 23 in Baghdad - but represented the first substantive dialogue with Iran in more than a year. By all accounts, the discussion was serious and Iran came prepared to discuss its nuclear program. The tone was markedly different from previous talks in 2011 when Iran insisted sanctions be lifted before addressing its nuclear program.

It remains to be seen if the talks will lead to concrete steps from Iran. They must - the window for a diplomatic solution is rapidly closing. The world community must see real progress and tangible results. Iran must demonstrate it is moving away from becoming a nuclear armed state. The outlines of an agreement are clear: Iran would halt enrichment of uranium to 20 percent, close its Fordow uranium enrichment plant and move its stockpile of enriched uranium out of the country. It would cap future enrichment at 5 percent and all nuclear activities, facilities and stored material would be accessible to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

In return, the P5+1 and the international community would gradually lift sanctions and possibly provide Iran with equipment and material for a civilian nuclear power program and medical purposes. The United States could affirm that it does not seek regime change. As Iran fulfills its obligations and takes verifiable actions to answer questions about its nuclear program, we could respond in kind.

Iran's supreme leader has said his nation does not seek nuclear weapons. These negotiations are an opportunity to prove that.

Some argue Iran has no intention of curtailing its nuclear program and that any talks are bound to fail, but I believe circumstances finally may be right to negotiate an agreement.

But given the looming threat of an Israeli military strike and the potentially catastrophic reaction in the Middle East, a diplomatic solution offers the best outcome for Iran, Israel and the international community. We must support those efforts.

Intel Gatekeeper: the case file on Senator Dianne Feinstein - CNN

Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:00:01 EST

Editor's note: In the Security Clearance "Case File" series, CNN national security producers profile key members of the intelligence community. As part of the series, Security Clearance is focusing on the roles women play in the U.S. intelligence community

It's true: one of the most powerful players in the world of U.S. espionage and intelligence wears ruby red nail polish.

In her role as chairwoman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California is the gatekeeper for the country’s most sensitive intelligence agencies. She is regularly briefed on evolving national security threats and keeps her ruby red-topped finger on the pulse of the most secret of missions. She’s blunt, direct, stubborn, and not afraid to admit it.

Since taking the gavel of the intelligence committee, Feinstein has added her own touches, among them changing the way some classified briefings are held.

“Typically, the sessions were pretty formal, much like the style of public hearings,” said a committee staffer who asked not to be named. Before Feinstein, members of the committee would sit in a briefing room, the witnesses at a separate table before them, and each member would wait his or her turn to pose questions to the witness. Now, once a month, “they all sit together at a round table, usually a few dozen doughnuts are brought in, and they have a discussion,” says the staffer. “There are no opening statements or written statement for the record, no rounds of questioning. Members just ask questions as they see fit.”

The sessions may be informal, but Feinstein remains on a mission of her own when it comes to her responsibility as chairwoman, a responsibility that she says is a key reason why she remains in the Senate.

“It is congressional oversight of intelligence. It is very important,” said Feinstein, who agreed to a rare interview to discuss the role she plays in the country’s intelligence structure. “We have the ability to stop something if we want to stop it. And we have the ability to watch things very carefully, as closely as we want to watch or can watch.”

Occasionally, Feinstein has been known for saying something to a reporter that she really wished she hadn’t, as was the case recently when she made comments about a highly controversial proposed prisoner exchange involving detainees currently held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Missteps like that can keep her chief of staff on his toes. She admitted that with all of the reading she does and briefings she sits in on, it’s sometimes tough to keep the classified bits separate from the unclassified. It’s a refreshingly honest answer in a town where posturing can sometimes come before truth.

Right now, Feinstein says she worries most about Iran, and about whether Israel will act too quickly and launch an attack against sensitive nuclear facilities in Iran. She is concerned about the U.S. relationship with Pakistan because she sees it as a strategic relationship that affects the entire region.

“We could have a positive relationship with Pakistan,” said Feinstein. “It is the best course for us and the best course for them. It’s a nation that I think is very troubled, but nonetheless it’s an important nation. And the degree to which the United States can play a role in helping facilitate answers to problems like between India and Pakistan, I think that is important that we are helpful there. And of course you really can’t have success in Afghanistan without cooperation from Pakistan.”

As one of the “gang of eight” - the ranking party leaders from both the Senate and House committees on intelligence - Feinstein was briefed on the raid to capture or kill Osama bin laden a year ago this week, but like many in the intelligence world, it's what she doesn't know that worries her more. That fear stems from personal experience.

