senate how much it hurt to withdraw the amendment. but despite many shortcomings as a result of compromise the bill before the senate is worthy of this chamber's immediate attention and support. it is time for us to stop voting -- and instead proceed to this bill and get to the business of legislating. after all, that is what the american people republicans and democrats alike expect us to do. congress was the unable to change it during the last decade. now in the second decade of the 21st century we again have the opportunity to make reforms we so desperately need and strengthen our nation. as i said on the senate floor late last week, the majority of us stand together.

if we stay true to our values and our agreements, i believe they can pass legislation to write the next great chapter in america's history of immigration , a chapter succeeding generations will thank us for. >> host: representative anna eshoo is one of the top democrats in congress on telecommunications issues. in fact choose a ranking member of the house subcommittee on communications and knowledge he and she represents palo alto california, google facebook netflix etc..

we will start with the front page of "the wall street journal," ruling blocks iphone sales, the u.s. international trade commission this week said appell violated a samsung patent it could restrict iphone sales in the u.s. unless a president takes action. >> guest: i think the president will take action because this cannot stand, but in my experience over 20 years representing silicon valley lawsuits and the competition that drives so much of what ends up in a courtroom is not something that is new. but this is obviously going to have to be faced and handled by the administration and then the facts have to come out as well. but walking and iphone is something that is very big. this is one of the most popular

products not only in the united states but around the world as well. klesko another issue is on patent trolls and president obama has ordered regulators to root out patent trolls. our patent trolls a problem for your company? >> guest: they are and increasingly so. this reminds me of an issue that i've dealt with many many years ago and that his security litigation that i have introduced legislation on and i would say that when i compared the two security litigation and the lawsuits that surrounded all of that i could put a multiplier on it but this is costing companies a great deal. it interrupts innovation, which is who and what we are and now there is legislation that has been introduced. there is more than one bill in

the congress. i think what we have to do to take a very close look to see you know what is the best prescription for handling this, and it's important to note that you know all companies are not on board with relative to a given solution. but it is a problem. there are more and more that refer to it. it is taking a toll and there is an old saying that my father used to use. it's a racket. so it is going to have to be addressed because it is costly and not just in terms of dollars but in terms of innovation as well. >> host: is their bipartisan support for patent troll legislation? >> guest: i think some the bills that i'm familiar with that i've been introduced in the house or bipartisan bills and that is what it should be. pasco also joining a

conversation of brendan sasso who is technology reporter for the hell newspaper. >> guest: i want to switch gears a little bit and ask about tom taylor the president's nominee to chair the federal communications. some people have expressed concern about his lobbying background. he is the head of the cable lobbying group in the cell phone lobbying group. i'm wondering what you think of the nomination and whether you think you will be a fair chairman? >> guest: he has the president's choice. he is the nominee and the believe his nomination will not only be taken up but i believe he will be confirmed. i don't think there are very many that would be free of the background that you just described unless we brought in a 22-year-old that simply has not had any time or experience here in washington. now that is a commentary on our system and it is a rub to many

people. that is on one side. that is one book in. the other bookend is, and i think this is a very important one, it's experience. you want someone that is experienced with a deep and broad understanding of the industries and the issues that are attached to these industries. now the chairman of the fcc is not there to favor a given industry but to understand what those issues are. so tom wheeler has a great deal of important experience under his belt and a very powerful agency, the federal communications commission, where i would like to see more competition where we deal with special access, where we deal with interoperability, where we make sure that the incentives, the voluntary options for the

first time in the history of our country, this sort of undertaking, that he will be able to shepherd that through in a way that will bring about wonderful choices in competition for the consumers in our country. >> guest: you mentioned a few issues you think are likely to come up before the fcc. i want to ask you about net neutrality. ricin has sued to overturn the fcc net neutrality rules. if the court sides with verizon strikes down the rule and all are in part what you think the next step would be giving? >> guest: i will introduce legislation that will allow the fcc to keep the internet open, accessible and free. >> guest: i wonder whether your republican colleagues in the house are going to agree with you on that issue though. i'm wondering if either how you would get some sort of legislation or action past or if

