. >> guest: net neutrality has become your internet service provider and all other options, and they are the ones that basically have the chokehold, and the pole position when it

comes to utilization of that spectrum and application of the broadband. >> host: so your bill has been in the congress now for three years, but it hasn't gone anywhere. now that the fcc has acted, would you foresee action in this fall? >> guest: i think the more aggressive the fcc becomes on the issue, the more people are saying, hey, we need to do something to rein them in on this. recently, also, we had a letter that 14 of us signed and sent over to the fcc expressing our concerns about what they were doing via privacy and reclassification. we're also working on an amicus brief that we will file. >> host: congressman, joining our conversation today is john mckinnon of "the wall street journal." >> hey, congressman. you mentioned decisions at the end of the year that congress has to make. one of those is, obviously, on spending. is there something you can do to

address your concerns about net neutrality, is there some way to -- >> guest: there are. and as we do appropriations and work through that process, there are riders that are placed on how money can be used to limit the actions that an agency can take. in times past it has been the will of the house to restrain the use of funds via the fcc for the implementation of the net neutrality order. that's the kind of action that i think that you will see as a way to kind of pull them back into line so that they are, they are not just jumping out and taking this authority that is not there for them to take. certainly, when you look at the reclassification actions that they have taken and the way they've moved forward on privacy, privacy is not the jurisdiction of the fcc. there is a federal government agency that does oversee privacy, and it is called the

federal trade commission. and you are going to see the ftc kind of get into this push and shove and fight with the fcc a little bit about the utilization and the protection of privacy rights of consumers. >> there's also a court challenge, as you're aware, of the net neutrality rules. how do you think that's going to play out, and if the rules are upheld by the courts, do you think that will increase the chances that congress will step in? >> guest: i think that if they are upheld, yes, you do see that. if you look at what the fcc has done in going where they don't have the authority to go and the uniharm type actions that -- unilateral type actions they've taken, then the ruling should come in our favor. and, of course, this is something that is there with the courts, and we have to wait and see what they are going to say in order to take our next action. >> but you think congress, to some degree do, is waiting for the courts to weigh in.

>> guest: there is always going to be a little bit of that even though we have bills that are filed and we have actions that are in process and we continue to take actions, conduct our oversight, produce letters and file letters with the agency so that we have that record of activity then, of course, when you have a definitive delivered by the court, then you can tailor the action in a more appropriate way. >> and talk about what it would take more congress to pass legislation, you know, rewriting the communications act of 1934 which, obviously, has been around for a while. how hard would it be? >> guest: well, i think it would be a laborious process, there is no doubt about that. but as you look at that act, what you have to do also is look, first, pulling back the net neutrality order because

internet services -- which are information services -- should not have been included in that 1934 act which is telecommunications services. and those are very different entities. and that, i think, is the first consideration in a removal of the net neutrality order or passing the internet freedom act which would be a prohibition of the actions of that order are certainly an act that congress could take. now, when you look at those that are producing content that is going to travel over the internet and talking with some of those content producers, they are very up front that there is confusion that is generated by the net neutrality order, there's confusion that is generated by the reclassification and the way

innovators are expected to work with the fcc. so they would appreciate seeing a simplification of how we move forward with this, because they're looking for a format and a platform to push content forward into the marketplace. >> host: well, representative blackburn, john mckinnon mentioned telecom overhaul, and you called that a laborious task, but hasn't the energy and commerce committee been doing quite a bit of work toward an overhaul? >> guest: oh, absolutely. absolutely, we've been doing a lot of spade work. and reforms of the fcc and reforms around the act, yes, indeed. but it's not something that will be a simple two-page bill, you know? be you're not going to get everything done that would be a simple part of that place. you can go back and look at some of the work that was done in, i

guess, 2005 when we were doing some work on some of these actions. this is -- go back even that far and then look at the incremental work that has been done. absolutely, and it is done in a thoughtful manner and with a great amount of diligence. and the members and the staff are very attentive to this. but my point is, it is not something that is simple and easy. it does taking digging into the issues because you have technologies that have advanced, you have delivery systems that are changed. and one of the things that we have learned as you look at a transmission of content is you can't do things that are going to be technology-specific. and you have to begin to look at some of the utilization of the

content that is traveling. so when i say laborious, yes. it takes time and it takes a thoughtful approach and really digging into the issue to be certain that you're not going to take actions that are going to be harmful or counterproductive. >> the essence of those rules is that they subject the companies to what are called common carrier requirements. do you think the whole idea of common carrier is outmoded in some way, or should it be rewritten or reconceived to apply to more modern times? >> guest: this is one of those things where you would want to have a discussion and to say, you know, we need to do this, a, b, c, d. i can't give you a pat answer like that. do we need to look at it and consider the fact that maybe it is one of those things that has