The senior senator from California is haunted by her vote to go to war in Iraq. But she says that regret drives her to better understand today’s intelligence and to more aggressively question intelligence leaders both in open hearings and classified settings.

There are limits to her power, though. While congressional intelligence committee leaders are privy to almost all intelligence information, one thing they don’t see is the president’s daily brief. Feinstein said that may have played a role in her decision to go to war, suggesting that had she known what the President George W. Bush knew at the time, she may have voted differently. Instead, Feinstein said she based her decision largely on the National Intelligence Estimate - the intelligence community's assessment of current threats that is regularly reported to Congress.

There have also been changes in the way intelligence comes together since Feinstein took over the chairmanship.

“We’ve been able to pass three intelligence bills,” Feinstein said. “And within the intelligence bills are changes in the authorities to the intelligence agencies so they have some importance. By and large, I think the civilian oversight of these agencies is really key and critical because they know that what they do is sifted through us. They know that if we find something, if we feel that something is not legal, is not in the best interests of this country, we will do something about it.”

Sometimes, when intelligence is missed, luck can step in. That was the case in December 2009, when an attempted terror attack by an airplane passenger hiding explosives in his underwear was thwarted because of the quick thinking of a flight attendant and nearby passengers.

“We worry about what that bomb signified. That bomb was a new bomb that was undetectable in a magnetometer and that is a real alarming situation," says Feinstein. “They subsequently detected two of those bombs in the Dubai airport," says Feinstein, who adds that investigators initially had trouble finding the explosive material. Acting on intelligence, they opened a box of printer cartridges, and found PETN in two of them. It would have been enough to down the airplane they were being transported on.

Such are the challenges that Feinstein worries about as she remains convinced that bad actors will continue to seek new ways to bring terror to America.

“I don't doubt that people will come after us if they can. The point is not to let them and be as vigilant, and keep up that vigilance which is very hard for America. We’re kind of a laid-back, anything goes country and that is no longer true in national security. The protection of the homeland is the number one goal I think, for all of us. So a lot of time is spent, a lot of questions are asked and it isn't an easy arena.”

Feinstein is a woman who is clearly passionate about what she does. She’s joining a small group of her colleagues from the Senate and House intelligence committees traveling to Afghanistan and Pakistan. She won't divulge travel details for security reasons, but says she isn’t the slightest bit nervous because being nervous simply “is not going to do any good.”

Feinstein was elected to the Senate in 1992 and assumed her role on the intelligence committee just months before the attacks of September 11, 2001.

She said she’s seen a huge change in the numbers of women who now represent the intelligence community in congressional hearings.

“When I first went on the committee, you never saw a woman testifying before you,” Feinstein said. “It’s a big change, and I had dinner recently with a group of women, about 10 or 11, and it was wonderful. It was just wonderful, because they are real professionals and they care very much about the country, the national security of our country, and are really prepared to sacrifice a great deal of their life to do it.”

Other women in the intelligence community share equal admiration for the role Feinstein plays and how she has pioneered new paths for women.

“People don’t realize how many things she was the first woman to do,” said Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence Stephanie O'Sullivan. “To be elected mayor of San Francisco, to serve as senator from California, to preside over a presidential inauguration and as chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Having her wield the power of the gavel is an inspiration to women throughout the intelligence community. She’s a leader in every sense of the word.”

Feinstein: Violence Against Women Act will save lives

Thu, 26 Apr 2012 08:00:00 EST

Senate passes bipartisan bill to fight domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking...

Feinstein: New ATF Data Proves Overwhelming Majority of Guns Recovered in Mexico Come from U.S.

Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:00:01 EST

Between 2007-2011, 68.5 percent of recovered weapons were of U.S. origin; more must be done to stop firearms trafficking to Mexico...

Secure infrastructure networks now - The Hill

Wed, 25 Apr 2012 12:00:01 EST

Two years after the 9/11 attacks, the Northeast and parts of the Midwest experienced one of the largest, most widespread blackouts in U.S. history. The power outage affected nearly 50 million people, caused 11 fatalities and cost our economy $6 billion.

Telecommunications failed, public transit was inoperable, and in New York City, people feared the worst and rushed into the streets to ask why their world had suddenly gone dark.