that fails whether you think tom wheeler should reclassify broadband in order to enact, reenact the net neutrality? >> guest: that is one of the options but to broaden this out beyond the subcommittee and the committee in congress which of course is important and what the composition is and who would do what, the american people are the ones that understand this and just as i think you saw during the sopa debate, once it was out there with that bill was, it was a prairie fire in this country. and so the internet is not something that the american people want to see carved up amongst large interest. that is not why the internet has been so successful. i think the american people weighing in on this, they could teach congress a lesson or two. >> guest: i'm wondering, this is news from a few weeks ago but

there were rumors that espn might strike a deal to subsidize a data for some people for self on bands that you could stream an espn game on your phone and it would not count against your cat. i know some consumers might think that's good. i get to watch more sports but it runs into the net neutrality rule and i'm wondering whether you think that sort of service would be a good thing for consumers? >> guest: i don't think it is myself. i read the article and i was taken aback by it. but, really when you look at the broad landscape for telecommunications and the internet, i think that the united states of america really needs to concentrate and congress and the fcc really need to concentrate on true competition. competition is one of the

hallmarks of our economy and it seems to me that i bump into those that speak about competition with a great deal of passion until they see competition coming from a thousand miles away and want to squash it like a bug. so we do need competition, far more consumer choice and i think when those two are the pillars that we just can't go wrong. but we have a long ways to go to get there. there was a very interesting article in today's "new york times" about the duopoly that we have in our country in terms of telecommunications companies and the history of that. i think all of that is instructive. at least it's instructive to me so those are the two things i keep my eye on. >> host: representative eshoo does cell phone unlock quality into that competition?

>> guest: i think it does. i think when people buy for and pay for it they should be able to use it however they choose to use it. and so i think it's very important that unlocking legislation which i am an original co-sponsor of, of course deals with something that is outside of the jurisdiction of my committee but the person that is walking down the street doesn't care about committee jurisdiction. they would like to be able to unlock and use and move across all of their applications without the fear of a penalty or even jail time. now this was contained in the digital millennium copyright act of the dmc a which allowed the librarian of congress to weigh in on this and there was an exemption and now it's open but that is going to be taken up by

the judiciary committee and i think this is the perfect time to address this. and i think that bill and i am an original co-sponsor on or i should say of, really closes the loop on this by opening things up. now i know the chairman, chairman goodlatte may have a good deal of regard for it. his bill only goes so far. in other words it's a temporary fix. the bill that i'm a part of makes it permanent and i think it's terrific for consumers and away we go. i say unlock them. >> host: so if you have a message for at&t's or the the verizon's for this to companies in general when it comes to net neutrality, when it comes to cell phone locking what would your message be to at&t and

verizon? >> guest: i enjoy working with everyone and while i may not read the sum of the larger carriers on some issues i will work with them and others. i think it's my responsibility to do that. but i do think that as the incentive option, the voluntary auctions that are upon us now, i do think that the fcc has to steer this in a way that is very small, medium-sized and large companies to be able to compete relative to the spectrum. and the idea that big fish swallow up little fish i don't think it's healthy for our economy. now they all have a business plan. obviously they want to make money but when you look at the markets in the country, 80% is owned in terms of the beachfront

, the most valuable spectrum and spectrum is gold in our country. we have to do much more in order to loosen and free it up. 80% is owned by the top companies. so for someone to suggest or if anyone were to suggest that is acceptable, i don't think so. i just don't so we agree with each other sometimes and other times we don't agree and it keeps life interesting. i think the facts are really rather compelling. >> guest: do you have any concern that if the fcc adopted what you are saying which would be a cap on at&t and verizon in the spectrum auction that might limit the amount of revenues they governor -- government would get? >> guest: that is the hammer that they are using. part of that hammer has some bang in some truth to it and

