Can Anduril Help Fix American Shipbuilding?

0:00Kate B. Odell: This episode is brought to you by Charles Schwab. Decisions made in Washington can affect your portfolio every day. But what policy changes should investors be watching? Washington Wise is an original podcast from Charles Schwab that unpacks the stories making news in Washington right now and how they may affect your finances and portfolio. Listen at schwab.com slash Washington Wise.

0:28Kate B. Odell: From the opinion pages of the Wall Street Journal, this is Potomac Watch. Can America's defense technology companies help fix the U.S. crisis in shipbuilding? That's our subject for today on Potomac Watch. I'm Kate O'Dell, your host this Wednesday. Earlier this week, the company Anderil Industries announced that it was putting up$3.7 billion in capital to start building parts of American submarines in Maryland. This is a new frontier for defense tech companies that have typically focused on missiles, drone defenses, and autonomous weapons. Joining us today to talk about this is Anderle's Christian Brose, President and Chief Strategy Officer.

1:06Kate B. Odell: In a prior life, Chris was a hand on Capitol Hill, and years ago he wrote a book called The Kill Chain that predicted some of the evolutions in warfare now playing out in Ukraine and Iran. Chris, thanks so much for joining us. It's always great to have you. On Tuesday, the announcement of Anduril's new submarine project, that's our reason for chatting today. But before we get there, it would be helpful if you would give us the fundamentals here on Virginia class submarines. I think our listeners are hearing a lot lately from the conflicts in Ukraine and Iran that warfare is changing in a lot of ways.

1:39Kate B. Odell: And you in the defense technology industry have been making that case quite often. So I guess the base question that I think we should start with for those who don't follow these debates as closely as you and I do is why in this age where we need more cheap cruise missiles and drones, does the U.S. also urgently need a lot more Virginia class submarines, even at$4 billion a pop?

2:00Christian Brose: It's a great question. And it's a nuance, I think, that often gets overlooked in this debate about the future of warfare, right? It's either all the old stuff or all the new stuff. And I think our argument has been for a very long time, and my argument has been that we need both. And I know, you know, you appreciate that. And, you know, as much as Anderle is leading the way in terms of autonomous systems and low cost weapons and software defined, AI defined defense capabilities, I think we also realize that there are critical weapon systems in the American arsenal that are going to be vital to maintaining deterrence for a very long time to come.

2:32Christian Brose: And, you know, the top of that list is the Virginia class submarine, you know, the nuclear attack submarine fleet, which, as Admiral Goucher said yesterday, is the apex predator of the world's oceans. You know, like I think there are many reasons that President Xi wakes up every morning and doesn't decide to go across the Strait of Taiwan. But probably near the top of that list is he doesn't know where America's submarines are or what they're capable. Well, he knows exactly what they're capable of doing to an invasion force. So, you know, very long way of saying these are absolutely essential war preventing and war winning systems.

3:03Christian Brose: And the challenge that our nation has had for some time is we know how to make them. Right. We've been making Virginia class submarines as a country for the past two decades. The challenge is we're just not making enough of them. And there are a lot of reasons that we could get into as to why that is. But two years ago, when the United States Navy came to Andrel and began this conversation of whether we can add production capacity to begin, you know, kind of producing more of the submarine components and modules and sort of larger ship sections over time that can allow us to build more of these submarines.

3:38Christian Brose: that's the whole goal of this. And, you know, I think we are currently kind of below the Navy's requirement for these submarines in terms of what America is currently producing. So there's work to be done. And, you know, I think for us, if Andro was founded to do anything, it was to solve the hardest and most consequential defense problems facing the country. And I can't think of one more important than this. And, you know, considering where we are in our journey, you know, better part of 10 years in, the more we looked at that problem, the more we realized there was actually a lot of this problem that is sort of Andrel-shaped, right?

4:11Christian Brose: I mean, things we can do to uniquely help production capacity increase in the country.

4:16Kate B. Odell: And I want to talk about specifically what Andrel is going to do, but completely agree with your point that Virginia-class submarines are really vital to avoiding a war in the Western Pacific. And they would be basically the door kicker for the rest of our naval fleet if, God forbid, that were to ever happen. And that stealth capability you're describing does have to make the Chinese think twice and avoid war in the first place. But on the shipbuilding problem, I think, again, our listeners hear a lot that the United States can't build ships anymore. In this particular case, Congress has been buying two Virginia-class submarines a year, and they have broad bipartisan support in Congress.

