News - Politics and Law

WASHINGTON--For someone not interested in politics, Craigslist.org founder Craig Newmark spends quite a bit of time these days working with people in Washington.

"Most people, including myself, don't want to be bothered with politics," Newmark said Friday at Google's Washington, D.C., headquarters. "They just want to call 311 to get a pothole fixed."

Yet as a proponent for policy ideas like Net neutrality and government transparency, Newmark has found himself an unlikely advocate for career lobbyists--just the good kind, though.

Google Communications Director Adam Kovacevich interviewed Craigslist founder Craig Newmark at Google's D.C. office on Friday.

(Credit: Stephanie Condon/CNET)

While lawmakers should embrace the online tools to make democracy more widespread, he said, industries like telecommunications have to play their part by steering away from deceitful lobbying practices.

"There are some bad actors in the lobbying business, but the vast majority are just people trying to get a fair shake for their clients in the sausage factory," said Newmark, who belongs to boards for groups like the Sunlight Foundation, which advocates for government transparency.

However, he said industries like telecom, finance, and oil often resort to using "unsavory" lobbying tactics such as fake grassroots--or "Astroturf"--campaigns. Some of those groups have taken aim at Google on issues like Net neutrality.

Newmark said the telecom industry's use of Astroturf groups creates an "artificial" conflict.

"Regarding telecoms, the first thing to do is listen to your employees," he said. "I work with abuse handling departments, and they're all for Net neutrality."

Newmark, who is part of an advisory committee for Barack Obama, criticized John McCain for bringing into his campaign people with questionable lobbying practices, such as campaign manager Rick Davis.

"I take a look at the Barack Obama campaign for warning signs as well," he said, but he associates with the candidate "with a clean conscience."

To be sure, the Obama campaign has its share of questionable lobbyist affiliations. Obama for a short time had former Fannie Mae CEO James Johnson leading his vice presidential search, and he is one of the largest recipients of donations from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Nevertheless, Newmark cited the Obama campaign's online organization as evidence that "now we have the beginnings of the technology to actually get serious about participatory democracy. This is like 1776 all over again."

Politicians can better utilize online resources like Twitter and direct e-mail communication with constituents, Newmark said, as well as letting authenticated citizens moderate online message boards.

"People can work together to push up the comments of people saying smart, good things," he said.

Citizen empowerment requires more transparency from the government, however, and Newmark chided the Senate for not passing the Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act, which would require the Senate to disclose its campaign financing online, something the House of Representatives already does.

Senators Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and John Ensign (R-Nev.) have suspended the bill, which Newmark said was unnecessary.

"It looks like they're protecting someone or they're hiding something," he said.

Last week, the Bush administration proposed a three-page bill to bail out Wall Street to the tune of $700 billion. It died in the U.S. House of Representatives earlier this week.

On Friday, though, the House approved a far bigger, broader, and beefier version of the bill--which has ballooned to a remarkable 442 pages. The vote was 263 to 171, with the bulk of the opposition coming from Republicans. Because the Senate already approved the measure, it immediately went to President Bush, who signed it into law.

On the theory that this would be a way to convince previously skeptical Democrats to approve the measure, one large chunk of the bailout bill is devoted to renewable energy, energy-efficient appliances, and so on (the "Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008"). The authors lured Republicans with protections from the alternative minimum tax (via the "Tax Extenders and Alternative Minimum Tax Relief Act of 2008").

That includes, as the New York Post pointed out, millions in tax breaks and related pork for kids' wooden arrows, Puerto Rican rum producers, auto race tracks, and corporations operating in American Samoa. (The likely explanation for the latter: StarKist has a large tuna-canning operation in American Samoa. And StarKist's parent company happens to be located in the district of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.)

The bill has become, in other words, something almost unrelated to the business of bailing out Wall Street. The Beltway term for this is a "Christmas tree bill," meaning everyone gets to hang their favorite spending projects on it--though by the time Congress gets it through, it more closely resembles a slop bucket.

"We will not Christmas-tree this bill," Sen. Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat promised a few days ago. "The times are too urgent. Everyone has their own desires and needs. It's going to have to wait."

So much for that idea.