that is that we do need some of these resources that flow from the auction in order to fund a very important public policy goal and that is the nationwide interoperable public safety network, which i was a great proponent of. that was the only recommendation at the 9/11 commission that the congress had not made good on and we finally did and thank goodness that we did. but, so we are reliant on bringing forward some resources but i think it's the only way we approach this is that this is a cash cow, that the country will be losing out because it's more than producing revenue. i think that we have to look at it through the lens of

multiplicity and what opportunities this affords us. this is probably one of the last large auctions that there will be and it's the first time in the history of our country that we are conducting an auction this way which says to me there is opportunity, large opportunity. so i think that it's important to keep what we were talking about in mind, that there be opportunities for small companies as well. my experience representing silicon valley, i'm sofa. you opened the program by saying i represent google and all of these wonderful companies employing hundreds of thousands of people but i remember when they were born. so it's very important in this spectrum as well that these companies be able to not only creep and crawl but be able to get up on their feet and walk and then run and grow.

that is where opportunity and innovation constantly take place and that is why i think it's so important. >> guest: i want to ask about another issue that's going to come up before your subcommittee in the next few months and that is stella the satellite television reparation bill that congress has to get done. you think the congress should pass a clean rasterization ours is an opportunity to take up issues that deal with regulations and what should this be? >> guest: i prefer clean so that it gets done. you don't want the effort to become a christmas tree with many things dangling off of it. but i do think that if there are some issues that can be proven to be legitimate, to be married with his bill we should have hearings about that and have a good discussion. i am somewhat agnostic as to what those issues would he but i

prefer a clean bill because it doesn't have to be reauthorized. it's something we need to get done. >> host: i'm sorry to interrupt but before we get too far from the spectrum i just want to ask you a bit of discussion over the last couple of weeks over this program whether not the auctions are doable in 2014 with three commissioners sitting on the fcc etc.. we have had a variety of opinions. what is your opinion? what are your thoughts? >> guest: i wouldn't say with certainty that they will take place in 2014 but i think that we are on track. as far as the senate confirming a new commissioner as well as a new head of the commission, they usually combined those. it's my understanunderstan bing and i think it's the correct one is that the republicans have decided to their person is going

to be and so that is bringing this down a bit. but i think we are on schedule and i hope that decision will be taken up by the republicans. they will decide who they want to advance. so that their nominations can be reviewed and they can be confirmed and i think that will be good for the country and good for the business of the country if we get that done. >> guest: mignon clyburn is the acting chairwoman now until the senate takes up tom wheeler. you think she should postpone controversial decisions until the permanent chairman gets in there? >> guest: i describe the school of driving with emergency brake on. as the acting chairwoman she has broken the glass ceiling. a woman, and african-americans. imagine in the 21st century and this is the first time that this has happened.

so, don't think things should be put off. i think that we should continue to conduct as much business as possible and just getting things done. that is my thinking on it. and i think she has the capability to do so as well. >> host: a couple of weeks ago representative waldman the chair of your subcommittee was on this program indeed mention and talked about the cybersecurity supply-chain working group that he appointed you and mike rogers two. what is that, what is its importance? >> guest: i think it has enormous importance and this is an issue that i raised with the chairman, chairman walden as we were going to be exploring many issues and it really dates back to my time as a member of the house intelligence committee where i served for four terms and we have term limits their buts supply chain integrity was

an issue that i dealt with their. i saw it very close up and i think on the intelligence side i understand this very well but also the technology side. and so we want to make sure under our jurisdiction as a committee exactly what supply chain integrity and tales, what is a threat to our supply-chain in our country, that we identify that and that within the jurisdiction of the committee that we come up with policies that will deal with that. we know, i know that on that fateful day that our nation was attacked, that our telecommunication system and all the different attacks within the integrity that it had was the jewel in the crown of our toolbox and so that should not

be interrupted. that can't be interrupted. it can't be sold off and i don't want to see any foreign interest taking that over and getting a toehold on our country because it is all about national security. >> guest: so you are saying no foreign interest to? do you mean specifically china or are you concerned about -- >> guest: i think we need to examine all of it. do i think that there are some specifics already better out there that have been examined that continue to be examined? yes, that is so but this is, and i think the chairman has done a wonderful job in establishing these working groups because you can't have -- they are not conversational but they are very important mark-ups.

