Transcripts For CSPAN2 The Communicators 20140414

Host i apologize. Thank you so much, sir. Guest thats all right. Host yesterday at the hearing held by the committee you said that a merger between comcast and Time Warner Cable would result in fewer choices, higher prices and even worse service for your constituents. How do you come to that conclusion . Guest well, because thats been the case when theres consolidation of media and of Telecommunications Media with. Thats whats happening here. This is, comcast is the biggest Cable Tv Company in the country, and its the biggest internet Broadband Company in the country, and its wanting to buy the second biggest cable tv and the third biggest internet Broadband Company x. Thats just too big. And not only that, but comcast has about 12 or 13 of all Television Programming after it bought Nbc Universal and their 20 some cable stations including telemundo and bravo and not to mention msnbc and cnbc. And, in fact, we talk a little bit about that merger or that acquisition of Nbc Universal in the hearing yesterday, and i talked about it. We, you know, when we were discussing that and i was against that one too, brian roberts, the ceo of comcast, said that, you know, look, we compete. Its okay if for us to buy Nbc Universal, buy all this content because we have to compete with all these other distributers. And he mentioned Time Warner Cable. As one of those competitors. And he said at that hearing, at the hearing with us that were not expanding our distribution. So its okay for us to vertically integrate this way. And they cant have it both ways. And they are trying to have it both ways. In one hearing you say, look, we compete with Time Warner Cable. And in the next, you know, a couple years later its, oh, we dont compete with Time Warner Cable. Thats literally what they said. So theyre completely contradicting themselves. And when they have this power now of, you know, theyre going to, you know, control so much of broadband, the broadband space, and they say, well, look, you know, on the cable area were competing with directv and satellite tv. Well, even if you get directv or satellite, any kind of satellite tv, you still want to be on the internet. And guess what . Youre going to have to go back to comcast. And then when theyve been talking to their 2346sers investors in these talks with, you know, Goldman Sachs and all the other investment banks that have investment in it, they talk about about how, oh, were going to bundle. Were going to use this power to leverage. Thats what were going to do. Thats what they say. And thats their job as a corporation, to make as much money for their investors as possible. So they were mischaracterizing what the market looks like, and this is going to, you know, their service is terrible. Thats i sent out an email asking people to tell me their views on this merger. I got over 100,000 letters and emails, and people talk about how lousy the service is, how they can only go to comcast. And actually mr. Cohen said, he essentially thanked me for pointing out how bad their service is and as theyre trying to work on that. I said, youre welcome. Host senator franken, joining our conversation here on the the communicators is tony romm who covers technology. Guest hi, tony. Hey, senator, thanks for joining us. I want to start with something david cohen said on wednesday, quote i can make you and members on this committee that one absolute commitment which is that there is nothing in this transaction that will cause anyones cable prices to go up. And im curious, senator, do you believe cohens commitment there . Do you think the Consumers Trust comcast when it promises there isnt a way for their cable prices to go through this deal . Guest i dont know how he says that when on one of his first phone calls about this deal he said that prices may go up even faster than they had before, that he cant guarantee that. That seems contradictory to what he said right at the outset on this deal. Sure. When you about bigness, comcast has talked about giving up some of its subscribers to keep up with that under 30 threshold, is that enough here . Giving subscribers up enough to address your concerns about comcasts bigness, so to speak . Guest you know, that 30 threshold was about one sector. So they have, yes, they have a 30 , theyll have a 30 threshold on cable tv. Theyll have a bigger threshold on cable internet. And then plus that, they have 12 or 13 of all programming. The original 30 was about having it in one sector like cable tv. That is very different when you have all of these pieces that youre putting together and that you can leverage. And they have shown that. Theyve shown that they do it. We actually had a dispute not a dispute, we had a discussion about mr. Cohens, i guess, filing to the fcc and doj. He had a footnote t in which he said that there was only one condition that was put on us by the fcc and doj that they even looked at. And that was they were supposed to create a standalone broadband package for people so they they could just get the broadband and wouldnt have to bundle with the cable tv. Today did that, but they didnt tell they did that, but they didnt tell anyone. They basically didnt market it. They were fine for that. So he said that was the only one. And i said, really . Because, actually, you didnt also follow the other condition, one of the other conditions on bloomberg. And the reason i brought up bloomberg, bloomberg is a cable news, a Financial News network, right . And one of the conditions was that you have neighborhooding. And neighborhooding means that you put the cable news stations all next to each other, so you have cnn next to fox next to msnbc so that if youre watching those things, you can switch from one to the other. And they also put cnbc there, and thats a Financial News network. Well, they were supposed to neighborhood bloomberg, okay . Now, comcast because they bought nbc and all of nbcs cable stations, they own cnbc. So they want as many eyeballs on cnbc as possible so they can charge as much for their advertising on cnbc. Thats how the game works, thats how tv works. And if they put bloomberg in