4:50Kate B. Odell: Yet we are delivering 1.1 a year, sometimes 1.2 a year. We have never hit two a year. And for a while before the COVID pandemic, it looks like maybe we would turn a corner on this problem. Maybe submarine production could improve, but then more supply chain disruption, more labor force disruption seems to have precluded that. And Congress has looked at this. Congress has dedicated more funding to try to increase a number of available workers and to increase their wages and to try to increase production capacity. But the overall number of annual production, it has not been particularly responsive.

5:24Kate B. Odell: So when Andrel started to look at this, what is the reason? Why can't a country like the United States build two submarines every year? What are the real constraints there?

5:34Christian Brose: It's a great question. And, you know, to date myself, going back to my time in the Senate 10 years ago, we were trying to solve this problem, exactly as you were saying, right? We were basically trying to push resources into the program under a belief that more resources would enable us to get production up. And I think 10 years on, for all of the sort of improvements that have been made, you know, we're not where we need to be at, like you said, two Virginia class per year. And if you add the AUKUS requirement, where we're supporting Virginia class for our Australian and British allies, that number goes up to 2.33.

6:09Christian Brose: So we're well below as a country where we need to be. And I think there are a lot of reasons for that. But I think fundamentally, you would think that if I put more money into solving the problem, I will be able to solve the problem. And I think we've run that experiment and it's not working. And I think the real reason that as we looked at this problem, we began to believe that we could make an impact and help is a lot of the reasons that submarine production is not where it needs to be have to do with the ways in which submarines are built and the shipyards that they're being built in. And what I mean by that is they still sort of resemble the way that it was done in the 1960s and the 1970s.

6:49Christian Brose: And I think, you know, many people are quick to sort of point the finger at industry and say, it's your fault. But I think a lot of that blame or a lot of that, you know, kind of explanation is probably a better word, really comes back to the requirements that the government provides, the certification process, which is no higher safety bar, right? I mean, you're putting 120 human souls aboard a big metal canister and submerging it under the ocean for three months at a time. There's no compromising on the safety mission for that system. But over time, what that's led to are shipyards that have kind of grown up organically, that are not laid out as efficiently as you would want them to be laid out in.

7:29Christian Brose: It's been very difficult to insert new technology into these kinds of, you know, legacy shipyards where we see it happening in commercial aerospace, you know, things that companies like Boeing or SpaceX are doing to really revolutionize the production of commercial airliners or space vehicles. Really, none of that has been able to, you know, kind of make its way into American shipbuilding. And then you sort of look at the ways in which the work is being done. And the workers in these shipyards are remarkable. I mean, these are master craftsmen, master shipbuilders, master welders. These people take, you know, many, many, many years to sort of become exceptional and proficient in their craft.

8:07Christian Brose: But their craft is building just very exquisite, very complex kind of artisanal systems and artisanal ways. And I think for us, you know, the real goal here is to step back away from all of that, which again, you know, our industry partners at, you know, at Newport News and Electric Boat just don't have the luxury of doing, right? I mean, they are under the gun to produce submarines for the country. They can't afford to just walk away and take a knee for five years and reimagine how shipbuilding is done. And I think a large part of the exercise for us is doing exactly that. So what we're going to be building in Baltimore is a shipyard that is laid out and enabled by technology the way that you would imagine it being possible to do in the year 2026.

8:48Christian Brose: And a lot of that comes down to taking these very complex kind of work instructions and breaking them up into a larger number of simpler tasks that a larger workforce can accomplish. So people who have high school, you know, or high school equivalency degrees, people who don't have shipbuilding experience, who can come in, who can get a modicum of training, can be enabled by the kinds of technologies we're going to be building the shipyard around, and can start contributing and building submarines faster. You know, it's an opportunity to just reimagine the whole way in which these kind of submarine components and larger modules are built.

9:28Christian Brose: But a lot of that is also going to be a partnership with the government and our industry partners to also simultaneously reimagine the certification process so that we're not building exactly the way that, you know, submarines have always been built. We are determining the outcome that needs to be met to ensure safety-critical components. But how that outcome is met through new technologies or new ways of building can and really needs to be reimagined and done differently.

