one more plug. the shirt and streamlined valuations. thank you very much. [inaudible conversations] .. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] a look now at the democracy protesters making their way from union station to the u.s. capitol. some of the demonstrators being arrested and it's supposed to go on for the entire year week here at the capitol.

it's being billed by organizers as the largest active civil disobedience this country protesting money and corruption in u.s. politics. the goal of the group says the team reports claim of the democracy was headed by ralph nader's group public citizen and 90 99rise.org to ensure free and fair elections. let's take a look at the protests now. >> [chanting]

[chanting] [chanting]

[cheering] [chanting]

[chanting] [chanting]

[chanting]

[chanting] [chanting]

[chanting] [chanting]

[chanting] [chanting] [applause] [chanting]

♪ ♪

♪ ♪

[cheering] ♪ [cheering]

♪ [cheering]

♪ [applause]

♪ ♪

♪ [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

>> this coverage coming to us from capitol hill the democracy spring protest. a number of these protesters marched from philadelphia to washington, d.c. starting point was at the liberty bell and it took them ten days to get here. the plan of those gathered i gao staged a sit in at the u.s. capitol through saturday protesting money and corruption in u.s. politics. we are watching some of the sights and sounds coming to us from this side of the capitol. some of the protesters asked to move but it looks like being arrested as well during the civil demonstration of protests. and as we are bringing you this coverage, some of the audio does get a little bit crackly. we are going to continue to watch this but again, apologies for the quality of the audio coming from the capitol and again thicapital andagain this y spring protest.

[inaudible]

[inaudible] the democracy spring protest here at the capitol building reporting many of the protesters marched here from philadelphia and planned the sit in around the capitol through saturday. they just started this morning walking from union station over here to the capital. having some technical problems with our audio but we will continue to watch the scene as demonstrators and police are coming together. some of them it looks like they are being arrested on sight. again the group democracy spring protesting money in politics.

>> [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible]

demonstrators here at the capitol today arrived here from union station. right now the police are asking some of them to move putting some of the armbands and arresting them. this group the democracy spring organizes the team reports claim the democracy they were promised headed by the group public citizen and the 90 99rise.org to push the corruption of big politics and ensure free and fair elections. some of the groups have come together to protest walked from philadelphia apparently 140 miles and arrived here today. you can find more pictures from some of the members here at rt.com. they rallied before marching to

the capital. take a look at that now. [applause] [cheering] >> it is so great to see you guys out here. i'm going to start with this because that's always exciting. over two decades in the positions they realized public opinion has a correlation to public policy. in other words, the also prettier doesn't care what we think. there was one thing that had a direct correlation to the policy and that was the opinion of the special-interest opinion, so

unfortunately, that helps over there has been deeply corrupted. but all of you are here to take the house back. [cheering] but it is into their house, it is our house. whose house? our house. whose house? our house. that's right. [cheering] so we started -- look i started 14 years ago and it is a big mess so what we need in the country is free and fair

election. and i can't imagine the founding fathers not being enormously proud of you because in the constitution from time to time to make it a more perfect union. so they envision exactly this moment and they put it in article number five dot app some point it is likely that congress will get corrupt so they were geniuses and they solve this very movement. there are some that are in the press that are naysayers. they are the establishment. so, when you've got

billion-dollar companies who make billions of dollars for money and politics where does the money and politics go? it goes to the tv ads so do you think that they will raise the dollars and the revenue in the democracy they don't care about that. of course they are not going to be on your side. but here is what they don't understand. we always then. so can we get some tax? of course. but martin luther king had a great thing about this. but it sways the future and it's right here. [applause]

when we fought for civil rights, we one. when we fight to get the democracy back we are going to win. [applause] this is the beginning of the victory. it's going to be a victory march. we've been under siege for a long time by the establishment and it's time for us to put them under siege. the first thing i ever said was they are not coming for us anymore, we are coming for them. and here you are coming for them right now today. [applause] one final thing for you guys

come it seemed absolutely impossible. they were critics back then and they said how in the world are you going to give women the right to vote when they can't vote in the first place. it's impossible. when we tell you it is impossible don't believe them. icu today our wonderful brothers and sisters today you are not discouraged. [cheering] what they don't tell you is it only took seven years to get that impossible amendment and it turned out it was possible so here we are in the streets and it's great to see all of you here it's the beginning. whose house?