the neighborhood, people go, like, huh. Id like to watch bloomberg. Id like to see, id like to sample that. I havent seen bloomberg, i want to see bloombergs Financial News network. And then they might like it. And they dont want people not watching cnbc. So they put bloomberg way, way, way in the nosebleed seats so people couldnt find it. They didnt put it in the neighborhood. And that was leveraging their position which is what they talk about when they talk to their investors. They had, in 2012 they had a conversation with one of the big wall street banks who was complaining youre not we dont think youre leveraging your position enough. And the executive from comcast said, oh, no, no, we are. [laughter] were, you know, our, you know, our percustomer were going up 4 or 5 or 6 a month on, you know, that was for internet. So, and i asked mr. Cohen, arent you going to use this i mean, thats your job for your investors, to get them the biggest return on investment. Arent you going to use this leverage to do things like bundle . And they had told their investors after this deal was announced that were going to tell our call Center People to push bundles, to push it. And this is, again, goes back to that earlier condition that they were fined on where they put standalone broadband, but they didnt tell anyone. So you call into the call center, and mr. Cohen in his answers is very careful. He said, well, weve destructed our call Center People to, when asked about, you know, standalone packages to say that they exist. But that doesnt mean they bring it up. That doesnt mean they dont and they told their investors, they told the wall street banks we are going to push bundling. We are going to upsell, thats the word they used, upsell. So they are, this is going to cost people in my state, in minnesota, is going to cost consumers more money. Weve seen the costs of your basic cable packages from 1995 until 2010 go up at more than double inflation. And usually when the technologies get better and better and better, actually the price goes down. You saw that in computers, you saw that in, you know, big screen, flat tvs. Theyre using, this is consolidation, and consolidation means leverage. And this is, and this leverage on who supplies them, who supplies the settop boxes and who supplies routers. This is very troubling. Host senator franken, how would you propose to increase competition in the cable market . Is. Guest the first thing i would do is not let the largest Cable Tv Company buy the second large Cable Tv Company. Thats where id start. I, my job here on the Judiciary Committee is to, you know, at these hearings is to raise my concerns, and what mr. Cohen you know, mr. Cohen seems like a really smart guy, and hes a really great guy, im sure. And he earns [laughter] i can say about him he earns, you know, sort of what he gets. But my job was to ask him tough questions. You see, they have 107 lobby u. S. Es on capitol hill. Lobbyists on capitol hill. Theyre swarming capitol hill, their lobbyists. You know . But ive got 100,000, i had 100,000 people, more than 100,000 people write me their objections. And so the first thing i would do is stop this deal. I would not let this go through if i were its not up to me. Its up to the fcc and the doj. Host tony fromm. Senator, i would like to change gears slightly and talk about another major issue here in washington, and thats surveillance. Youve been one of many folks on capitol hill who have called for more transparency and assorted information the governments collecting and what its doing with it. So im curious if you could sketch out your prospects for reform this year. Where do you see this transparency measure, and what do you think of the efforts on capitol hill to change the way the nsa collects and uses Surveillance Data . Guest well, i have a bipartisan bill, senator dean heller of nevada, republican, as cosponsor, the lead cosponsor of my bill. Which i believe in transparency, and i think the American People should be into it be led to understand how Many Americans information is being stored and how much of it is then being accessed. So, for example, in the Metadata Program which the administration has changed now and they are going to do, theyre going to, essentially, do it where the, if any, Companies Keep the cay da and that youve data and that youve got to get a warrant to do that, and i think thats a very acceptable change, but i think that americans would know, need to know how Many Americans data is actually looked at. Because the metadata, as you know, is just the number called from, the number called to, the time and date of that call and the duration of the call. Its not any content. At the point where now where theyre going to get a fisa order or warrant to look at this stuff, americans want to know just how many, how much of our information is looked at, how Many Americans are caught up in that. I think thats something that americans are entitled to know so they can decide for themselves if this is the right thing to do. I voted against both the 215 and 702 reauthorizations because i felt there wasnt enough transparency. I had cosponsored transparency amendments to each of those. When they didnt pass, i voted against them. In the 702, thats getting, capturing the internet traffic of people, of nonamericans overseas who we are known to have some tie to terrorism. That is very, very important that we do that. I think its absolutely crucial. But the statute says youre not supposed to take americans now, obviously, if a known bomb maker like in the subway bombing case is doing traffic with somebody in colorado and that guy is talking about bombing the new york subway, thats when its good to be able to get his phone data, and thats when its good so the fbi can see hes talking to a guy in philadelphia and that together theyre plotting to bomb the new york subways. This is important its important that we have these in place, we just need transparency. Those two guys, by the way, zazi and the guy in philadelphia, are in prison. I think that zazi was his name. Sure. And thats the surveillance side of things. On the commercial side of things theres been a lot