9:55Kate B. Odell: We'll take a quick break and be right back with more Potomac Watch. This episode is brought to you by Charles Schwab. Decisions made in Washington can affect your portfolio every day. But what policy changes should investors be watching? Washington Wise is an original podcast from Charles Schwab that unpacks the stories making news in Washington right now and how they may affect your finances and portfolio. Listen at schwab.com slash Washington Wise. This is Matthew Hennessey, the editor of Free Expression. I want to personally invite you to come check out what we're doing. Signing up for the newsletter couldn't be easier.

10:35Kate B. Odell: Just go to our homepage, directly below the Wall Street Journal logo, you'll find the magic words, free expression wedged between opinion and arts. There's an option to sign up for the newsletter right at the top of our section. Just hit that button and you'll start getting the world's hardest working newsletter delivered directly to your inbox Monday through Friday. If you aren't a journal subscriber, the newsletter is free, but we are gonna need your email address. There's a lot of fun stuff in the newsletter that you can only read in the newsletter, and I don't want you to miss any of it. Sign up for free expression today.

11:08Kate B. Odell: We'll see you in your inbox.

11:13Kate B. Odell: Welcome back. I'm talking to Chris Brose about America's submarine production. The certification issue, as it's called, may be a little wonky for our listeners, but I think an important one. So Anderle has already said this week is already working on torpedo tubes, on prototyping torpedo tubes that it will begin to build for these submarines. To your point, you do not want to compromise the safety of these vessels when you have people taking them underwater with a nuclear reactor. That's like the most no-fail mission that the U.S. Navy has. At the same time, the Navy does have a history of difficulty of adapting its standards and accepting new ways of doing business.

11:52Kate B. Odell: And it's had this problem in different shipbuilding programs. For instance, the Navy did just walk away from a frigate it was building because it tweaked it so much to be more survivable. And then the whole project fell apart. And I guess on the other side of this very crucial survivability equity is that if we don't have the vessels at all, they're not survivable. And that the United States can't win any fight with submarines that don't exist. And so this seems like one of the big questions about this project. And, you know, already you see some coverage. Anderle's never built a submarine. You know, why should we suggest this to succeed?

12:27Kate B. Odell: What are you hearing from the Navy about is willing to be flexible on these regulatory bureaucratic standards? And how is Andrel going to make a torpedo tube that is cheaper and faster without compromising that?

12:39Christian Brose: Look, these are great questions. And these are the same questions that we had when we started this conversation with the Navy two years ago, you know, where initially we were skeptical that we had anything to offer. But, you know, the more, like I said, like we sort of took this journey and dug in, the more we started to realize that, you know, these are problems that we actually believe we can help to address. And yeah, I mean, I take the point that we've never done this before. I mean, I guess the only thing I would say is for the better part of the decade that Andrel has been a company, we've just consistently been doing things that we've never done before.

13:09Christian Brose: You know, we never built an autonomous fighter jet, we're building autonomous fighter jets. So this is obviously, you know, an order of magnitude, larger, more complex challenge. But I think that we feel a lot of confidence based on all the work that we've done. We didn't really talk about this yesterday, but as a company, we're probably about$160 million of our own money invested into this already, standing up the Proto Factory in California, where a lot of this work is being done. A lot of these technologies are being sort of brought in and proven out. So to your question about the Navy's receptivity, I think we are hearing loud and clear from the leadership of the Navy and certainly in the person of Vice Admiral Goucher, who is the direct report program manager for submarines.

13:53Christian Brose: I mean, he is running the submarine program for the country, that they want to use this opportunity that we're creating an arsenal to really kind of rethink the certification process. And I know, you know, this is not what you were suggesting, but this is not about compromising on safety. It's not about lowering the bar to, you know, to try to improve cost and schedule. It's about keeping the safety bar where it needs to be, but demonstrating that with new approaches to production, utilization, and incorporation of new technologies, we can deliver on those safety requirements in different ways that generate a faster pace of production and reduced cost.

14:32Christian Brose: So, you know, I think we're starting to do this work now, like you mentioned, on torpedo tubes. We've received design information from our partners at Electric Boat, and not surprisingly. I think the engineers and the smart folks at Andrel are saying, hey, we think that there's a different way to do this. And I think that Electric Boat would probably agree with us. The challenge becomes, like you said, that conversation with the Navy and our industry partners to say, hey, if we can prove that there's a different and better way to do this that goes faster, reduces cost, and hits the safety requirement, can't we all agree that that's the goal here, right?