Here's a look a some of the green-tech measures:

• One-year extension for wind and refined coal energy tax credits. A production credit for electricity produced from renewable marine energy sources (meaning through wave power and river power, or by exploiting the differences in ocean temperature). Energy credits for "small wind properties," geothermal heat pump systems, and energy-efficient residential properties.

• New renewable-energy bonds. Up to $800 billion in energy bonds may be offered to the public, with a third from "public power providers," a third from governments, and the remainder from "cooperative electric companies."

• Tax credits for "cellulosic biofuels" and for "carbon dioxide sequestration." An extension of an alternative fuel credit. Tax credits for "new qualified plug-in electric-drive motor vehicles." Bicycle commuters get a nod, as do regulations aimed at "residential top-loading clothes washers."

IRS undercover operations: Privacy invasion?
The bailout bill also gives the Internal Revenue Service new authority to conduct undercover operations. It would immunize the IRS from a passel of federal laws, including permitting IRS agents to run businesses for an extended sting operation, to open their own personal bank accounts with U.S. tax dollars, and so on. (Think IRS agents posing as accountants or tax preparers and saying, "I'm not sure if that deduction is entirely legal, but it'll save you $1,000. Want to take it?") That section had expired as of January 1, 2008, and would now be renewed.

Starting with the so-called Anti-Drug Abuse Act in 1988, the IRS has possessed this authority temporarily, with occasional multiple-year lapses. A 1999 internal report said the IRS had 126 "trained undercover agents" working in field offices at the time. This is the first time that such undercover authority would be made permanent.

Sens. Max Baucus (D) and Chuck Grassley (R) have been pushing to make it permanent for a while, claiming (PDF) in April that: "Undercover operations are an integral part of IRS efforts to detect and prove noncompliance. The temporary status of this provision creates uncertainty, as the IRS plans its undercover efforts from year to year."

There's another section of the bailout bill worth noting. It lets the IRS give information from individual tax returns to any federal law enforcement agency investigating suspected "terrorist" activity, which can, in turn, share it with local and state police. Intelligence agencies such as the CIA and the National Security Agency can also receive that information.

The information that can be shared includes "a taxpayer's identity, the nature, source, or amount of his income, payments, receipts, deductions, exemptions, credits, assets, liabilities, net worth, tax liability, tax withheld, deficiencies, overassessments, or tax payments, whether the taxpayer's return was, is being, or will be examined or subject to other investigation or processing, or any other data received by, recorded by, prepared by, furnished to, or collected by the Secretary with respect to a return."

That provision had already existed in federal law and automatically expired on January 1, 2008.

What's a little odd is that there's been little to no discussion of the IRS sections of the bailout bill, even though they raise privacy concerns. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said this week: "I will continue to work with congressional leaders to find a way forward to pass a comprehensive plan to stabilize our financial system and protect the American people by limiting the prospects of further deterioration in our economy." He never mentioned the necessity of additional IRS undercover operations.

The bailout: Details, controversy, and loopholes
As my colleagues over at CBSNews.com reported on Friday, the law authorizes the Treasury Department to create a so-called Troubled Assets Relief Program, or TARP, as well as a separate insurance fund.

The TARP program permits the Treasury to purchase mortgage-backed bonds or any other "troubled assets" from financial institutions. The idea is that because banks have become so hesitant to lend to each other, this law will help unstick the gears of the modern financial economy.

Some loopholes exist. It's possible for a bank to buy $100 billion of bad debt--perhaps in the form of subprime mortgages that are becoming quickly worthless-- declare bankruptcy, and sell it to the Treasury Department for $120 billion, or $200 billion. In other words, although the Treasury Department is supposed to look out for the best interests of taxpayers, there's no law forbidding such profits in the case of firms involved in bankruptcy, receivership, or mergers.

The Treasury Department is authorized to "guarantee" home mortgages, essentially becoming a kind of co-signer, to reduce the number of foreclosures. If the home owner stops paying his or her mortgage, taxpayers would be on the hook. The Treasury Department can also eliminate a "reasonable" amount of a home owner's mortgage debt, under section 109 of the new law, which would likely delay the process of house prices falling.

In response to grassroots pressure from Americans upset about Wall Street executives cashing in, Section 111 is titled "Executive Compensation and Corporate Governance."