of talk about doing something, talk about transparency, talk about new rules, but its never really turned into guest i have, i have a bill there that actually passed, a version of it passed last congress through the Judiciary Committee. The Location Privacy measure. Exactly. I think you have the right to allow people to take your Location Information and to give them permission to do that and permission to keep it and permission to give it or sell it to a third party. One of, part of this is stalking apps. The first hearing i did on this, one of the first testimony came from the Minnesota Coalition of battered women. And they gave some hairraising testimony. They talked about this woman in st. Louis county, thats in northern minnesota, and she was in an abusive situation. So she went to a Domestic Violence center at a county building. And while she was there, she got a text from her abuse wither saying why are abuser saying why are you in the county building . Are you going to the Domestic Violence center . And that scared her, and they took her to the county courthouse to get a restraining order against the guy. She gets there, on her phone is why are you in the courthouse, are you getting a restraining order against me . Now, thats called, thats stalking. Thats gps stalking. Part of my bill would start to keep records on this. Do to j only doj only has records from 1996 for some reason on the number of gps stalking incidences, and its then 25,000. Now, think of how many more people have smartphones than they had, theres been an explosion of the use of smartphones since then. So this would make the manufacture and marketing of these stalking apps, i mean, theyre marketed as follow your, you know, your girlfriend, see if shes cheating on you. Senator, so just to clarify here, on both the Location Privacy measure that youve introduced and on the broader issue of the Electronic Communications privacy act, you know, reforming that 1986 law that governs digital due process, what do you think are the prospects for movement this year . What do you think happens, you know, as we get closer to the end of the year . Guest well, you know, chairman leahy cares about both these issues, and i know i have republican colleagues that care about these issues as well. My hope is that we will get to these things and that we will, you know, senator leahy, chairman leahy has written a lot of the ecpa laws in the past, and i think and hope well get to this. Host and finally, senator franken, whats the next step with regard to the comcast Time Warner Cable proposed merger with regard to senate Judiciary Committee . Guest i dont know. Id like to see us do more hearings, but well see. Host and have you shared your views with doj and the fcc at this point . Guest yes, we have. Weve been as soon as soon as proposed deal was announced, i wrote to both doj and the fcc to express my concerns, and ive had a running correspondence with them. Host senator al franken, democrat of minnesota and a member of the senate Judiciary Committee. Thanks for join ising us on the communicators, sir. Guest thank you. Host and tony romm of politico, what did you hear from senator franken will specifically about comcast . Guest sure. Its not over is what we heard. Not just because senator franken wants another hearing, but because there are actually ore hearings still to come. The house Judiciary Committee plans to look at this may 8th, and aides to chairman Patrick Leahy have said they might hold another hearing on this partly because comcast filed formal documents with the fcc just hours before the senate Judiciary Committee ultimately held its inquiry. We heard there are plenty of questions on capitol hill. There may not be as many critics on the hill who share some of senator frankens very serious concerns with the deal, but plenty of members who have lots of questions, lots of concerns, well hear that going forward. Host well, you attended yesterdays hearing, whatd you hear from the other senators . Were senator frankens views widely shared . Was there some support for this potential merger . Guest there were definitely questions about consumers and competition. Plenty of folks are concerned that potentially this could mean higher cable rates. Plenty of folks are concerned this could affect broadband just considering the fact that comcast would touch so many millions more homes, but there was also that typical partisan breakdown between democrats and republicans over what the fcc and the Justice Department should do here. Senator hatch simply doesnt think the fcc should take a very strong hand to this deal. There might be support for conditions, but were going to have to hear that later in this debate because its so early, you know . We only just got these documents, well hear more from the hill, but for now plenty of interest on cable and broadband. Host one of the issues that david cohen has discussed is the fact that comcast is under Net Neutrality, the only company that operates under Net Neutrality rules right now because of the nbc merger. Do you foresee some conditions being put on this merger by fcc, by doj . Guest sure. So comcast has said it would apply its Net Neutrality commitment to Time Warner Cable, and that expires, you know, in a few short years. Now, the trouble here is that the fccs open internet rules are in total legal generality. And co jeopardy, and can cohens argument is you dont really need a new, strong condition simply because the fcc will have probably figured out by 2018 how to address the issue of Net Neutrality. That being said, plenty members of Congress Want the fcc to do something on Net Neutrality in the specific case of this transaction, and we heard that from senator leahy yesterday. He said, you know, comcast has to adhere to these rules, well see ultimately what the fcc decides to do. Host senator franken talked about 900plus 100plus lob by bists, do you run into these . Guest there are a lot of lobby bists. An analysis that we did at politico looked at the four committees that regulate comcast, the house and senate Judiciary Committee and the commerce or energy and Commerce Committee, and comcast gave to