>> our house!. lets go laundry victory march. [applause] [cheering] and please welcome to the next speaker to the stage and attorney, professor and activist for social justice fighting for justice for racial and economic the quality, the president of the national organization for women. please join me in welcoming professor o'neill. [applause] [cheering] good morning. on behalf of the national organization for women, i am thrilled to be here to welcome you to say we are working

together to change our future and we know we can do it by working together. [cheering] the purpose and the bylaw says to take action through intersectional grassroots organizing and to read the societal change and to build a feminist future which will include all of us. what do we mean exactly when we say we are going to be giving the intersectional grassroots organizing when we work for gender justice we will not be colorblind. we will question any kind of policy of color. how does that impact the center for women of color wha but is te unemployment rate? we look to the margins at the

center of the work. that is the dedication. that is why we are so adamant about overturning citizens united into getting money out of politics. [applause] and stopping the voters including the amendment to the constitution of the united states for every citizen of the country is guaranteed the right to vote. [applause] i want to tell you very specifically why that is so important for women. when you ask your self what are they specifically doing to wom women. women working lifetime of unequal pay and a large part of

it is a ridiculously low poverty level minimum wage. two thirds of the minimum-wage workers in the united states are women. 70% of the workers in the united states are women. a lot of people don't know this is $2.13 per tipping workers. it's less than $6. why get a job? how are you going to support your family coming in 40% of the families women are the primary breadwinner's.

when you are facing these injustices across the board, economic injustices that are felt by immigrant women and one in that look like me now you look at the voters of the present law and what do you find? the key part is voter id law. they are more likely to change their name so it takes extra time and resources to find not only your birth certificate but then your marriage certificate and your divorce decree to show that you are entitled to vote in this country. it is outrageous and it falls on the people in the human resources to make that trip. we don't accept that and we are going to change it by taking back our country. [applause] [cheering]

so let's look at what happens and let's be clear about how that system got into north carolina and how it gets into ohio and florida. it's because the money is politics. now in theory, a rich guy like david coke committee could use their money to help elect progressive candidates. the reality is they will always use their money to elect conservatives and what they do as soon as possible into office you look at what happened in 2010 and 2011 and 2012 and onto today the conservative legislaturelegislators at the se federal levels are waging a war on women.

that's what happened with a 15-dollar minimum wage. but with money and politics you have politicians that want to block the minimum wage. with the money and politics we have politicians that are trying to block them from access to care. one in three of us will have an abortion by the age of 45. it is a common and necessary aspect of our basic reproductive health care. these conservative politicians are trying to block us from achieving to access birth control. 99% of sexually active women in this country utilize birth control at some time. what does it mean when a woman can't access basic reproductive health care? she can't keep that job she's got. she can't determine, how will

she manage her career were keeping the job she has come how will she decide what kind of family she has and then support her family in dignity and economic security? the less get money out of politics because that is the only way that we can begin to elect a progressive politicians who will put our policies first who will put our needs and interests first. i've overstepped my time and i apologize but i do get excited about this. we are with you and we will take our taxes back. thank you. [applause]

[chanting] [chanting] [chanting] [chanting]

[chanting] [chanting] i'm so excited about the energy in this place. next we have patrick who works at the intersection of the climate justice and getting money out of politics. he's a director of the action network and the cofounder into

democracy. please join me. [applause] [cheering] thank you and welcome. our work isn't translated into action. it was a quote that we came up with several years ago when a group of us -- my brother was speaking there also when we did a 30 day fast to talk about immigration policy. >> is that better? we are used to being really quiet and again i welcome the many different states in the community leaders, people of all

colors to raise awareness and to bring about the trust and big money in politics. to work together for the free and fair election where everyone has an equal voice and people say we recognize the responsibility of the government to seek justice for all people to build a common good. the common good. justice can't be achieved unless the role in the democratic process is just as fair. governing the process is there for all. it's not limited by power of money, social class and unequal access to public media. i know that today i won't be able to join you here today but i will be here next monday for

the leaders and they will be thinking about this today. i often get asked the question why do we participate in the disobedience i get asked the question of why do state leaders even care about this issue and should we in the separation of church and state and i tell people i do this because for me this is how i pray. when they turned the tables over which we do every single time he was committing acts of civil disobedience.

