as 2012 begins, we thought we would take this opportunity on the communicators to look at some of the legislative and regulatory issues the telecommunications industry may face this year and to do so we

have invited three of our regular guest reporters on to talk about some of these issues. paul kirby's a senior editor with telecommunications reports, julieanna is the tech and telecom stultz writer and what we galtham nagesh. and you all for being on the reporters. once again, gautham, second session of the 100 of congress begins in just a couple of weeks. what is the biggest issue that the congress will be facing with regards to telecommunications? >> i think right now the hottest issue is obviously online piracy. that is a new development, but as we have discussed in the past there are two bills in front of the house right now and a bill in front of the senate that would take rather significant steps to increase the government's authority to to enforce online copyright. they also draw a very strong backlash from the technology community and i think that is

the hottest topic right now because the state of the bills is still very much in doubt. >> gruenwald, who is on each side of the piracy bills? >> on one side of the supporters include the contant industry, the movie makers, the record industry publishers, people who make content, movies, music, and all the other side come as gautham mentioned are the tech industry, a lot of the tech companies opposed to the house and senate bills, twitter, facebook, google, lined up against it along with internet engineers, civil libertarians are the folks. >> paul kirby, uzi piracy passing the piracy legislation passing in 2012? >> i think it will. the house will probably get something through. the problem will be in the senate controlled by the democrats. so it's going to be kind of going to be messy as we get down to the crunch time. what is something the senate will do and then when they do

pass something because the walls are different in the senate you can have the minority block legislation would with the conference look like, so i think it is going to be some time and as we get closer for the year even though this is an election eurith you will we get closer and people want to get out of time so it's going to get a little messy. gautham nagesh is there a lot of money being thrown at these piracy bills? >> absolutely. i think that the bill protect i.t. and then in the house it is called the stop online privacy act is the result of many years of lobbying on behalf of as juliana said, hollywood, the content industries, the retail industry, u.s. chamber of commerce has an office dedicated to this legislation. we are talking about probably one of the largest lobbying efforts in the recent years in washington, and the tech industry, even though it's very large, constitutes a larger share of our economy is having to catch up jury quickly and they are far behind in terms of spending right now. >> when using the ads being put up by the companies for and against these bills they are almost apocalyptic about what

could actually happen. what's the purpose of that and could something -- i mean, could our world changed that much if this legislation is passed? >> it depends on who you ask. there are engineers who have strong concerns with the legislation particularly because it would mandate that internet service providers to certain actions to keep americans. that's the only jurisdiction could affect. keep americans from accessing foreign web sites that offer online -- that offer the pirated content or counterfeits and so they have concerns with some of the things that have been put in place to protect security of the internet system could be hampered by this. that's what the critics say. the supporters on the other hand say this is all overblown that some of the measures that they are asking to be taken are being used to block sound and do other things. as it is a he said she said. >> paul kirby, have we heard any

word on the administration on their view of the piracy legislation? >> i don't cover it kind of day today. this is and we did officially. the legislation -- the administration will often weigh in and it gets to the floor and the senate to omb and say this is what we do recommend a veto or not to veto. >> i think that right now there has been some hope among the online community in particular they've asked president obama to veto the bill. they've submitted one of those on line petitions which well, the white house will respond to the required number of signatures. however the white house has been very aggressive in terms of online copyright enforcement. it would be seen more likely at this point at the white house would not veto the legislation. of course that is speculative and they haven't yet given their official position. >> juliana gruenwald? >> we need a bill to get to the floor now. there's been a closure of the votes on the senate bill protect

ip and that will likely pass. that's what supporters say senator leahy, the chairman of the senate judiciary committee and as the author of the senate bill said he believes he hasn't won enough votes to get the bill through. >> what else will the telecommunications industry face this year? >> the other is the spectrum legislation and the whole host to free up more spectrum to meet the nation's demand for and before congress left there was that maybe spectrum legislation was going to get attached to the payroll tax extension and when they only passed the two month extension they did not include the spectrum legislation. when they come back and work on the one-year extension, there is the fault that spectrum legislation could be included in that because spectrum auctions raise money for the treasury, and that would provide an offset for the cost of that bill.

