>> monday, january 13th, first ladies, influential returns on monday live on c-span. up next on the "the communicators" a conversation with the president and ceo gary shiprano. scombl >> and joining us this week is the president and ceo of the consumer and electronic association. who do you represent? >> we have 2,000 technologies. everyone with power going

through it. >> what issue do you focus on? >> we are focused on innovation. we want to make sure american companies can keep introducing the coolest products in the world. it is global phenomenon but we are the leader. and that requires additional spectrum and a rationale patent policy. and requires free trade. >> we will talk about the issue, but i want to talk about an issue the fcc is hashing out and that is a consumer issue, the unlooking -- unlocking -- of cellphones, do you have an

opinion about that? >> the government has decided once you buy the phone and kerry out the contract it should be unlocked and we have no problem with that. >> how important is the fcc for you all? >> all of the growth in the economy is from products that hook up with telecommunication. and we believe you should have a choice in broadband. it used to be broadcast on cable and satellite, but now there is the internet. and we want people having the choice of all of the technology in different ways. so there is wireless broadband and in the major cities we have run out of spectrum to have the broadband.

so congress passed legislation man dating the spectrum. >> what do you think about the new chair? >> he is head of the association which is a great background. i served on a committee he served on. he led the united states in major world issues and allowed the state department to gather together and help when there is a crises around the world. and he is not looking his next job. every chairman has been young, and there is nothing wrong with a guy with gray hair now and then >> joining the conversation is alexander byers who writes for "politico" and puts out a letter

for them. >> let's start with immigration. things have been stalled in the house for the while. the bill passed in the senate. is it time for the tech industry and democrats to support more of a piece meal approach to passing immigration bills? especially because one of the bills that may have legs in the house is the skills visa act and it is going to look at the number of green card adding that some members might be able to use? >> the tech industry and democrats and republicans are united we should get the best and brightest people in the united states. we should hire them after the university. we have a decision we want this. we are sending jobs and revenue overseas which is a bad thing. the democrats have taken the

position this must be part of the package. steve jobs predicted sadly four years ago saying you are killing the future of the technology industry with that strategy because immigration reform is difficult. we would love to see a stand alone bill. the speaker of the house is holding things up because he is not having the legislation on the floor. until that decision is made we are marking time. we are disappointed. >> you would not be upset if a bill focused on immigration moved through the house, put from your perspective that would

be a fine approach. >> i would be happy getting that legislation through. it is sad we are holding it hostage. we would like to see a house -- vote on the house -- floor. >> do you have any confidence -- 2014 is an election year and as we get closer to november of next year there is going to be less legislation, do you have confidence in the early part of 2014 there is an opportunity for movement? >> i have confidence if boehner brings something to the floor for a vote it can be passed. we need progress in this.

our nation is going down while others are going up. candidate is advertising if you have visa problems come to us. we are seeing our best companies in the united states between our tax policies and visa policy they are being forced invest overseas. >> so it isn't just the immigration issue that hasn't moved swiftly. there hasn't been a ton of things getting done in congress and that is more true when you look at the technology field in general. how do you approach washington while knowing there is not a lot of successful legislation? what is the strategy to get something done whether it is an agency or executive branch or in

congress? >> i think we have been successful. we got the patent legislation through the house. that happened quickly. market place fairness through the senate and hoping it will get through the house. that is important legislation that makes it so the brick and meter retailers are on the tame playing field as those selling on the internet and that is important. there is a lot of support for free trade in congress and that is important. in terms of also, like everyone, we want things not to happen. and i think it is matter of the senate and house having as much problems as the democrats and republicans. so our job is to get them to see there is a national interest. we have supported the no-labels movement. and that is members willing to talk and recognize their job isn't to be idealist. they are to solve the national problem. business people are pragmatist.

i am happy to be in the middle and say let's solve the major problems. i wrote a book this year and went around the world talking about it. other countries have figured out what we are doing. we have to keep your first place status as innovators that favor technology. i am looking for basic education, free trade and the access to the best and brightest. >> let's pivot to paton. there is an appetite for pursuing a particularly similar bill. how important was that to your

members? there has been a lot of sort of back and forth about whether this bill would sort of stop the trolls or if it would weaken the judicial system. what are your thoughts? >> he held the hearing in the bipartisan way. it is important. 80% of the companies are small businesses. we're hearing the ceo and the top level engineering staff is increasingly taking up defending patent litigation or threats of litigati l litigation.