It does not include, however, any statutory dollar limit on how high executive salaries of TARP bailout recipients can be. Instead, it lets Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, the former CEO of Goldman Sachs, come up with "appropriate standards." In addition, only the top five executives will have their golden parachutes limited; all the rest will remain untouched, even if their second-tier salaries and bonuses happen to be in the millions or tens of millions of dollars.

Bear Stearns CEO James Cayne made $61.3 million from selling his shares a day after the JP Morgan bailout. Daniel Mudd, CEO of Fannie Mae, was replaced last month; he made $11.6 million in 2007. Richard Syron was chairman and CEO of Freddie Mac from 2003 until last month. He made $19.8 million last year. Martin Sullivan was ousted as president and CEO of AIG this summer, and was paid a $47 million severance package.

While salaries of failed executives will have no statutory limit, TARP-participating companies will lose a tax deduction if they pay their top executives more than $500,000 a year. The $500,000 limit only kicks in if the company offloads over $300 million in assets through TARP.

Section 115 of the law says that the administration can, after notifying Congress and waiting 15 days, purchase and hold $700 billion of assets "at any one time." (It can buy and hold $350 billion without waiting.)

This, too, is a potential loophole. It permits the Treasury Department to buy up, say, $700 billion in 2008, sell those assets off gradually over the next year at a (probable) loss, and repeat the same process in 2009. Losses to taxpayers, in other words, could exceed $700 billion. Although the Treasury Department is instructed to try to avoid losses, the text of the law does not forbid that scenario.

If the TARP ends up costing taxpayers money, the president may ask Congress to consider enacting a law to recoup "from the financial industry an amount equal to the shortfall," presumably through higher taxes. But Congress is under no obligation to do anything; a mechanism to cover the shortfall does not exist in this law.

Even though FDIC coverage will be boosted from $100,000 to $250,000 per account through December 2009, premiums to banks may not take "into account" the higher account coverage. In other words, premiums can't increase for that reason.

Also:

•  This may be just the beginning of bailouts. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Thursday that the state may need a $7 billion loan from the U.S. Treasury, according to a report in the Los Angeles Times. That's because the state has spent more than it takes in through tax revenue, with an annual budget deficit of $14 billion or more, even though its individual income tax rate is arguably the highest in the nation.

•  CBS News' John Bentley reports from Arizona that Republican presidential candidate John McCain is taking some credit for the bailout's passage: "I'm glad I suspended my campaign and went back to Washington to bring, and help bring, House Republicans to the table," he said on Friday. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama described the law as "absolutely necessary to prevent an economic catastrophe."

•  Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, who correctly predicted in 2003 that taxpayers would be "forced to bail out investors," said in a speech on the House floor that the legislation would "only further harm the economy" and was actually worse than the previous version. In a CNN interview, the former Republican presidential candidate said his colleagues are refusing to deal with the underlying problems and spending more tax dollars even though "this country's bankrupt."

•  The Dow Jones Industrial Average (-22 percent year-to-date) and the Nasdaq composite index (-27 percent) closed on Friday down 1.5 percent, despite the bailout. Gold ended at $834.80 an ounce, slightly up for the day and the year. Crude oil futures ended at $93.88 a barrel, slightly down for the day.

•  U.S. jobs fell by 159,000, a decline of 760,000 this year. Technology firms have also contemplated hiring freezes and some, including Hewlett-Packard and Dell, have already laid off employees, as my colleague Ina Fried reports in a separate article.

Updated at 10:40 a.m. PDT to reflect the House of Representatives' approval of the bill.

Updated at 3:30 p.m. PDT to add more details.

The first and only debate between the two vice presidential candidates, Sen. Joe Biden and Gov. Sarah Palin, covered a broad array of subjects, including the economy, war, taxes, and their readiness to help govern the country.

Neither technology nor the tech industry came up in the 90-minute debate, which took place Thursday night at Washington University in St. Louis. However, the issues of alternate energy and oil dependence were brought up several times.

Although many pundits had predicted a verbal battlefield and the possibility of gaffes from Palin, the two were generally cordial to one another, and Palin made no major mistakes.