The 2003 blackout turned out to have been caused by a power surge to an electric grid in Ohio that launched a chain reaction eastward. But a foreign nation or terrorists could plot to shut down the electric grid through a cyberattack as well. In the digital era, a few computer keystrokes from anywhere in the world could devastate the operations of our critical infrastructure — electric grids, water delivery systems and transportation, finance and communications networks. An attack like that could cause widespread chaos, even death, and could be a preface to a wider assault on our national security.

That type of scenario is at the top of the list for homeland and national defense leaders who agree that the cyber networks of the nation’s critical infrastructure are sitting ducks for the pernicious acts of criminals, hostile foreign powers, hackers and terrorists. In fact, they report that our enemies are already mapping critical networks, presumably so that if they decide to attack, they can do so swiftly, having already identified vulnerabilities. Given the existential threat to our national and economic security, the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security and intelligence officials are united in their call for minimum cybersecurity standards for the critical privately-owned infrastructure our lives depend on.

Today, the House is set to take up several cybersecurity bills on information-sharing and investing in cyber research and development. None of these bills includes necessary protections for our most critical infrastructure — rejecting the recommendations of Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, National Security Agency Director Keith Alexander and former Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, as well as the House Republican Cybersecurity Task Force appointed by House leadership and Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.), who chairs the House Homeland Security subcommittee with jurisdiction over cybersecurity.

Information-sharing is very important. But without protections for critical infrastructure, information-sharing alone is a half measure. It won’t get the job done. Virtually all cybersecurity experts agree with the now-abandoned conclusions of the House Republican Cybersecurity Task Force: if the owners of critical infrastructure systems don’t have the capabilities or desire to act on timely threat information, then sharing real-time intelligence won’t do much good. To effectively protect ourselves from the growing cyber threat, we must require that a small slice of our most critical infrastructure meet risk-based cybersecurity standards.

That’s why we have drafted the bipartisan Cybersecurity Act of 2012 (S.2105). In addition to information-sharing and R&D provisions, the bill includes minimum security performance requirements for the most critical cyber networks. We are proposing that owners of the most vulnerable systems partner with the Department of Homeland Security to develop the performance requirements to keep hackers from entering critical networks through the front door, the back door or any open windows.

Private owners of critical cyber infrastructure would be free to decide how to meet those standards, and if a network is already well-secured, the legislation would impose no additional security requirements.

The system is already blinking red in warning. FBI Director Robert Mueller has predicted that, in the near future, cyberattacks will surpass terrorism as the country’s greatest threat, while Chertoff, who served in the George W. Bush administration, said cyber threats are “one of the most seriously disruptive challenges to our national security since the onset of the nuclear age.”

The Department of Homeland Security has received close to 50,000 reports of cyber intrusions or attempted intrusions into private networks since October 2011 — an increase of 10,000 over the same period the year before. And these are only the intrusions that have been reported to the federal government. Nearly 50 reports of “attempted or successful cyber intrusions of critical infrastructure control systems” have occurred since the president called on Congress to pass cybersecurity legislation during his State of the Union address in late January, according to the White House.

We wouldn’t allow anyone to physically enter our nuclear power plants, airport control towers and utility systems to steal information and manipulate physical controls — so why aren’t we installing the same figurative fences and surveillance cameras to protect our critical cyber networks?

Our legislation would save American jobs, help businesses prosper and protect the ingenuity that built this great nation from cyber theft. Let’s not repeat the failure to act to prevent an attack, as we did before 9/11. This time, let’s raise our defenses before the attack comes.

Lieberman and Collins are chairman and ranking member, respectively, on the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee. Rockefeller is chairman of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, and Feinstein is chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee.

Feinstein, Boxer Statement on Detection of ‘Mad Cow’ Disease in California

Tue, 24 Apr 2012 05:00:00 EST

Washington—Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer (both D-Calif.) today issued the following statement on the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s detection of a case of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), also known as mad cow disease, in Central California.

“We have been notified that a case of mad cow disease has been detected in a single dairy cow in Central California. This was an atypical case of BSE involving one animal and did not enter the human food supply. The USDA is taking this incident seriously and has moved quickly to notify the public about the diseased cow.

“According to USDA, BSE cannot be transmitted to humans through milk consumption. In addition, the department has strong safeguards in place to prevent diseased animals from entering the food supply.

“We believe the system is working as it is supposed to work and have requested a meeting with USDA to receive a status report on this incident. We are following this closely and will work with USDA and the State of California to ensure that all precautions have been taken.”

###

Region in line for vital freeway funding - Riverside Press-Enterprise

Tue, 24 Apr 2012 12:00:01 EST

Toll lanes are coming to Corona, transportation officials said, following a federal announcement providing the last funding piece for Riverside County’s largest road project.