15:08Christian Brose: It's to be able to achieve the outcome better, faster, cheaper, with no compromise on safety. And if we can do that in a different way than the nation has done for the past several decades, that's great, right? That's called modernization. And the other thing that I would add, and this is a critical point here, is everything that we are going to be building in the Arsenal 2 shipyard is going to be shared with our industry partners at EB, Electric Boat, and Newport News, and with the United States Navy. And this is another large part of it, which is to be able to attack the problem in its totality and really build a, you know, a software-defined kind of digital foundation or operating system for how this shipyard is going to work, to manage work, to manage the supply chain.

15:50Christian Brose: All of that technology is going to be shared back with our traditional shipbuilding partners. And I think, you know, the hope is that if we can prove it out in Arsenal, that is something that they can utilize in their shipyards at no cost to them. And again, that is a holistic kind of rethink of how this gets done. If we can prove that there's a different way to build a torpedo tube that is better, faster, cheaper, and doesn't compromise on safety, then our partners at Electric Boat, for example, can seek other industry partners to build the same way, right? To add to that sort of robustness in the supply chain, because we've proven with the Navy that this can be built and this can be certified to go onto a production ship.

16:31Christian Brose: So there's a lot of new things that we're going to have to do here. It is going to require a very close collaboration with our more traditional shipbuilding partners, as well as with the Navy. But as we embark on this, we feel very confident that we have that willingness and collaboration.

16:45Kate B. Odell: And I think you're underscoring here that the point of this is to use private capital to expand the underlying base entirely and be additive. I understand here now we've gone through the kind of strategic case for this and the reason the country needs the submarines. But I want to talk a little bit about Andrel's competitive business case for this. I mean, defense technology has been quite successful, particularly in the software space, also in designing a discrete missile that the services can buy, cheap cruise missiles, things like that. But this is a much different bear. And so I'm curious what you're telling your investors about the fact that you are signing up to walk headlong into one of the most intractable defense industrial-based problems that the United States has right now.

17:24Christian Brose: You know, I think the great thing about our investors is from the get-go, they knew what Andrel was founded to do, right? They know that we're working on defense programs. They know that our, you know, major customers are the U.S. government and allied governments. And these things take time, right? You know, we're not a software as a service company, you know, selling into the commercial market. So I think there's a strategic awareness and understanding of the work we're doing, the importance of it. And there's a patience. You know, this is going to take time. But, you know, I think there's also a confidence that, you know, much as we've done new things that we've never done before in our past, you know, that this is something that we also have a good plan to accomplish and will be successful, again, over a very long time horizon.

18:05Christian Brose: But I think as we look at what we're building here, I mean, we very much think of this shipyard as the weapon system, right? I mean, you know, you and I have talked a lot about what the future of warfare is going to look like. It's going to look like a constant sort of adapt and counter-adapt, move and counter-move cycle where we're going to have to change very rapidly, build new products, modify new systems, react to what our adversaries do and go very quickly. And the two million square foot facility in Baltimore is going to be exactly that. You know, we're going to be contributing to the Virginia class submarine program, which I believe nuclear powered attack submarines are going to be, you know, a hallmark of American power for as far into the future as I can see and make predictions about.

18:47Christian Brose: But this facility will also be able to produce all different kinds of maritime capabilities at a speed, at a, you know, kind of cost point that I think is going to help the United States and the Navy really win the future. That'll be in part won by the Virginia-class submarine program or successor programs. It'll also be won by, you know, other kinds of naval capabilities that nobody's even imagined yet. But this facility is going to be flexible and adaptable to build across all of that. So I think there's an awareness on the part of our investors that, you know, that's exactly what we're building here.

19:21Christian Brose: But I think the primary thing that I would go back to is an awareness and, frankly, an appreciation that we're willing to kind of run into the sound of the gunfire here to try to help on one of the most important national defense problems that the country has. And I think in the process, demonstrate that, you know, you can build a business case for this. Maybe different than some of the other business cases that Andruil's working on. It's obviously going to be very different than some of the more robotic systems or kind of more commercial-like products that we're building. But that doesn't make it less attractive, and it certainly doesn't make it less important for us as a company.