st. francis got naked in the public square to protest the inequality. we need to rewrite our story to intervene a subjectiveness. we need a story that tells us people are not considered illegal because they want a better life and we want a story that tells us that children are not sold into slavery so that we can have cheap cell phones and coffee. our government isn't controlled by a few wealthy people and

people's voting rights are not taken away in racism that's rare in that. money has always played a key role but it should be the subject to democratic values and it is necessary to have a policy safeguard to ensure the wealthiest groups in the public sphere to share the religious teachings that recognize each person exercises the human dignity of each and every person. every person should not only have the right to vote but he or she should have the right to be heard and to contribute his or her ideas for the policies. it was founded on the concept

that come from the marketplace where everyone can contribute. it couldn't be any more clear. for those that claim to be christian just tell them that every single one of them told him that. we first get the result that unlimited money can on the gun safety voting rights and the ability to have open and honest

discussions on these issues and people were called to create the community. it's impossible to create a loving community and a common home when it's fueled by attack ads and interest groups that are unaccountable and unidentifiable. the community cannot be created in the corporate funding for the building of the private systems and workers are denied the right to vote and the community isn't the only ones that are heard. they teach us that the common good should be focused on the needs of those both vulnerable in society and it begins to weigh morwaymore than our own vd views on the democracy.

the recent polls have shown that 80% of the registered voters across all party affiliations of the belief that the political system is corrupt in the three forms. [applause] reforms. [applause] >> pope grant this set we created the idols of the capital in the image in the dictatorship of the economy which is lacking any humane goal and we have a subject of disposal where human beings themselves are considered as consumer goods which can be used so [inaudible] it's to rise and it isn't our goods that we protect the is

there's. for those in need are not ignored. the government will become increasingly beholden to those that can't afford to spend. the less of the allies can be heard and all that it takes though is one good person. one person to restore he. one for all of us. money and politics isn't just a political issue it is a moral issue. pope francis called for the cultural revolution. we've been traveling around the world following for that. so what inc. hard about that revolution and let's begin that revolution today. thank you. [applause]

>> i have another amazing speaker please join me in welcoming the cofounder of the dream defenders organization shifting the culture dedicated to building a community of reconciliation and training and organizing in civil disobedience organizing and direct action. [applause] repeat after me. [chanting] we are certainly in unprecedented times for the democratic process of the country we find in every crack

and crevice of the country from every margin that the left is rising and everyone is saying no more to the corporate class. and even as the voices are rising with every note and cranny there are people that say we have no right to be here and that we are wasting our time and we are asking for too much, too fast and we say to those people we are demanding everything that was promised to us. from our rights as human beings but from the documents they hold so dear and so great and we hold these rights to be self-evident

and all men and women and siblings are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights among life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and in order to procure these the government are included among the people to secure their rights from the consent of the governed when any become it is the duty of the people to watch? abolish it. repeat after me because the constitution told us to.

[chanting] power, transformation! we want it! we need it and we've got to have it! right now! )-right-paren! right now! resolution before revenue.

we will continue with the program. [inaudible] we spent a lot of time two years ago and while we were doing all of that i want to read a passa passage. come now the rich have brought into the goals have corroded and will be evidenced against you and will feature fire and the treasures of the last day behold

those that move that which you have kept back crying out against you that have reached the self-indulgence and in this beautiful spirituality for the cultural revolution and in whatever great tradition they practice or don't practice u but stood together as one. [applause] >> the senate gobbles in possession of 3 p.m. eastern today you can watch the senate live on c-span2 the lawmakers continuing with work on legislation setting programs on

policy for the federal aviation administration and then for the judicial nominee in tennessee. the houses bac house is back inn tomorrow after their three week break dealing with the virus and border security. the senate here on c-span to. >> we have 72 of the delegate votes. [cheering]