>> paul kirby this has been one of julius genachowski's issues talking about spectrum shortage and looking ahead. >> he calls it the invisible infrastructure and pushes for were called incentive options. but allow the sec to offer spectrum and then some of the proceeds can go to the folks giving the spectrum of come tv broadcasters, perhaps satellite operators. the legislation that juliana talks about has the minute and it is bipartisan people or to support that part of it, and it pays for a lot of these other things in the payroll tax extension of unemployment of benefits which involves medicare. so it can help pay the house republicans for $16 billion is an offset to help pay for these other things so it's caught up in the bigger package. again and has the bipartisan support. there are other of things for public safety building in public safety net for get funding some of those things are some of the

controversy will democrats' house in particular and public safety groups are opposed to some provisions that will require them for instance to give back to the spectrum in exchange for other spectrum of public safety network and the funding level the house republicans passed the bill that would involve the lower funding level than what was passed in the senate in the delta was pushed by senator rockefeller in hutcheson. that's going to end up in any final package. ghanem wasn't in the two month extension was in the one in the house. i think the will stay in there. the conference committee, people on the committee the will talk about this legislation are old and up in and the commerce committee and the communications committee. so they are expected to, you know, push the spectrum. >> do you see any action on the spectrum? >> i do. there's a big push on all sides to see this go through. congressman bolten has thrown

out the idea of how can we drop the public safety provisions if they can't settle some of the issues on that, but that is a big priority for senator rockefeller and i would be surprised if he allowed that to happen. they are his most top priority as far as the spectrum goes. >> i think that juliana is proud. they would see the public safety left behind on this issue because that's been one of the main sticking points going forward. i think that there is fairly widespread consensus on the need first the options. obviously the wireless networks have been a huge issue with the at&t merger, its in front and center the last year. the momentum is there hammering out the details. >> when you see a wide spread, gautham nagesh, is there a bipartisan support for this? >> yes. the broadcasters have been one of the main plant meant when it comes to spectrum auctions.

lovkvist characterized as passive aggressive to me meaning they still raise seeming objections to understand the big as is coming and they have accepted that. >> paul kirby, third issue? >> it will continue to be an issue at the fcc and on the hill is light square, still kind of out there. there is more testing going on. there was testing that was completed in the government report in december that the government fought in the way that testing a general location, gps device is the cause interference and that conclusion is pessimistic but there's more testing that's going to occur in january. the fcc then would have to make a decision in the commerce department to recommend emendations about what continue to be an issue out there. now it is not as broad of the spectrum of the online piracy but it's still an issue kind of

the regulatory issue that the people in called bruseghin about as well. >> and there's a lot of money involved. >> on both sides, the gps industry and light square. >> where are we on the privacy issue? >> i.t. we will continue to see hearings on that to the i would be surprised if we see any marked up of legislation in the house. congresswoman mary bono mack has said she will hold more hearings on that. there isn't a bill out there related to the privacy dealing with data breeches and intrusions into the company networks and private information being taken. that could move forward with that also been kind of -- there has been issues with that in the house, democrats don't like the bill that came out of the subcommittee. mary bono mack's subcommittee and they've tried to work through those issues in the senate they reach the legislation could get attached to a cybersecurity legislation, but that is the one area where we could see some movement on

the privacy. >> yes. right now it's fair to see that we will have hearings and discussions that privacy is more of a recovery than a legislative issue at the moment. the federal trade commission is really enforcing the sort of serving as the defacto privacy standards to the government. we have seen settlements against both google and facebook regarding misrepresentations alleged misrepresentations in the privacy policy. the federal trade commission has put under the comprehensive privacy programs. they're going to be audited every two years and they've really served notice that this is what is going to happen we are going to be watching when you do. we don't need a bill to stiffen we will use the ftc. secure you are not abusing the consumers information or putting it out there in ways they don't expect because that is going to be there. >> gautham nagesh you cover telecommunications for the hill newspaper. or the telecommunications issues on the hill broken-down by party, or the broken down by

industry? >> they are starting to take down a positive tone particularly when you talk about things like regulation. elbe easily the republicans and house especially if a very antiregulatory tone. so that's why they oppose something like that neutrality. that being said, the technical issues are not a priority for most lawmakers that remains the case. so what that means is these issues are really whoever is interested in them and i think that you really see the difference is based on how educated people are about the technology policy and how much they had an edge. >> juliana gruenwald you were shaking your head yes. >> i think that the issues are not partisan, but on some issues like that neutrality obviously they have taken a partisan tone. on the online privacy debate for example, there is bipartisan opposition in the house. the house judiciary committee before the break they were marking other legislation and the opposition to that was on both sides of the all you had

darrell issa and zoey lofgren, democrat and republican, very liberal democrat, to offer amendments to fix the flaws they said were in that bill so that is just one example where there is a bipartisan support. speed a good example, a lot of times it is the details. so in the spectrum for instance the republicans and democrats both agree we need to get more spectrum out there. but how do you do it? for instance the house bill that was passed that involves the spectrum, it would basically say to the fcc you can't limit eligibility. you can't say verizon come at&t can't participate in this because you're so big or you can bid on these particular licenses that is the provision they got so there's also the net a truck with a provision. so the big issues people may support and be bipartisan, but then it's the little details of you will. they are not so little, but those five provisions that can draw people to take one side or