For a recap of the debate, see the Webcast presented here from Katie Couric and the CBS News political team.

For more stories about the debate, including fact checking of the veep candidates' statements and a post-debate poll of uncommitted voters, see the complete coverage of the campaign from CBS News.

The final two presidential debates are set for Tuesday and October 15, respectively. CNET News will likewise feature links to the live streaming of those debates and the wrap-ups from CBS News.

The Senate on Wednesday unanimously voted in favor of providing parents with more control over the content their children receive through various technologies.

The Child Safe Viewing Act, introduced last year by Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., requires the Federal Communications Commission to issue a notice of inquiry to examine what advanced content-blocking technologies are available for various communication devices and platforms. It also calls for the FCC to consider how to develop and deploy such technologies without affecting content providers' pricing or packaging.

The bill defines "advanced blocking technologies" as technology that enables parents to protect their children from "indecent or objectionable video or audio programming, as determined by the parent, that is transmitted through the use of wire, wireless, or radio communication."

The legislation still must go through the House of Representatives before being sent to the president.

While the bill does not empower the FCC to do anything other than to produce a report on its findings for Congress, it is one of a handful of steps Congress has taken in recent weeks to address threats new technologies can expose children to.

Two senators known for their support of stringent intellectual property enforcement expressed concern on Thursday that an anti-counterfeiting treaty currently being drafted may be too far-reaching.

Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Arlen Specter (R-Penn.) sent a letter on Thursday to U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab saying that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement currently under negotiation "could limit Congress's ability to make appropriate refinements to intellectual property law in the future."

The speed of the negotiations and their lack of transparency compound the risk that the treaty will unnecessarily constrain Congress, the letter says.

Leahy and Specter authored the recently passed Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act. Before the legislation was approved by Congress, it was stripped of a controversial provision opposed by the Bush administration that would have given the Justice Department authority to pursue civil copyright infringement cases.

"We are disappointed that the Administration has been resistant to this effort and has opposed additional enforcement authority, such as civil enforcement in copyright cases where the violation rises to the level of criminal activity," the letter says.

As chair and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the two senators also support funding to assist foreign countries in combating U.S. intellectual property infringement.

Even though they applaud the USTR's efforts to bolster intellectual property protection, the senators said, they were concerned "about the breadth of the issues" the trade agreement could cover "and the specificity with which it could be written."

The USTR tried to allay concerns over the treaty at a public forum last month that gave some indication of what would be included in the agreement. Representatives of the USTR emphasized that the treaty would focus on the enforcement of policies already in place, rather than creating new, substantive policy agreements with other countries.

However, many at the forum still expressed their misgivings over the agreement. A representative from Google said the treaty should not include any provisions regarding Internet policy, since U.S. Internet policy is still in its nascent stages. The senators' letter mirrored those sentiments.

"Regarding the potential breadth of ACTA, we strongly urge you not to permit the agreement to address issues of liability for service providers or technological protection measures," it said. "The contours of the law and liability exposure in these areas continue to be debated in the courts."

As the federal government makes efforts to protect citizens online, it is encouraging people to look out for themselves as well.

To kick off its fifth annual "National Cyber Security Month," the National Cyber Security Alliance, an organization of government, academic, and industry representatives, paired with Symantec to release the results of a national poll on Thursday showing Americans do not feel very safe online, yet they believe they are more protected than they actually are.

Just 26 percent of respondents said they felt their computers were "very safe" from viruses, and 21 percent felt their computers were "very safe" from hackers.

"We might be making it too difficult for people to feel safe," said Michael Kaiser, the director of the NCSA. "We need simple tips stripped of the jargon."

The report was released on the heels of a new law signed by President Bush last week that increases penalties for hacking and other cybercrime charges. Rolled in with an amendment to provide Secret Service protection to former vice presidents, the Identity Theft Enforcement and Restitution Act makes it a felony to damage 10 or more protected computers used by the federal government or a financial institution.

It also allows federal prosecutors to bring cybercrime charges against a person without having to meet any threshold for damages caused by the crime. In cases where an identity thief is ordered to pay restitution, the law calls for the victims to be compensated for the time they spent trying to remediate the damage.