you served as president of national cable telecommunications association president and ceo of the national cellular telecommunications internet association. association. you've been a venture capitalist now since 2013, chairman of the federal communications commission your first job how is it different from some of your previous positions? scenic the great thing about this job is that it follows the other positions because what i was fortunate enough to be able to do in the industry is because

they were bringing great change to the american economy at the way they live their lives and that is what we were dealing with because we are now in the middle of one of the resolutions at all times to say how do we deal with the kind of changes that are happening all around us as a result of the technology so i think it is a continuation to answer the question specifically. >> but spring brian fung into the conversation today from the "washington post." >> you have said before that you understand how the industry lobbying playbook works because you have been there and at the same time you also said that when you were working for industry in different times and the industries themselves you said here now how are they changed in terms of their

approach to washington was their strategy changed and tactics changed as they've grown and matured? a country and -- was that we were the insurgents and incumbents were not terribly -- about this competition they were facing. but everybody grows up. and today those industries are themselves facing new insurgent challenges. i think that's the change taking

place. >> host: everyone grows up a should sing a whole new crop of businesses and online video growing up. do you foreseea time when those new industries themselves become incumbents and what does that look like when they do? >> guest: my crystal ball is foggy in terms of what things look like. but i think you stated it correctly, that everybody grows up. >> host: let me go back because -- >> guest: steve case has a great new book out, third wave, which he talks about the three stages of the technological development which is first everybody got connected, which was very involved in. in the asking a long and took advantage o of the connection. it is now significant state. the third stage is that you have to build on what has been done

before, the policy issues become even more important at that point in time and it's not just the idea can't get county build a successful business and consumer service. that's kind of the relative everybody is in right now. >> in the ways of you pointed out the cable industry and the cellular industry in a lot of ways have worked to foreclose new entrants in competition. could these new entrants themselves to come barriers to competition? >> guest: so what we want to try and create is a record to environment in which competition -- regulatory environment -- allowed to thrive. i don't think you want to play the hypothetical game, but this is what we're trying to create. >> is there something finally different about online video as compared to what's come before cable and other forms of

communication? >> guest: that's really good question. i don't think the difference is the video. it's still on the screen. they are using digital instead of tape but those are tactical differences. there is more of it. and what you want to make sure happens, is to allow for the distribution of that video, which will then encourage the production of that video. that was one of the concepts behind our open internet order. that there's this virtuous circle here that producing material drives demand for the network, the better the network, get more room there is producing material which drives, and we are existing in that kind of

environment right now. >> host: chairman wheeler, a lot of people who don't support the open internet order have said it's a solution looking for a problem common to the internet has grown up without net neutrality regulations and it's been highly successful. >> guest: the reality is we need to make sure we're in, that networks are open, fast and fa fair. and that the success of the internet is the fact that it was the home for permission was innovation. ppaca to i've got an idea, let me to deliver it, and here is this wonderful broadband pathway. the fact that fit our gatekeepers of their, then, which are those who provide internet connectivity raises the question, okay, how do you maintain that kind of open access to consumers and consumers open access to the web?

and answer is it's okay, we will have the rule that says it's going to be open. and that then drives this kind of virtuous circle that i was talking about. >> host: just to follow up, has the mission of the fcc changed, given everything that's been changing in the industry? >> guest: golly, i've been hanging around the sec as you indicated for like 40 years. i can guarantee you it's changed multiple times over those decades. i hope it continues to evolve. the job of the fcc is to be the advocate for consumers in a vast, a vastly changing environment. >> the open internet order, in particular with regard to the general conducts standard, you have essentially, we've seen a lot of questions bubble up about this program that the company has come up with what the program that the companies come out with.