The U.S. Transportation Department announced Tuesday it would accept an application for the funds needed to complete a $1.3 billion project to widen a chronically congested stretch of Highway 91.

The announcement, a major victory for Inland Southern California after two earlier tries failed to get all the money needed, was hailed as the game-changing decision that will finally extend toll lanes into Riverside County.

“Having this announcement really moves this project from being something that wasn’t exactly there yet,” said John Standiford, deputy director of the Riverside County Transportation Commission. “It’s less conceptual and a bit more real now.”

The work will extend the two toll lanes between Highway 55 and the Orange County line to Interstate 15 in Corona, as well as add a general-use lane in both directions from the county line to Pierce Street in Riverside.

About one-third of the project, $444.6 million, will be funded by a federal loan, which local officials will repay once the project is completed in about five years.

“We are fully engaged and anxious to get started,” said Supervisor John Benoit.

The project would create an estimated 4,600 jobs in Riverside County and as many as 16,000 statewide. Construction would start in fall 2013, with work expected to finish in late 2017.

Along the route, numerous businesses will be affected by the widening, something officials have been addressing for years through some land purchases. More land will be acquired once the environmental analysis is approved by state and federal officials.

Tuesday’s announcement follows a decision in January to loan the project about $200 million. Though officials commended the earlier award, they said more was needed to ensure the project had all its funding in place.

Critical funding

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said the Riverside County Transportation Commission has been selected to apply for the funds through the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act, which provides loans, loan guarantees and lines of credit to large and nationally or regionally significant transportation projects.

Benoit said the decision by Congress to expand the TIFIA program helped Riverside County make the cut, albeit in two stages.

“When you’re looking for $400 million or so and the whole pot is just double that, your chances are slim,” Benoit said.

Federal transportation officials will loan the transportation commission one-third of the project’s expected cost. Tolls collected on the route will repay the money, as well as other bonds the transportation commission will sell to fund the project.

For drivers, the toll trip will be seamless, with Riverside and Orange counties sharing their portion of the revenues for tolls paid in the respective counties.

Inland officials have looked to the federal government for $444.6 million needed to complete financing for the project. The final award is subject to final terms and negotiations, but area lawmakers heralded LaHood’s announcement as an approval.

“This is the last piece of the puzzle,” said Rep. Ken Calvert, a vocal supporter of the freeway upgrade. “The 91 freeway is a famous bottleneck that hinders goods movement to the rest of the country, and it’s a local commuter nightmare.”

Calvert, R-Corona, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who worked together on the effort, both said they received phone calls early Tuesday from LaHood, informing them of the news.

“Last month while driving on State Route 91, I saw firsthand the congestion that hamstrings hundreds of thousands of Californians, not only during rush hour, but 24 hours a day,” Feinstein said. “The 91 Corridor Improvement Project will improve the lives of millions of Californians while substantially growing the regional economy across Southern California.”

Calvert described the Inland area’s coordinated push for the funding as “one of those rare moments when we all worked together (on an initiative) and got it done.”

Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Redlands, and Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif, also lobbied for the money, while Assemblyman Jeff Miller, R-Corona, sponsored state legislation in support of the project.

The team effort, which also included local business leaders and county officials traveling to Washington to confer with lawmakers, helped the project gain traction with federal transportation officials.

“We felt we made the case, so we felt pretty confident about that,” said Anne Mayer, the transportation commission’s

Work in progress

Finalizing the funding is an important step, but many details remain for the project. An environmental report for the project should be completed by late July or August, said Michael Blomquist, toll project director for the transportation commission.

Simultaneously, officials will narrow the field of four potential teams that will design and build the project. The four groups — most led by national construction and engineering firms — will receive a more detailed proposal that includes the federal funding, Blomquist said.

One of the teams is expected to be chosen by early next year, he said, so that construction could begin by late 2013.

The project is one of a handful around the state using design-build, where a team is selected to design and build the project to speed up construction. Use of design-build required state approval.

The process differs from design sequencing, which was blamed for cost overruns and delays in rebuilding the 60/91/215 interchange.

Officials stress the project isn’t just a road expansion. Part of the plan for adding toll lanes includes doubling the number of buses operated between Riverside County and Orange County. Twenty commuter buses currently run between Corona and Orange and Riverside and Costa Mesa.

Widening the road will allow the buses to use toll lanes, which in turn will allow them to make the trip more quickly and become more attractive to commuters, officials said.