but i think this is one of several working groups that have been established bipartisan, very important and i think mike rogers obviously now chairman of the house intelligence committee and also a member of energy and the energy and commerce and myself having chaired both of those background together and now he is the chairman, i think we can get this very important work done. >> guest: softbank a japanese company is trying to buy sprint and they have just got national security clearance for that. you think that is a wrong decision? >> guest: i was part of that clearing but, i am sure or i would hope as there is and any reason for me to second-guess it that the vetting was very deep and broad, as it should be. because again national security of our country is not two words. there are many parts of it and our telecommunications at the structure and what it represents is an essential part of that.

>> host: how would you describe yours and greg walden's working relationship? >> guest: i think it's very healthy. we genuinely like each other. we have i think a real deep respect for each other. he has his job to do, but the way i view it is so many of these issues, almost all of them are really nonpartisan. i want for them to be bipartisan. they should be and i think that our record together or our records together are a very good one. it's a very large bill on spectrum with establishing finally the nationwide interoperable public safety network. it's very very exciting and important for people across the country. and imagine when the first responders went to the twin

towers and the fire department and the new york release department. they could not communicate with one another and so we changed that. now we have had some arguments and debates about unlicensed spectrum which i think is so important. we did get it into the bill but in the aftermath we have had some disagreement. it's in a very respectful manner, which it should the. >> guest: . >> host: another meeting in washington next week. two questions, are you planning on attending the show? >> guest: i am. in fact i'm going to fly back give up the day at home in my district to fly back to be there for it. i haven't been for a while and i think both ranking member -- it's an important industry in our country. their shows are really very exciting too in terms of showing

off the innovation that they are so proud of. >> host: just to follow up on that senator mccain has to reintroduce doris reintroducing his à la carte cable bill. what you think of that? >> guest: well i understand his calling for it. there was a previous member of our committee some years ago that raised it. i can't remember who it is. what i worry about when you really dissect how all this packaging works, à la carte everyone understands because they have been in restaurants and they know what à la carte means, but what i am genuinely concerned about are some of the really smaller niche stations that could be lost in this. i think they are important. they are important in minority immunities in our country and such so while i understand from

a very popular viewpoint that you deconstruct this and people can just you know by one at a time, i mean i am struck by how many stations i have access to and i think sometimes how much you make using this? but there is a reason for that packaging and my concern, my chief concern are these niche stations and how you accommodate that. but i also think there's a frustration on the part of many people. i hear it from my constituents and that is that they don't see competition between cable operators in the region and while the cable industry has made a huge investment, i mean billions of dollars, and i applaud that, you know people see their cable bills go up. so it will be an interesting debate. it didn't really go anywhere

last time. i don't think senator rockefeller who is the chairman of the committee has commented on it this time and i don't think senator may cane is on the committee any longer. so let's see what happens. >> host: we have one minute left. >> guest: another issue is area. i'm wondering if you think that is the thing, internet and tv service. >> guest: i think it's exciting. i think it's very exciting and i think it has the possibility of really revolutionizing tv as we know it. >> guest: one last question briefly. chairman walden the fcc process reform act that she expects a different outcome this time? it didn't get anywhere in the senate last time. is there any room for compromise? >> guest: i think there is room for compromise but we really were not improving very much in the last go-round and

what i mean that is the suggestion that we put on the table just kind of fell off the table. but do you know what? it's a new chapter. i welcome the chairman's saying we want to work with you. these are some of the things that you brought up in the last congress. we are willing to sit down and talk about them. i think that's the way to go so the door is never closed permanently. >> host: brendan sasso this with the hill newspaper. thank you bath -- thank you both. >> guest: my pleasure.

..