hasn't the fcc just put itself in a position of having to have a position on every single thing that comes up when it comes to new internet business models? doesn't that create the opportunity for inconsistent rulings and precedents that could allow certain behaviors to get through a loophole? >> guest: that's a good question, but what we've tried to do is just the opposite, is not to be judgmental. we tried, just to become utah has the fcc changed. when i first got involved at the fcc, it was very directional and detailed. you will do this. we will look at your books for this. you will have these kinds of directors. it was a very, very specific in terms of what it did. and in the open internet order, we have a very different kind of approach where, instead of

saying we know best, we have said you want to the couple of concepts. you want an internet where there is no blocking, no throttling, no paid privatization and consumers to litigating. transparency. and then you put a referee on the field, and the referee has the ability to look at circumstances and throw the flag, if necessary. that's an entirely different approach to what the fcc used to be. i think that's the kind of approach that encourages this kind of permission was innovation that i was talking about a minute to go spend some of your republican colleagues have pointed out this approach could lead to uneven enforcement and the sort of kind of ambiguity surrounding regulation that creates this is uncertainty. >> guest: every company in the world would like to have

certainty and a monopoly. and that's the way the telephone business used to be run. markets are inherently uncertain. we have engaging in an activity that allows markets to be markets. yes, that's uncertain. but what we want to make sure happens is that as i said there's a referee, somebody with a striped shirt who could say no, that's not right. but we're going to look on a case-by-case basis, not on some kind of a big broad brush approach. >> with one of these issues you looking at on a case-by-case basis, i wonder commitment with companies such as comcast and at&t on these programs. did those meetings satisfy your questions? or do you still have outstanding questions remaining for these companies?

>> guest: i wasn't actually in, the staff -- >> do you still have outstanding questions? >> guest: i think what we are in the process of doing right now is trying to sort through all that information. and by the way, it wasn't just meeting with companies. that are a lot of consumer representatives and advocates for other positions, including other companies who also wanted to meet with us and share their points of view. the fcc ought to be the crucible where all of these things come together. i was sent to somebody the other day, this concept of the public interest, which is in our statute and is our responsibility, as everybody gets more sophisticated in how they present their arguments, the public interest, is always

with me. if we don't do this come the publicinterest -- i'm trying to say how it would look for a concept with a public interest means the common good? that's why i think we want to create this crucible where everybody is input, and we try and seek out what is the common good tried what i know you don't like hypotheticals, but i am going to propose one anyway. twice the net neutrality regulations put out by the sec been overturned. it in court right now. what happens if your position goes down again? >> guest: you're right, i don't like hypotheticals, but i have all the respect in the world for the court and the judgment that they make. i feel pretty confident in the outcome. if you go back to the last court decision, one of the things they

said was, wait a minute, you are imposing common carrier like requirements. we've taken that issue off the table. we will see how the court decides. >> host: december 2014, front-page article in "the wall street journal" detailing the white house working group i met because of the regulations. i don't think i've ever heard you respond to what you saw, what you read in the article. was it accurate, in your view? was it a separate track from which were doing at the fcc? >> guest: to tell you the truth i don't remember the details of the article. the white house always runs its own process, but we are an independent agency that was running our process. >> the fcc has been looking at the terms and the terrorist associate with the business broadband market. is there enough competition in this space? to cable companies are getting

more into enterprise broadband and data, good to represent additional competition orare they more -- aspect you've asked a really good question response is going to be stay tuned because weare about to put out a proposal on this, but right now it is a premature time to talk about that. >> host: november 2013, it -- just a geeky point of all the states. >> host: you confirm as chairman of the fcc. what was your agenda at the point of did you have an agenda? >> guest: that's a really good question because, because i had been held up in been confirmed in the senate for about six months, and so while we were waiting we've able to say okay, what other kinds of things we would like to do? so yes, we arrived with an agenda. i think you've seen that agenda play out. >> host: what haven't you

gotten to? >> guest: you know, i'd love to see the incentive auction get completed. the process has now started i would love to see us get through the kinds of issues that brian raised. i would love to see us resolve the privacy issue here that cable set-top box issue. but when you look back, i mean, you are a lot of things that have happened since november of 2014. >> when you came into office, you had the things that you wanted to get done. at the time the comcast time warner merger was not an issue. net neutrality had yet to become an issue. it does take you by surprise? were those issues, did they come on your radar at a time when you're trying to get other things done? >> guest: we always knew the net to tell the issue was before

the court and something could happen. obviously i didn't anything about the comcast, anticipation of the comcast deal. one of the things about this job, it makes it real fun is i will guarantee you that every day something happens i wasn't expecting. sometimes they are bigger than others but it's one of the things that makes it interesting. >> host: your colleague a jeep i was on this program i want to put little bit of videotape and get you to respond to what he had to say. spirit it is unfortunate this been come as a look at the numbers, especially the last 14 months that we've seen such partisan rancor unprecedented in scope. we have seen more partyline votes that we had in the previous 43 yrs. that's unfortunate because these issuesare not typically politicized. >> host: i know he said this on the dais with you there.