the other to the estimate this is the c-span's communicator program. we are looking ahead to 2012 to some of the legislative and regulatory issues that lawmakers may be facing. we are joined by three of our regular guest reporters paul kirby is a senior editor with telecommunications reports, juliana gruenwald works for the national journal where she covers technical and telecom come and gautham nagesh works for the hill newspaper where he is a technology reporter. okay. who wants to take this and start with this one? reform of the fcc? something that the commissioners are now talking about along with people in congress. who wants to start? go ahead. >> so, the process reform is currently in front of the house energy commerce committee. >> is there a bill? >> there is a bill from the telecom greg walden who is focused on the telecom issues he's a former broadcaster himself. this is i think fair to say a lot of it comes from two things which is the merger of nbc

universal comcast and then dennett neutrality rules. both were prolonged debates within the commission. the ultimate results for the net neutrality rules and the a touch of the conditions to the nbc universal comcast merger raised a lot of -- they raised objections. they felt some of the conditions on the merger went outside of what they should concern themselves with and they were just unhappy with dennett neutrality rules they think it is an over reach. so what this is trying to do e essentially is on the one hand ostensibly bring transparency to what the fcc does. gives them more reporting requirements but more importantly what is going to visit it harder to pass new regulations because they are going to require the cost-benefit analysis of any potential regulation. but cloud of are quite a bit in terms of action going forward. >> i'm going to let my colleagues deal with this.

>> mr. kirby? >> some folks on the other side say why are you treating them different than the other of mr. deficiencies and the congress and the house have looked of legislation basically that will apply to all administrative agencies. it's one of many independent agencies and so some folks feel they are being treated differently. as you said, the commissioners have said that there is a need for reform but again, it's those details of how you do it. the democrats in the house energy and commerce committee say we are not against reform but the way that you're doing this during the markup and during the hearing is in some ways not a great way to go forward. so, they're has been a full plan are expected in december a full committee markup that has been so we are waiting on that going forward and something to get to the senate contained in the senate bill would assume them to be more friendly to the fcc and their authority so what would come out of this divided congress we don't know at this

point. >> we have mentioned connect neutrality so far today. what is the status of matt neutrality, something we've talked about for years on the communicators. >> go ahead. >> the rules have become official as of november 20th. we are awaiting several from the left and the right. isp like verizon filed lawsuits claiming again the overage of the authority shouldn't be allowed to enforce the rules at the same time we have the public interest groups and others who want to see these rules applied to the wireless devices mobile internet which is done currently. so it's still in doubt moving putting together an enforcement regime. the net neutrality is going to take a complete. someone will have to be discriminating against the site and that is going to be how we are going to see whether or not is going to play out, with the court challenges i think are going to be the theme for the early part of the year. estimate will close court challenges have been early on in 2012? >> i'm uncertain about the time

line actually. >> juliana gruenwald, what are you looking forward to in 2012? >> there are miscellaneous issues in congress that we will have more hearings on to the editors internet gambling, congress passed dillinger all in 2006 to try to ban internet gambling here in the united states. critics say that it's unworkable, you know, you can't -- people are still gambling on line. let's regulate and tax it that way consumers who do go on line to play poker and other games have some protection. so there was a buildup was introduced last year by congressman joe barton and congressman barney frank who is retiring from other folks to allow people to place bets on line for online poker only. and there's been a couple of hearings on that. conagra's common mary bono mack, we talked about earlier, her committee will probably have another hearing on that.

don't know if we will see any actual legislation move. but you are starting to see a little bit more support for allowing people to gamble on line including some protection for consumers. so that's one issue that i see at least some discussion on the. the other issue is the whole net sales tax issue and there's been a lot of lobbying on that. and that deals with -- it goes back to the 1992 supreme court decision which the supreme court says the you can't require -- you can't require retailers to collect sales taxes from customers in states where those retailers do not have a physical presence. with the growth of the e commerce online, you know, mean street retailers are saying why are we still required to do this when the of retailers like amazon don't have to? so there is no legislation introduced that would close that loophole. i expect some more in another hearing or two. i don't know if that will move this year. >> paul kirby?

>> the fcc is going to be asked whether verizon wireless should by spectrum from the ford cable companies, and why that spectrum wasn't built out so it's not a matter of the set competition in terms of those companies now not offering those services and verizon would. there are some marketing agreements that would allow the companies to offer each other services to market services and that has gotten concern from the public interest groups. they are looking at that. the doj will get the transaction as well as the sec. the implications for the verizon companies is part of what has been filed and then for a rise in communications will file application. so that's going to get some attention. we don't have the deals of all deals such as t-mobile and at&t but we have a small transaction that will still get focus of people and don't forget we still have the two commissioners that are pending in the senator. senator grassley of iowa has placed a hold on the energy pie

issue he wants the documents to relate to light square and the said we only get documents to the chairman of the authorizing committee, the house and senate commerce committees. cities placed a hold on those two. the three commissioners, commissioner copps commesso they can do their work for three. but we are waiting on the other to to get confirmed and we will see when that happens. >> ase at&t in 2011 is just gone, no more? any further d. phillips and in that in 2012? >> i would say we would have to wait until -- i think if the administration the election results and the republican administration i wouldn't be surprised to see them try again because the democrats in the justice department made it clear they don't have concerns about the merger. it would surprise me to see something else. when they filed the merger we think their needs to be for nationwide carriers.