every l every company is getting letters and saying we have to do something. we are getting hit with a troll letter because there is a function on the copy machine we bought. so this is a strong issue i represent our members on. this is equivalent to the card check. >> you mentioned the demand issue. and this was interesting given there were a lot of members of the house that wanted to see the stronger reform provisions in the bill. we will see where the senate goes on that aspect. but one of the concerns people have with that particular part of the patent reform debate is the first amendment concern. to what extent can you say what a person or a company is allowed to say in any letter?

demand letter or not. do you have similar concerns the government shouldn't go too far in saying here is what you can and can't say in a legal document? >> we have laws regulating how we call people up for debts, what we say to each other because of the antitrust laws. but the first amendment protects the government interfering with the public and free speech. i do under the concern, but i don't think this is a first amendment claim. if the lawsuits are throwing it out, that will affect the demand letters. and you have to respond and the process is in the bill that is carried forth, i think it will cut down significantly on the number of demand letters.

or those receiving them will get a quick answer other than getting legal advice on how they should settle. >> when you look at the framework of telecommunication loss do they need to be updated for the world? >> the '96 telecom act doesn't even mention the internet. the world has changed in 20 years on how we get education, information and entertainment. there is an argument there is too much regulation. i believe and i would point to the merger of at&t and t-mobile. where the chairman could cause at&t to spend $4 billion and paying a penalty because he

squashed the merger because there is laws out there that are not concern. we should have legal certainty. this is going beyond the fcc. i think you have a right to know what law you are violating. we have seen with the boeing situation where they were blocked in north carolina. and we have seen it with gibson and now we are seeing regulation that the collapsing the business community because they can't figure out the laws. you see obamacare and the dodd-frank law that is out of control. we should do it with the principle we want to be

competitive and have the best system in the world. and do it without sending thousands of pages of unclear things where you are throwing things out that business don't know if is legal or not. >> should the '96 law be replaced? 1934 communication law is used in some ways. >> we should be asking they broadcasters are getting free spectrum? why do they have a law that says cable company must carry their signal? we have a world where you have broadcast competing with satellite and internet and increasingly citizens are

choosing to get the information from totally other sources. and why do we have laws that favor one medium over the other? competition, fairness and if the government is imposing law they should be minimal and on different media. >> one of the issues that has been discussed is the issue of privacy. the nsa taking data. what has the cea said about privacy? >> it is dear to us because we are americans and it hurts us to know the government is doing things we didn't expect. there are two issues, one is what is the government doing and requiring business to do. and the other is what are businesses doing and what rights

do consumers have. we have to look at what the government is doing is establishing principle. if they are requiring businesses to do something it has to be a little disclosure there and a hearing where the other side can be heard and principles should be established. in terms of businesses, i think businesses have an obligation of putting things so people can under them. i would like us to see them go to standardization because like every other person i am also clicking on "i accept" and i have no idea what i am accepting. the way we do with disclosure of mileage with you buy a new car, the government has a role in that.

i think it is an important role. the government can encourage standardization and uniformity in how we communicate so we can all understand what we are getting and the government has the right to say if the company changes the rules and this could go to unlocking thing and you could get out of the contract. so between disclosure and the ability to change the contract if the company changes the rules. >> you were talking about the government's role in regulating or not regulating on the consumer privacy issues. one question is is this a space where for example, chairman rockefeller has a bill that would force users to opt out of

cross-site tracking. and others say that is too heavy handed. because the law is drafted and voted on and whatever is written in the statute is obsolete. the obama administration has a multi stakeholder thing and the agreements that come out of that are de facto or not law but guidelines and if the company isn't following those they are shunned or looked down upon. what do you think is the best approach for handling consumer privacy? multi stake model or is there a role for the government to weigh in on? >> what keeps me awake is our nation will do something and choke off the future innovation.