>> guest: the reality is that there are intelligent, dedicated, strong-willed individuals, five of us, and people have their own opinion. but the way that the system has been set up is, is there a majority that comes together to make a decision? and, you know, the answer is there has to. >> host: you think you should be allowed to meet with two other commissioners in private to have a discussion? >> guest: is a really interesting situation that we have. just to clarify, that three commissioners can't sit down alone for fear they would bypass the process. is it frustrating? yes. might there be some efficiency that could be gained ask possibly. is there a need for urgent

change? it's working. when it comes to all of the procedural issues at the commission, i mean, i'm kind of a traditionalist. that the rules we are living by today are the rules that have been in place for decades. and they've worked. >> what would it be like to be a democratic chairman or commissioner under a republican president? >> guest: i don't know. >> do you anticipate staying on as chairman after the election? >> guest: i think it's too long, too long, too long of a time away to make it decision.

spent the question was posed to a recent hearing into decline to answer then. >> guest: so i am being consistent. >> but we are nearing the election. there is pressure building in the political sphere. >> host: and you mentioned you're a traditionalist. >> would you follow tradition and? >> guest: what did i say at figuring? i said i fully understood what tradition was, but that it was too early to make a firm commitment. >> host: is a because it makes you a lame duck automatically? >> guest: i just think it's early. you know? i mean, we are 10 months away from a new inauguration. we will deal with things as we get closer to that. >> host: mr. chairman, how would you describe congresses interest in the fcc proceedings and the potential for a rewrite

of the telecom act? >> guest: congress is very interested in the work of the fcc. i'm not the guy that can make the decision about a rewrite. you need to speak to the chairmen of the committees about that. but you know, i can member of my days representing the, that congress was interested then and clearly interested today. >> let's talk about something that is reasonably in your control and something that you don't with early on in your tenure as chairman. should consumers be allowed to use cellular telephones on airplanes? >> guest: so that's a question that gets divided into two parts, brian. the first part is that we have a responsibility for how the networks operate. and the sec had for years, had a

rule in place that said you couldn't use the device on a plane because it would interfere with the terrestrial networks downstairs, on the ground. new technology came along that captured the signal on the plane in which is why you can get wi-fi on the plane today. and, therefore, wasn't interfering on the ground. and so we said okay, if you got that new technology on the plane and it's not everything, that's fine. that doesn't have anything to do with whether you can make a phone call. i've been pretty outspoken i do want to be a 35,000 feet and listen to some person next to me yakking away on the phone. but that's not our rules. that's ruled that get made by the fa a. so we handled the technical side of things and the faa is preparing a proceeding to do with the consumer side. >> you face a lot of public

backlash in response to the issue when it came up. did that take you by surprise, and what did you learn from that experience? >> guest: so i think that was an issue of we failed, i failed, at the outset to define what was going on, as i just did. adheres our scope of responsibility and his others scopes of responsibility. did i learn from it? sure. i hope i learn from everything everyday. >> for consumers, that early experience may have changed how they did you early on,and as your tenure move forward, a lot of people were surprised by some a decision she made make especially around the net neutrality that the suspects of negatively. if you like people underestimated you? >> guest: look, the job i've got, which is a great job, is to look at a set of challenges and

figure out what the vast path forward is representing the american consumer. they can make up their own minds about what, and they did. you know, i hear. i don't know the answer. >> host: you mentioned that over all you look at your job as to increase or promote competition in the telecommunications field test the competition, competition, competition. >> host: there you go. where does the privacy issue get into debt and what are your early thoughts? >> guest: so, you know, for as long as any of us can remember, we all had an expectation of privacy on the phone that works. the fact that i was calling air france was not information that