19:52Kate B. Odell: Sicking on that business case point, you know, I think it's very fair to say here that other defense technology companies are going to be watching this deal, watching, you know, whether it works and calibrating their own bets accordingly. So the success of it for the administration, hopefully, you know, I trust they understand that there's a larger capital investment question at play with this deal. But if it were to be a smashing success, what other types of technology, what other types of work could defense tech companies start doing for some of America's more conventional military assets, including stealth aircraft or other platforms?

20:24Christian Brose: It's a great question. And it's certainly not one that we've looked at. I mean, I definitely think if you just kind of stick with the Navy, there's a lot of help that the industrial base could use, you know, whether it's aircraft carriers, destroyers, you know, kind of the next generation of, you know, some of these platforms that remain critical to kind of our naval arsenal. Certainly on the weapons side, I mean, I know there's a lot of interest there in terms of where companies can get in and contribute in all different kinds of ways, right? Whether it's as subcontractors to the legacy weapons providers to just help ramp production, you know, whether it's building sort of larger sections of ships, you know, helping with maintenance, you know, we have huge maintenance challenges, you know, as you're well familiar with in terms of our different classes of Navy ships.

21:09Christian Brose: I'm sure there's areas there. I mean, I've not looked deeply at it, But there's areas there where, again, just new approaches, new ways of attacking these problems, the insertion of new technologies, just a hunger to get after it. I mean, I think those are kind of the defining features of this defense technology movement that has really blossomed over the past 10 years in America. And I'd like to think that we're leading the way on that. I'd like to think that what we're building in Arsenal 2 and the contributions that we'll make to the Virginia-class submarine program will motivate other companies to also increase their ambition and go after these other critical areas of challenges in our industrial base and where they can help, even if it's not completely in line with everything they've done to date as a company.

21:50Christian Brose: I mean, there's a lot of work to be done and a lot of great people who are now eager to do it. So I think your question's spot on. I think there's a lot of opportunity out there.

21:59Kate B. Odell: I appreciate you're raising the submarine maintenance issue as well, because, I mean, so the Navy wants 66 attack submarines, not just Virginia's, but others, too. And the numbers are in the low 40s. And because of maintenance, the operationally ready number of submarines is in the 30s. And that just becomes a fleet that's too small. I think the Trump administration deserves credit for trying to expand yard capacity and dry dock capacity to get after that problem, too, because if we just build more and we can't maintain them, we have not fixed the fleet's problem. Hang tight. We'll take one more quick break.

22:29Kate B. Odell: This episode is brought to you by Charles Schwab. Decisions made in Washington can affect your portfolio every day. Washington Wise from Charles Schwab is an original podcast that unpacks the stories making news in Washington. Listen at schwab.com slash Washington Wise.

22:45Christian Brose: Don't forget you can reach the latest episode of Potomac Watch anytime. Just ask your smart speaker. Play the Opinion Potomac Watch podcast.

22:56Kate B. Odell: From the opinion pages of The Wall Street Journal, this is Potomac Watch. And we're back on Potomac Watch. There is, you know, some contract money in this deal that you're doing. The Navy has agreed to put up some money in a contract here. Does that depend on getting a budget appropriation through Congress this year? Does it depend on reconciliation? And how are you and Andrew kind of reading what Congress might do this year and whether is kind of serious about making the most of this moment where you do have some private capital getting into our defense problems.

23:28Christian Brose: Yeah, I think from our standpoint, I mean, really the way we wanted to structure this deal was to really maximize our capital investment against all of the inputs, right? So standing up the facility, building the workforce, you know, kind of all the research and development, you know, all the enabling technologies, we wanted to fund that because we wanted to build it the way we knew it could and needed to be built and really then put the government in the position of being the buyer of what we're producing, right? And whether that's kind of initial components to start, test articles or test assets to follow, and then eventually kind of larger sections, modules, and other things really start to make this look a bit more like a commercial transaction, even though there's no commercial market for any of these things.

24:10Christian Brose: To your question about funding, I think we feel confident that we have the funding committed from the government to get going. And we certainly are not going to slow down in terms of what our capital commitments to this project will require. I think the larger question, which is really kind of going to face the Congress, you know, when everybody returns after the election is how are you going to dispose of this budget request for one and a half trillion dollars? We remain very supportive of that top line, you know, whether it's done through reconciliation or some other legislative means like that's for the Congress to decide.