The cybercrime provisions in the law "constitute some of the most significant laws so far" to protect people online, said Adam Rak, senior director for public awareness from Symantec. "Ultimately, though, the responsibility falls on all of us."

Rak said the three basic tools critical for keeping the average user safe are antivirus, antispyware, and firewall software.

Yet the NCSA study, which combined a survey of more than 3,000 Americans with an evaluation of 400 personal computers belonging to those surveyed, showed that most people do not have all three components.

"Just having anti-virus software is not enough," Rak said. "Picture a car with antilock brakes, airbags, and seat belts--I doubt any of us would buy a car without seat belts installed."

Just over 80 percent of respondents had antispyware protections enabled, and 95 percent had updated antivirus software. Yet just 50 percent had antiphishing protections.

Even though 81 percent of respondents said they had firewall protections on their computers, only 42 percent of those computers checked were actually equipped with them. As many as 75 percent of respondents thought they had antispam filters installed when, in fact, only 58 percent actually did.

The sole vice presidential debate of the 2008 election season takes place Thursday night, pitting Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin against Sen. Joe Biden.

The debate kicks off at 9:00 p.m. EDT, and you can follow it live online at the CBS News Debate Webcast site. Immediately after the debate, stay with the site for Web-only analysis and commentary with Katie Couric, the CBS News political team, and guests.

You can also submit your own questions, now or during the event, at the Debate Webcast site.

The 90-minute debate will take place at Washington University in St. Louis and is set to be moderated by Gwen Ifill of PBS.

You can check out the post-debate Webcast from the first presidential debate, between John McCain and Barack Obama, here: CBS Webcast: Examining McCain-Obama debate No. 1.

We'll do the same for the final two presidential debates, on October 7 and on October 15.

See also: Complete coverage of campaign '08 from CBS News.

(Credit: CNET News)

Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign launched an iPhone application on Thursday that turns the vaunted device into a political recruiting tool.

The most notable feature "organizes and prioritizes your contacts by key battleground states, making it easy to reach out and make an impact quickly," according to the software.

On my phone, the application ranked contacts in Colorado, Michigan, and New Mexico at the top; at the bottom was a friend whose cell phone has a Texas number, though she actually lives in California.

The application anonymously reports back the number of calls made this way: "Your privacy is important: no personal data or contacts will be uploaded or stored. Only the total number of calls you make is uploaded anonymously."

The software is the latest effort by politicians to capitalize on technology, joining other examples such as ads distributed through YouTube, Web-based fund-raising, Facebook pages and fan groups, and e-mail recruitment drives.

The Obama for America iPhone application is available for download through Apple's iTunes store, said Raven Zachary, an iPhone consultant who's directing the launch effort.

A "get involved" feature uses the phone's GPS-based location sensing to find the nearest Obama campaign headquarters, and "local events" likewise pulls up a list of activities sorted by proximity.

A "media" section provides links to video and photos, but beware: YouTube showed errors following some of the links. Perhaps the newer videos hadn't been prepared for iPhone display yet.

The application also shows Obama statements to the news media and a guide to Obama's positions on various issues.

Update 8:50 a.m. PDT: The application shows how many calls have been made nationwide and how many you made. Those statistics are the kind that can motivate people--they can feel like they're part of something bigger. That may sound a bit silly as a motivational tool, but consider that Smule's Sonic Lighter application for the iPhone is popular, despite the fact that it costs 99 cents more than its free competition, likely because people can see where else on the globe people are using it and because the longer you run the application, the bigger your own spot on the map becomes. It's a kind of competition.

Update 9:28 a.m. PDT: The campaign added an Obama iPhone app Web site, too.

A new authorization bill would give the White House more oversight of the Homeland Security Department's much-beleaguered cybersecurity efforts.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on Friday introduced its DHS authorization bill (PDF) for fiscal years 2008 and 2009, which calls for the director of the National Cyber Security Center to be appointed by and, in some circumstances, to report directly to the president.

DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff in March announced the appointment of Silicon Valley entrepreneur Rod Beckström as the NCSC director. Beckström reports directly to Chertoff, though Under Secretary Robert Jamison is responsible for the DHS' overall cybersecurity efforts, which along with the NCSC includes the U.S. Computer and Emergency Readiness Team and its intrusion detection system, called Einstein.