i think innovation is our destiny and will keep our country great. we have the most innovative people in the world here. whether the government is protecting the status quote of businesses lobbying or because there is well-meaning people like senator rockefeller is correct we are concerned about privacy. that is good intention. but if you were choking off new developments and technology that way. so i think you should listen to people and you want to accomplish something where we feel comfortable in our privacy and we have choices. if we could reach that goal together rather than having something forced by any side on somebody else that is a good thing. the internet is free. it is a great source of information. but the fact you as a consumer is being exposed to something

through ads and information and people will know about how and market you. >> gary, you talk about innovation. and just kicking off is international ces. what is nat? >> the world's largest innovation event. it is a 150,000 people and 3300 companies compani companies diverging in las vegas for a week where people come and expose ideas and it will make it or break it. some invest lifesavingis. we get 35,000 people from outside of the united states. legislators and government people are coming in. the secretary of commerce and other countries from other governments are there for one

purpose because innovation is going to be a real-life experience where they can see, feel, touch and listen. learning things and being inspired. solutions to real problems we are talking about. safe driving and technology. a special area for driverless cars. disabled people. a whole focus on robots. on 3-d printing. there is a whole wave of technology. 3-d printing is going to be huge. and we will have drones. and in the future it is how do you want it? driverless car dropping it off? 3-d printer to print it? >> you have several corporate leaders speaking as well. >> absolutely. we have the leader of every

company involved in innovation. from the head of verizon and at&t to the head of twitter. the new head president of intel. the head of sony. the head of yahoo!. we have 900 different speakers. >> is this open to the public? >> despite being called the international consumer electronic show it is open only to those that have a business card or reporters. we have to keep the crowds low because las vegas has more hotel rooms but we look to keep it around 150,000 people.

>> there was a lot of talk about patent reform and i would guess there is still talk about it this year because there is still work in terms of legislation. when the bill was being voted, cea said you were going to score this bill as part of your technology legislation scorecard. tell us what that is. >> we have a political action community and when we make decisions about giving money to congress we are looking for members that we are scoring aligned with the world of innovation. positions on immigration, trade and we support members that are philosophically consistent. so we announced we are scoring this legislation. we had a pac meeting and we want to know how members voted on the legislation.

no member of congress gets a perfect score by us. but we do score them that way. and are they speaking about innovation? care about it as a national priority. >> certainly there are similar scorecards from the nra or groups like club for growth. do you have the sense that lawmakers are particularly tied into something like a technology legislation scorecard? are they saying i better be on the right side of the patent bill or i could get in trouble wi if i am on the wrong side of the debt ceiling or budget bill? >> they are trying to do what is best. if only one talks to them they may go one way. this isn't just a patent troll who isn't producing anything and

extorting americans. this is 2,000 technology companies that care about this legislation. that is why we do things we do. we want members of congress to understand when technology conference talks this is important for the future of the industry and the country because the job growth and growth in small businesses relies on innovation. that is what this country is built on. >> how much discussion at ces will be about spectrum? >> we will be talking about spectrum and the auctions. it is an important issue. when we talk about an issue there is action on it last year. patents were talked about in january and members of congress

told us hearing the anguish of people who are being killed by the trolls they were willing to step up. there is legislation that is says the government spectrum should be put out there and usable and there is insensitive on doing it. it was bi-partisan and no opposition so it didn't get a lot of talk. spectrum issues will be around for a long time. >> when tom wheeler is coming out and you get ten minutes with him, what is your message with him? >> i will be the neutral questioner. take the questions from the audience. i will talk about spectrum and

telecom act reform. what he wants the legacy to be. tom is an articulate. what i like about chairman wheeler is he is at a point in his career where he knows the fcc and he has had a long time to think about these issue. >> what technology are you most excited about this year? >> that is a difficult question because there is so many. i think 3-d printing will change the world. it is becoming a consumer product. the things you can do and create people is very exciting.

there is a 100,000 downloadable things. it allows the spirit of youth to be tapped. it is killer products. and the ultra television is fabulous. and driverless cars are going to make life better. and customized learning. and we talk about health care law and all of the issues with it but the issues is in innovation. we have a huge growing area on wireless health. people are monitoring themselves. and that information at the cautionary level with get to physicians. >> gary is president and ceo of

the consumer and electronic association. and alex byers is a writer with "politico." thank you, gentlemen. >> thank you. >> on the next washington journal, the president of the american principles project will talk about social conservative priorities and agenda. followed by a look at federal investment in green technology businesses. and a discussion on al qaeda in iraq and the united states agreement to assist without sending troops in. washington journal is live with your calls and the day's headlines every morning at 7 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> our message was this: