I welcome this debate. And I think it's healthy for our democracy. I think it's a sign of maturity. Because probably five years ago, six years ago, we might not have been having this debate. When it comes to telephone calls, nobody is listening to your telephone calls. I don't have to listen to your phone calls and know what you're doing. That's not what this program's about. As was indicated, what the intelligence community is doing, is looking at phone numbers and durations of calls. They are not looking at people's names, and they're not looking at content. If I know every single phone call you made, I'm able to determine every single person you talk to. I can get a pattern about your life that is very, very intrusive. I specifically said that one of the things that we're going to have to discuss in debate is how are we striking this balance between the need to keep the American people safe and our concerns about privacy? No one's arguing whether or not you have the right to go out and tap and go, do everything you need to do to track down al-Qaeda. That's not the question here. But by sifting through this so-called metadata, they may identify potential leads with respect to folks who might engage in terrorism. The real question here is, what do they do with this information that they collect that does not have anything to do with al-Qaeda? The modest encroachments on privacy that are involved in getting phone numbers or duration without a name attached and not looking at content that on net, it was worth us doing. Some other folks may have a different assessment of that. If it's true that 200 million Americans phone calls were monitored in terms of not listening to what they said, but to whom they spoke and who spoke to them, I don't know. The Congress should investigate this.