the phone company should be able to turn around and sell to hotels in paris or two or agencies with things like this. it was private information of the consumer -- tour or agencies. the question is when you go to the internet, and you're going to the air france website, why should that be different? and so what we've been saying is we put up a proposed rule that says that it's the consumers information, and the consumer has the right to make the decision as to whether he or she wants that information to be packaged and sold by the network. that are many cases that folks will want that, terrific, that's their decision. because it's their information. >> host: so let's take another

step up talk about set-top boxes and privacy. some have called this the google bill, or the google legislation or regulation because then google can sell ads around what you are watching. >> guest: no. the rules say that you have to maintain the content and you can't substitute commercials. you can't put windows around it. and one of the nice things about the process that we go through is that we specifically proposed some language, and if that language isn't good enough, tell us how to fix it. because wedon't want google doing that. we respect privacy. we respect the assets that are called by programmers and the cable company. we are just trying to follow the statutory mandate that congress gave us.

maybe you should think about this, thou shall mandate, saying that consumers should have choices in terms of navigation devices that they use on the cable or satellite system. this situation exists today is that 99% of cable consumers don't have that choice. >> host: and that's one of the final pillars action of the telecom act of 96, isn't it, the set-top boxes? >> guest: it was a key component. you want to have navigation device competition was the -- >> on that point, on a recent appearance before congress, you said that to our competitive navigation devices available, and opponents to your set-top box plan ran with it is that you are contradicting yourself in the you have the response? >> guest: their own. you can go to best buy and look

at the choices. i went to best buy a couple of weeks ago and bought an amazon fire. i was out at the consumer electronics show and saw how they were devices there that you could buy and substitute for the box if the cable operator would give the box the data it needs to operate speed let me sneak in one more guess that i saw you guys passing notes back and forth. >> i tried to stop him, mr. chairman. before you at the fcc, you were in venture capital. put on your venture capital hat for a minute. we are seeing capital drying up for startups right now. it's getting harder and harder to raise money. what needs to happen next in this space? >> guest: i think there are two things going on. what is that there was about, i just saw this statistic the

other day, about a 35% increase in venture capital going into internet-based startups in the last year. and i think that a lot of that is the result of the fact that the our open network. you don't have to do mother may i, can they get on your network and delivered my new idea? the second thing is, it is becoming, fortunately it is become less expensive to start a business today. that in my time in my roughly 10 years as a venture capitalist i saw the amount of money that was needed for startups decline because of the advent of the cloud and the fact that startups now don't have to go out and buy all this hard work, by all the software. they can just go to the cloud and gated for a lot less money. and so the nature of venture capital has changed. where the investments up front are not as big and that's good for entrepreneurs aspect this is the stance of "the communicators." tom wheeler as of two of the federal communications

commission. brian fung covers technology issues for the "washington pos post." >> 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. >> tonight on c-span a conversation about allowing women in combat. >> as a recruiter and as battalion officer, you know that these standards and usage were not a good shot into last year. what stopped you from being a good shot? >> i was convinced that it wasn't a good shot. and when i told us of us could hold my recruit to a higher standard of ice that had to start with me. so i forced my so to go to the

electronic pistol range or a bath before going to qualify as i could become more confident with my weapon come into work. for the first time i shot expert. so it can be done. >> twenty years of service and it took you that long? the basic school, you know, we all qualified right then and there and there's nobody telling you at the time you couldn't shoot. >> clearly you're not only with language expectancy. expectancy. if it was a case that when the, you can roll your eyes, but the point is that if women are told through language welcome women can't shoot. you guys -- >> i never saw that through my entire four years speaking another been told up at the point is easily get addicted to shooting results at parris island is clear that wasn't the case. when we change that dynamic we saw the results. >> you can watch the entire discussion on women in combat tonight on c-span at 8 p.m. eastern.

>> madam president, we'd probably give 72 -- we proudly give 72 of our delegate votes to the next president of the united states. [cheers and applause] >> live now to the senate floor and c-span2. senators today continue work on legislation setting programs and policy for the federal aviation administration. at 5 p.m. this senate vote on the confirmation for a judicial nominee in tennessee.

the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. savior of all, make us patient and kind. help us to not do to others what we wouldn't want done to us. lord, fill the hearts of our senators with your overflowing love. enable them to love their