outlived its usefulness might be the right way to say that, certainly. the common carrier provision is something that would be ripe, if you will, for a discussion and a review and say how could this be modernized, be simpler and produce a more effective end product. >> so i think another concern that people have right now is cyber cybersecurity. >> guest: yes. >> this is an area where congress has tried mightily to pass legislation this year. what's holding it up and what's the outlook? >> guest: ing yeah. you know, when you look at the security issues, you're exactly right, and we have the blackburn-welch bill which is the data security bill that we have worked forward to the point that we've got the language right, and we are ready to move that forward. what the exact hold-up is, i

wish i knew. [laughter] because we would like to move it forward. here's kind of the problem that we are facing and what is in front of us. if you go back to 2005, you have the first data breach. that was the choice point data breach. and since that period of time you have the information of tens of millions of americans that has been exposed through data breaches. 2014 was termed the year of the breach. and this is the type occurrence that costs our economy billions of dollars every year, and it also costs our economy billions of jobs. data breaches -- or thousands of jobs. 5,800 jobs is the estimation of

how many jobs it has cost. here's what happened. as individuals become subjected to these breaches and many people have, they've come to realize it's not if you have your data breached, it is when is your data going to be breached. so having a federal standard and exercising some preemption and setting a period of time, a framework of time that companies have to conduct that information and then to inform consumers and set penalties for enforcement, those are appropriate steps that should be taken, and they're the steps that are covered in the data security legislation that we have worked on at energy and commerce committee and are are ready to see that legislation on the floor, have it moved to the floor. this is something that consumers want to see. right now companies can kind of

hide behind, well, you know, we're domiciled here, we think the breach occurred there. there's 47 different state laws and kind of run out a period of time or extend a period of time before consumers are told of the breach and the access on their information. what we would like to do is to have that federal standard so that people do know what has transpired and there are set standards that companies know they have to provide this set of consumer information and this set of consumer protections. and then with the ftc there are this set of enforcements with penalties for set amount. and that is what is embodied in the bill. >> now, you mentioned 2014 being the year of the breach. how's 2015 looking, and what's

the future hold? is this problem going to get better or worse? >> guest: well, at this point the problem is not getting any better. and as you all are aware, we've had significant breaches this year. and they're far too common place, and they're very troubling to consumers whether it is health information that is being breached or financial information that is being breached. now, one of the things that we do know is that there are bad actors that are housed in other places around the world, and maybe these are people that do not wish us well. and it is their full-time job. they sit there trying to hack into our companies. we know that our critical infrastructure is hit thousands of times every single week, and our financial service structure, some of the enterprise systems that are there, some of the

closed systems, some of the open source systems, we know that this is an existing problem, and you need to have those rules of the road, if you will, that are going to lay this out because we don't see a diminishment in the problem. we do see an increase in the problem. and one of the reasons i think that we have to move forward and say, okay, we need to do something on data security is because of the open source nature of the internet. and if you go back and look at how the internet started where you had four different computers in four separate locations with four known operators or administrators for those systems and everything was open source and everyone involved in the loop was a known entity, then you had that assurance built

into that network that you were not going to have an intrusion into that network. and today what we know is because of bad actors, rogue web sites, rogue financial networks that you do not have that kind of security a as to what actors are coming into your network. the isps need to play a role in this in blocking some of these bad actors. certainly, there was an effort some years back with sopa and pipa to have some provisions in there that would have encouraged and allowed the isps to block some of these rogue actors. and we know that as these bad actors seek entrance into our systems whether they're financial or health care or

critical infrastructure that what we have to do is to increase our surveillance and looking for these bad actors and the malware, the spyware and these aberrant algorithms that are embedding themselves in our networks. >> host: well, congressman, my guess is that everybody in congress, house and senate, agrees that something needs to be done, so what is the hold up on passing cybersecurity legislation? >> guest: i don't know exactly what the hold-up is. i guess it is the will of the body. my hope that once we get through the issues with the speaker and resolve the issues that are there, the financial issues, debt ceiling issues, omnibus, that you will see this move forward i. certainly is an issue that is talked about when we have town halls and when consumers come and constituents

come to the town halls, they will talk about the problems that they have experienced from a breach. they also talk about the inconvenience that is foisted on them in protecting their data if they have experienced a breach. another issue that is kind of a related issue but not the same is the issue of privacy. and, certainly, to dig a little deeper on this, the last congress we established a privacy working group at the energy and commerce committee, and congressman welch and i chaired that to look at the privacy issues that surround the virtual marketplace and look at those components that are so necessary for consumers to have the tool box to protect their what i call the virtual you, themselves and their presence online. so they know they are transacting their business and participating in e-commerce,

which is convenient for them, that their data and their information online is being protected, that it is not being pulled and used or it's it's not being used against their will or without their permission. >> now, we've been talking about the problems that the internet is facing these days, but aside from those problems how do you see the future of the internet shaping up, and what gets you excited about the internet and what are the new uses and applications that you see? >> guest: yeah. i, and i think that it is, it is just amazing to me the amount of potential that is there. let's flip to health infomatics, if you will. and as you look for a delivery system for health care going

into areas that are underserved or have difficulty in accessing health care, being able to utilize the telemedicine concept and being able to transmit digital imaging for x-rays and for review of scans. think about the convenience that is for an underserved or remote area that does not have access to a specialist. that allows those trauma centers and primary physician providers, nurse practitioners to be able to work with a specialist miles away and then get that patient to the appropriate place, to the appropriate care. so you can think about that as a violence -- convenience item.