24:43Christian Brose: But, you know, I would also say we're also very concerned about the risks that would come if that doesn't happen, where there's a lot of new capabilities, as you're very aware, new programs that are being started, new munitions efforts, scaling weapons production, all of the great work that the Defense Autonomous Working Group wants to do, is doing, and wants to do. There's a lot of investments in the future that that money will make possible. And I, just speaking personally, worry that if that top line gets reduced. I've just watched this movie before where the bureaucracy does its thing and we end up putting all of our money into the past.

25:21Christian Brose: The future gets told to wait another year. I think with the work we're going to be doing at this shipyard, regardless of how this year, the fiscal year 27 budget gets disposed of, this is going to be a long-term endeavor. I mean, we're going to be at this for a very long time. It will absolutely depend upon future congressional authorizations and appropriations of money. It's going to require bipartisan support because it is going to outlast the current administration. It's going to span, you know, I'm sure many different balances of power, you know, in the legislative branch. And I think the really positive thing is, as we've done this work and as we've talked to people all across the administration, people throughout the Congress, both houses, both parties, state and local leadership in Maryland, everybody is almost most universally supportive of this.

26:09Christian Brose: You know, the response has been overwhelmingly positive. And that's great for us because we're going to need that bipartisan support the same way we have on everything that we've been doing over the past 10 years to really ensure that this delivers on the goals that all of us have for it and really helps to solve this problem. This is a national problem, right? It's not a political problem. It's going to take a long time to fix it because it took a long time for us as a country to get into this challenge. So, you know, I think we feel very confident that we have a good, you know, kind of basis of support to move forward.

26:38Christian Brose: But, you know, all that's going to have to be worked in flight and, you know, all the different legislative cycles that we have in front of us.

26:44Kate B. Odell: All right. Last question for you today, Chris, and it is related to what you just wrapped up is how long this is going to take to fix. I mean, there's been a long time debate in Washington about when does the threat from the military build up from the Chinese Communist Party? When does that peak? And I think there is a strong case that it is sooner than we might like, that the threat to Taiwan, you know, Phil Davidson, the Navy Admiral, is called the Davidson window, said it could possibly peak in 2027. Now, I think perhaps maybe now we're talking about 29, 30, but, you know, how soon can you make a dent in our submarine production problems, given that we may not have decades to deter them and we may not have decades to fix the issue we have building ship?

27:21Christian Brose: It's a great question. And throughout the course of this project, you know, I've often been reminded of the old saying, the best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. and today. We're planting a tree today, right? And I think we're well aware and others should be aware too, that it's not going to grow overnight. This is going to take time. I mean, putting together a facility of this size, putting the workforce together, we're going to go as fast as we can, you know, and I think the work that we're already starting to do on things like torpedo tubes, hopefully we'll make an impact, you know, hopefully we'll enable our industry partners at Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls, Newport News to build more submarines faster.

27:56Christian Brose: but I don't want anybody to be under the illusion that all of a sudden we're going to jump up to the nation's goal of submarine production. But I think perhaps maybe the better answer to your question is, I think the real goal for us is to continue to push that window of vulnerability to the right and then eventually have it closed. So if we can get through 2027 and I share your concerns about that, all of a sudden we're talking about 2028 and 2032 and we're pushing this problem into the future. I am very confident that America is going to be able to win that future and maintain deterrence. We are mobilized in this country from new industry to old industry on a bipartisan basis that I've never seen before.

28:38Christian Brose: And I feel very confident that if we can weather, you know, kind of the potential turbulence and risk of the near term, you know, I feel very bullish on the long term prospects for where we're going. And again, all of these, you know, seeds that are being put in the ground today, you know, really being massively beneficial to the country in the years to come.

28:56Kate B. Odell: Well, thanks, Chris, for joining us. That's a wrap for today on Potomac Watch.

29:02Kate B. Odell: This episode is brought to you by Charles Schwab. Decisions made in Washington can affect your portfolio every day. But what policy changes should investors be watching? Washington Wise is an original podcast from Charles Schwab that unpacks the stories making news in Washington right now and how they may affect your finances and portfolio. Listen at schwab.com slash WashingtonWise.