practically all but a small handful of members on all of these committees. It canvass all of its regulators on capitol hill. And its even just outside of washington. You know, i went back to philadelphia where comcast is based, and you can just look at city could be ills and individual councils and individual proposals in the statehouse that comcast has lobbied on. They gave 50,000 to pennsylvania above tom corbett. David cohen actually helped raise money for corbett whos a vulnerable republican governor. It shelled out huge bucks to defeat a paid sick leave bill in the city of philadelphia. And you can find comcast lobbyists everywhere from california to chicago, all the way, of course, right here to d. C. So theres a lot more more opponents to overcome. Folks like public kwledge and free press have started making noise about this deal, but the question is whether comcast is going to go around that just given the amount it spends and its ability to talk in d. C. Host you also about asked privacy legislation. Where does that stand . Guest i feel like wee talk about that every time were here. Theres plenty of interesting something happens at facebook or google or another major tech company, and sure enough theres a rush and a call to legislate on capitol hill, but it doesnt really produce actual law. It never really gets past the committee stage. Privacy legislation doesnt make it onto the floor. Most folks are watching surveillance reform with all of the blowup after Edward Snowdens leaks, theres interest in doing something. Congress is going to have to return to this issue with some of these authorities expiring next year, but theyre still pretty widespread disagreement over what to do with the future of the governments programs to collect phone call logs and internet day and other communications. Host tony romm, another issue we always talk about is the 96 telecom act and whether its time to rewrite that. Whats the status of that on capitol hill in. Guest the house energy and Commerce Committee and the Communications Subcommittee led by chairman greg walden have been talking about this for some time, theyve been holding hearings, having comment periods, lots of papers and statements and things, but they havent really started writing legislation. And because the process is going to take so long, we have so Many Industries to wade through, its going to be some time until we actually have a rewrite of the com act if we even get there because the politics are so tough. The thing everyone is watching is the future of cable legislation, satellite television, where that goes from here. The house and senate have started talking about this, potential for reform just because of the sunset date in the law. Thatll be the next thing that moves. We talk about that, as you said, ever time. Host so as somebody who covers capitol hill, how do you see the comcast deal playing out . Guest so theres going to be a lot of noise made about this, and with every hearing theres, you know, more headlines, there are more stories, there are more interviews done to draw attention to both the good and the bad of the deal. Ultimately, congress doesnt have a say in this. As senator franken himself acknowledged. Its the fcc and the Justice Department that gets to decide. But congress can apply pressure. One of the things we saw in the comcast nbc u. S. Transaction was they wanted them to not use conditions in a particularly aggressive way. It was conservative argument against heavyhanded government regulation. The interesting parallel here is that while nbc and Time Warner Cable are very different transactions, chairman tom wheeler before he got to the commission wrote a lot about the importance of merger conditions. It came up quite regularly during his appearances on capitol hill before his confirmation. Plenty of republicans asked him whether he felt his previous writings were correct that, you know, the fcc could stimulate big market changes when it comes to big transactions. And so wheelers going to be in the spot here. It hasnt really started yet. Weve only heard murmurs from republicans, but if the ncc looks like fcc looks like it might use pretty serious conditions, you could see a bit of a clash between the agency and capitol hill. Of. Host tony romm with politico, thanks for being on the communicators. Guest thanks for having me. Cspan, created by americas Cable Companies 35 years ago and brought to you as a Public Service by your local cable or satellite provider. Comedian louis black will discuss politics and social issues today at the National Press club. Our live coverage begins at 1 00 eastern on cspan. We should have finished alqaeda in 2001. Our general who was there but more than just the general, i think all of us. Think back. We were attacked on 9 11. 3,000 americans died. More americans than died at pearl harbor. And we had alqaeda, and we had Osama Bin Laden trapped in some mountains called tora bora. We didnt finish em off. And then we let em escape over the other side of the mountain because we said thats pakistani territory. Oh, wait. Think for a moment. Can you imagine during world war ii when we had admirals win the battle of midway which changed the entire war against japan. He sailed across the International Dateline in the pacific and attacked the japanese. Destroyed their fleet. 1942. He went across the International Dateline. Supposing he had turned back and said, well, thats the International Dateline, and japan has said if we dont cross the International Dateline, well take this part of the pacific, you take that, and well live happily ever after. We get to these mountains in the middle of nowhere, and we allow alqaeda to escape . Makes no sense. Our entire country had become more legalistic. We should have gone and finished it right then. This month booktvs Book Club Selection is bing wests the wrong war. Read the book and join in the discussion at booktv. Org. And live sunday, may 4th, look for our next in depth guest, luis j. Rodriguez. His work includes the awardwinning always running and his 2011 release, it calls you back. Find booktv every weekend on cspan2. The president for americans for tax reform,