The Senate in its authorization bill provides guidelines for the recently created center, about which the DHS has been slow to provide details to Congress. Critics of the DHS' operations have called for the White House to assume responsibility of cybersecurity. The transfer of power will be one of the recommendations made by the Center for Strategic International Studies' Commission on Cybersecurity for the 44th Presidency in its report to be issued in November.

The bill officially establishes the NCSC within the DHS, as well its director, a Senate-confirmed presidential appointee. It calls for the director to report to the president directly about strategies and performance metrics for the security of the federal information infrastructure, as well as about inter-agency plans for responding to incidents relating to that infrastructure. The director would report to the DHS secretary on all other NCSC missions.

The bill gives the director authority to access any information from government agencies and relevant private sector entities--including law enforcement information, intelligence information, and terrorism information--he deems relevant to the security of the federal information infrastructure. The director would also be responsible for giving guidance over budgets to each agency that operates a federal computer system; he would evaluate those budgets and turn in his evaluations to Congress.

Other authorities of the director include reviewing the plans and policies of other agencies relevant to the information infrastructure, as well as physically inspecting facilities. The National Security Agency's director would work with the NCSC's director on developing plans to evaluate the government's information infrastructure.

The bill authorizes $30 million for the NCSC for fiscal year 2009.

WASHINGTON--Government needs better engagement with the private sector to develop a stronger homeland security strategy for emergency response, government and industry representatives said Wednesday--and may even turn to companies like eBay for inspiration on how to respond to domestic emergencies, suggested a representative for John McCain.

The remarks were made during a panel discussion Wednesday focused on a report by the nonpartisan, not-for-profit Reform Institute. The report suggests the federal government create a homeland security policy that focuses not only on offensive measures to protect the country, but also reactive measures to keep the country resilient in the face of an emergency.

The report (PDF), released Wednesday, specifically said industry and government need to create contingency plans to address threats of disruption to the supply chain--such as hazardous shipping containers brought into U.S. ports--that could have wide ranging consequences for the nation, economic and otherwise.

Among other things, a McCain administration may take an "eBay approach" to maintaining an open supply chain in the event of an emergency, said Lee Carosi Dunn, counsel to Senator John McCain, the Republican presidential nominee.

That would mean "providing the technology for localities to bid out at competitive rates for the supplies they need" during natural or man-made disasters, Dunn explained. After Hurricane Katrina, for example, many organizations were interested in providing much-needed resources--like ice--to the affected areas, but poor organization and communications hampered the transfer of those supplies.

Taking an "eBay approach," Dunn said, was one way to possibly keep the supply chain open more effectively, with financing for the bidding coming from both the affected localities and federal funding.

"It's an example of private sector ideas that could be utilized in government programs," she said.

Dunn noted that former eBay chief executive Meg Whitman is a co-chair for McCain's presidential campaign and that the candidate greatly admires the company.

As president, McCain would also place a great emphasis on cybersecurity, Dunn said, especially in the wake of the cyberattacks against Georgia from Russia. The candidate has also taken initiative in the area of communications interoperability, the campaign surrogate said, and has been a longtime advocate for setting aside spectrum for first responders, as well as providing them with more funding.

McCain's offensive strategy for homeland security will not help foster greater resiliency in the United States, countered P.J. Crowley, a senior fellow and director of homeland security at American Progress who serves as a volunteer advisor for Democratic candidate Barack Obama.

"Senator McCain's answer is to leave 140,000 troops in Iraq," he said. "The longer this strategy goes on, that necessarily means there are fewer resources available for other things."

Only 9 percent of government funds spent on national security go towards defensive operations, he said, while 80 to 85 percent are spent on offense.

"At some fashion you want to make sure the government has resilient systems," Crowley said. "Ultimately, resources matter."

Crowley said the foremost responsibility for the next president will be to ensure government departments undergo a smooth transition from the current administration to next. For many departments, including DHS, this will be the first full administrative transition.

The transition, he said, will prove a chance to "step back and take a strategic look at where we need to go."

"DHS is doing a lot of good things, but certain things have been uneven," he said. "One of the challenges is to make sure DHS continues to mature."