you also think about working with some of our federally-qualified health centers when they are working with individuals and are able to collect and bring in information utilizing an ipad or a tablet and then provide some certainty around that and give directions to the patients utilizing that help software. and, actually, in the 21st century cures bill we embodied the software act which deals with these provisions. and we put the fda in the right lane when it comes to dealing with health care software. this is such an exciting field when you look at the m-health apps. what it will do is to say, okay, fda, if something has a life or death consequence and you're looking at software that is

embedded into a defibrillator or an implant, then that needs to go to the fda for oversight. if it is something that is there for an informational purpose, no, we're going to send it over here to the marketplace, because it requires a learned intermediary. but think about how that engages individuals in the maintenance of their health care and looking at disease management. also as we move forward with precision medicine, medicine, therapies, practices that are directed more specifically to the individual for their health and wellness. and you have the utilization of an ipad or a tablet for that participation and capturing data, capturing information and doing predictive diagnosis for how someone is going to handle

certain protocols or therapies and what will be the next step for them. there is a whole new usage and utilization there that is going to bring about more possibilities for better outcomes. and so when you look at just the internet there with that health informatics, you're looking at greater participation, what is going to happen with a perp's health, you can -- a person's health, you can make certain that people have taken pills and therapies at the appropriate time, eliminate travel time, eliminate some outpatient entrances and exits or hospitalizations. so i think that there is an opportunity for savings and better outcomes that are embodied in that. let's look at the entertainment

side. when you talk about the internet and usage, you're looking at a delivery system model which we basically would call over the top when it comes to technology, because you're not going through a cable or a tv system or a broadcast system. what you're doing is jumping it with the wireless and the utilization of carrying that in where your product delivery is more like a streaming surface. of course, that requires higher speeds and greater bandwidth that is there in your broadband and the broadband utilization. and we want to make certain that that broadband is expanded in those higher speeds -- and those higher speeds are expanded into more communities. but i think the days are fast passing that people are going to view a regularly-scheduled program at a regularly-set time. and what they're going to do is

to access and carry their entertainment with them and then plug it into a dumb screen and pull it down at will and when they want to. i think my two grandsons who love utilizing their ipads and have enjoyed pulling in some of the cartoons and movies, they're going to always have that ability to just carry their entertainment product with them. i find it very interesting that you are beginning to see major motion picture releases look at releasing direct to the consumer as well as to the theaters. that just shows you how quickly the transition is coming with the use of that broadband and the internet with carrying that product directly to the consumer

at the time that they want to receive it. >> host: representative blackburn, we only have two minutes left, but you represent the nashville area. and on an upcoming communicators, we're going to be talking with carrie sherman of the riaa about music accessibility and ownership. how has the last 15 years affected some of your constituents in nashville? >> guest: yeah. with some of the new technologies that are out there and the new delivery systems and the way performance is or is not paid and the way your royalties are paid for songwriters, what you see is some differences in that. performance rights is something that jerry nadler and i are working on right now to make sure that these musicians are paid for terrestrial radio play to get that on the books and then also allow these performers to be able to repatriate

royalties that are due to them around the country. what we have seen too with some of the delivery systems is they pay such a low rate that it is very difficult for songwriters in some venues or through some technologies and for performers in other technologies to be paid a fair wage for the product that they have created. i think also you look at the way the radio business has changed, ask and now you have a lot of -- and now you have a lot of format radio whether it is oldies or country or gospel or contemporary christian or rock and that format radio where those radio stations are actually utilizing that product for that format, they're making a lot of money on it. and those performers are receiving no performance pay at all, no performance right at all. that is something that is unfair

as this business model has evolved. performers no longer show up to the radio station, pay a -- play a show and get paid as they walk out the door. those days are gone. it is all done through digitized music now. >> host: let's finish where we started. we talked about the house leadership changes that are going on right now. what about at the enc committee? would you be interested in being the chairman? >> guest: oh, my goodness gracious. we have a great chairman in fred upton, and he is doing a terrific job. what we need to do is focus on getting some of the energy legislation, telecommunications and the internet legislation done this year, the privacy and data security bills and not look at that. people want us to take action, they're not worried about personalities and leadership positions. >> host: representative marsha blackburn, current vice chair of the e, and c committee. john mckinnon with "the wall

street journal." this is "the communicators." >> c-span, created by america's cable companies 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. >> today education secretary arne duncan talks about results of a two-year study on standardized tests in urban school systems. hosted by the council of great city schools, you can see it live beginning at 9:30 a.m. eastern here on c-span2. >> u.s. chamber of commerce president and ceo thomas donohue talked to reporters at a breakfast hosted by the washington bureau of the christian science monitor. he talked about legislative priorities in the coming years and the chamber's role in the upcoming 2016 election. this is an hour. >> so metropolitan this morning, we're going to have people join us in prre