so that would under the current administration seem to preclude t-mobile and sprint from merging. people looked before and said we want to buy t-mobile they thought even though they had different technologies. i think if you have a new administration you could see at&t go after t-mobile or perhaps sprint and t-mobile but i think you would have to wait for the new administration. >> what's the status of the fcc and the media ownership? is there going to be action? anybody know? >> we don't cover media as much as the strict telecom if he will. >> gautham nagesh comer next issue. >> one thing that we will be tracking insider security. this has become increasingly something that has come to the forefront like these other issues that took a while. we've been talking about cybersecurity for ten or 20 years, but now it's something as a result in the data breaches as a result of some of these

high-profile defense and just the increasing reliance of the society on the internet to run critical sectors of the economy and infrastructure there's an awareness that this is very real. we've also got groups like anonymous which is a vigilante group longline taking aim at the u.s. government institutions and major u.s. economies that are part of the critical infrastructure. so the awareness of the issue is at an all-time high. what type of action that will amount to remains very much in doubt. >> juliana gruenwald? >> on that issue we have seen the house has been a little bit more active in the recent months there been the two bills introduced by the house intelligence chairman and then another one by the chairman of the homeland security subcommittee so the idea that they may have to mention those into one bill if they bring them to the floor. i mean, there are concerns with each bill, so that's -- the will have to be dealt with this year. >> what kind of influence do the

national association of broadcasters, the national cable telecommunications association come all these interest groups have in washington right now? >> well i think the nav the way and a little bit and i think we have seen that with the spectrum the date. at one time and they were very powerful. so i think they may be their influence is waning a little bit in recent years. >> have you seen an increase in facebook and google activity and the legislative process, the regulatory process? >> there are certainly the washington lobbying offices. a few years ago really they were just kind of new to this. kind of like not to many years ago microsoft really wasn't active before the antitrust issues, so yes, they kind of really bolster. if you look at who they have and a lot of people in the staffers depending on the issue they can hire outside folks including the former members of congress.

so i think they really increase their lobbying a lot. and by every with what juliana said about and -- na. you have to be killed because to get over pledge your head. the at&t mobil merger they felt they overplayed their hand. the had a huge amount of money and reasons to get this through. and some felt like when you have the ymca weighing in on a white do they care? well because they had an interest in what happened in at&t. so, i think the groups are still powerful to provide the washington-based groups but they have to be careful. in washington of course you have for the astroturf groups, the seemingly innocuous way in funded by the major trade groups and companies and the reporters see through that and people in congress to but that isn't necessarily the case. the and to be careful how they do it.

>> i would say that actually will i don't disagree that the spectrum may have diminished somewhat and i haven't covered telecom issues as long as my colleagues here but i would say the influence from these groups especially the legacy telecom groups is greater than the public is probably aware because technology issues are really seen through the lens of the telecom policy issues because that is with the technology policy has been for the last century. the internet is only been used widely by the public for about 15 to 20 years. they've been regulating at&t and the phone system for 90 years. some of these relationships go back very far. the ncta, broadcasters, all of the groups involved in the technology policy sort of really the insider's insider group in the beltway, and for people who are, you know, mean st type of consumers are people who just follow the political issues in a more casual manner might think that the influence of google or microsoft or facebook would be much greater than it is based on

the impact on the broad culture, but they are still waiting even though they've rammed that significantly in the last year due to some of these policies they still are way behind the sophistications of the operations that these groups have been around for a long time. spec we have one minute left. very quickly, we talked in 2011 of a lot of our legislative guests about the potential re-ride of the telecommunications. is there an appetite for that? paul kirby? >> there was a guest recently, gordon smith for the national association of archive. the little pieces but to do the big thing you will not have any major like that, ev write in an election year. you will get close to the election. people will want to get out of here and people will get more heated you'll have more legislative days. we will continue to talk about the rest of our lives although you won't see it this year. >> i agree i haven't heard anybody talk about that at all on the agenda this year. >> de you see and potentially

after the election? >> hard to say. it depends who is in charge of congress. i mean republicans when the senate like a lot of people are predicting i don't know if they are going to want to pick that. >> i heard some discussion on the conditions act and things that need to be addressed but that is an aircraft carrier as opposed to something you can turn around very quickly. >> thank you all for being part of our legislative preview for 2012. gautham nagesh with the whole newspaper, juliana gruenwald with of the journal, and paul kirby with telecommunications report.