“This is a comprehensive improvement,” Standiford said, “We are committed to investing in the corridor.”

Feinstein Announces $444 Million Loan to Widen Riverside Highway

Tue, 24 Apr 2012 12:00:01 EST

Will increase capacity, reduce traffic on State Highway 91, create 4,600 jobs in Riverside County...

Editorial: Silicon Valley must protect against catastrophic sea-level rise - San Jose Mercury News

Sat, 21 Apr 2012 12:00:01 EST

In a visit to Silicon Valley earlier this month, U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein issued a timely warning about the potentially catastrophic effects of sea-level rise throughout the Bay Area and the need to act now to control the damage. She knows that water issues are likely to dominate California politics for the next decade.

But the biggest, most immediate threat of all is one we've known about for years and could fix if we had the political will. We need to shore up the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta's deteriorating 1,300 mile levee system that protects the fresh supply of water that 65 percent of Californians drink. An earthquake could cause the utter failure of the levees in minutes, a catastrophe that could obscure other damage. A break in a strategic location would allow the salt water of the San Francisco Bay to pour into the fresh water of the Delta, destroying the fresh water that provides half of Silicon Valley's supply. This could happen any day. But the state holds the levees hostage to a broader and more controversial comprehensive water plan. It is an irresponsible gamble.

That's no reason to ignore the threat of the sea-level rise, however. Scientists estimate that the sea level in California could rise 16 inches in the next 40 years and 55 inches by 2100. As Feinstein pointed out in her San Jose visit, the impact would be huge. Many populated areas ringing the bay are below sea level.

Any significant sea rise would collapse the levees built to manage the remaining San Francisco Bay salt ponds. Major campuses such as Facebook, Google, Yahoo, DreamWorks, Cisco and Intuit would be flooded. Thousands of homes and apartments from Newark to San Jose to East Palo Alto and Foster City would be destroyed. Portions of Highways 101 and 237 would be underwater.

Steve McCormick, president of the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, told the Mercury News: "What we are facing is not a potential, but an inevitable catastrophe .... It's really just a matter of time before these current levees collapse.''

Feinstein, McCormack and a coalition including business leaders and environmentalists are trying to raise more than $1 billion over the next decade to build new levees and restore wetlands that would protect the Bay. Federal, state and local governments will need to step up, since the ruin of the Bay Area would be an economic disaster. The BART expansion that brought Feinstein to town provides a model for how everyone can pull together.

Homeowners and businesses that built on land below sea level helped cause this problem, but government at all levels also invested in roads and other systems to support those sites, whose development they often encouraged. Now it's time to pull together to protect these areas and the region's economy.

Three years before Hurricane Katrina, the New Orleans Times-Picayune published a four-day front-page series, "Washed Away," that warned of what could happen if a major hurricane struck. It outlined how strategic levee failure could submerge the city, leaving hundreds of thousands homeless. Reporters and editors who worked on the series found little satisfaction in how eerily accurate their warnings proved to be.

California and the Bay Area has had plenty of warnings. What more will it take to prevent our own Katrina?

Feinstein: Senate Committee Approves Funding for Major California Transit Projects

Thu, 19 Apr 2012 12:00:01 EST

Washington—Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, today applauded the committee’s passage of a bill containing more than $2 billion to construct new mass transit projects. Several key projects in California will qualify for these funds.

“Securing dollars for mass transit in California is a top priority for me,” said Senator Feinstein. “Funding these projects means new jobs for California workers and is critical to reduce congestion in the most heavily traveled regions in the nation.”

The $2 billion is included in the Senate’s FY 2013 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations bill, which was approved by the committee today by a vote of 28-1. The bill now heads to the full Senate for consideration.

The committee bill provides funding for seven mass transit projects in California:

Los Angeles Westside Subway Extension
Los Angeles Regional Connector Transit Corridor
BART Silicon Valley Extension Project
San Francisco Central Subway Third Street Light Rail
Van Ness Avenue Bus Rapid Transit
South Sacramento Corridor
Fresno Area Express Blackstone/Keys Canyon Bus Rapid Transit

“The two Los Angeles subway projects are at the heart of a plan to build a comprehensive transit system in America’s second largest city,” Senator Feinstein added. “I’m pleased the committee—for the very first time—included funds for these key transit projects, offering the funds they need to move forward. It’s past time that Los Angeles has a subway system that matches its stature as a global city, and this bill moves us in the right direction.”

###