don't know much about our programming therefore we have to have those licenses. we have to come to an agreement with them. that gives them an uneven field on which we have to play immediately. we don't have a choice. we have to sit down. we can't say no. >> second of all, we've already seen how they've behaved in a "free, open system markt place." they collude. that will immediately go to the conduct, we believe, that they've already proven they will go to. they will conduct themselves in an anti-competitive way. that's what we're faced with. a gun to our head and no market power. >> ms. griffin wharks's the consumer interest here. how do con acceptability decrees help consumers. >> thank you, senator. consumers benefit when they have choices for different services, that give them different tinesypes of offerings and

different consent points. so here, in creating that market, it's allowing new perspectives to enter into the market pay areas and launch consumers and give consumers a new choice. >> i have a general question for anyone if you'd like to speak on it. i'm trying to get a sense of each of your view what fair market value means for your perspective. and i'm happy to have anyone. but i'm really just trying to understand how the consent decree stands in the way of achieving it as well. but, to anyone, we can start down here with ms. matthews. in an instance where they do not agree, either party can simply walk away: when they do agree, presummablely, they would reach a free-market rate.

schszs don't feel they have the ability to walk away, either. >> as a small business person, i

think a free market is a place where i can decide what's most appropriate for my business. and, in this context, i don't feel like i can do that. we have collections that are sanctioned in their activity. their very existence doesn't allow a free market to really operate. you have to come outside of this theoretical free market to bargain in the way that they do. there has to be a construct to govern that sort of activity. when you're talking about a seller the size and magnitude of large publishers, you don't have a free marktsd. >> mr. miller.

>> free market is something that the song writers can only dream of. we've never had that. it's got us to the day where it's quickly becoming unsustainable. the naught of sitting down with a life-changing profession, we are the ultimate player that can't say no. we are handcuffed at the bottom of the ocean. we're just looking for some relief. >> ms. griffin? >> i would agree with ms. matthews that a free market is one where either side can walk away without going out of business entirely. mr. miller mentioned how song writers feel that way and that the p.r.o.s dom nate the business so much that you do

have to go through them. that's what makes them so dangerous from a competitive perspective. >> thank you. >> how do they come peet. answer my question. don't licensees really end up needing a license from all the plos? >> the current business practice is most licensees obtain a license agreement from the three largest bureaus, csap b.m.i. and ascap. they are always free, however, to license around. meaning they can program around those assets, purposely because they have complete, creative control observe their programming.

pub libbers are directly competing with pros. international, foreign societies, are competing with pros. and i wown't be surprised if technology companies start competing with pros. >> your view on that same comment? on how the competitive marketplace looks to broadcast? >> first of all, i'm a member of ascap, have been for over 20 years. i'm a very important member of ascap. i still have publishing skbress, as well, in the musical works. these are friends of mine. so i'm not trying to say anything about their personal blaif i don't recall. but they don't really compete as to a particular work because

they don't allow people to license with both societies. as to the works in their catalog, they deal exclusively. i don't think that that is competition, frankly. >> what risks do we run if doj were to disband? if we got to a free market and relied on any trust statutes. and how does partial withdrawal mitigate or ag ra gait those risks? >> i think the three major publishers would have the power to demand whatever they want for the licenses.

just looking at the dichblgal side, we see that there in the major labels when they license uses not governed by statutory licenses. we've seen them demand equity stakes. they can get vertically integrated. we've seen them get large, lump- lump-sum advances. it doesn't go down to the artist at the end of the day. and then the independent labels say that the majors get royalties that are plr than their share of the market. so much so that some of the independent labels are asking for more statutory licenses, which is a pretty telling example of what the state of competition is there. the danger with partial withdrawals over just disbanding

the consent decrees entirely is that we have seen how the p.r.o.s and ascap act when they think that they can partially withdrawal. hi concern is you can partially withdrawal. it could be given that kind of behavior in the market. >> let me ask a last question, if i might. mr. miller, i really appreciated your testimony. just as reminder of the creative individuals who are, in many ways, at the beginning of this conversation. although ms. griffin also reminds us consumers are also a critical piece. there's a lot of different stages in this. mr. miller, not all song writers want to have some of their performance rights pulled out of pros. why is that? and do you agre or disagree with that perspective?

that does create a lot of hypotheticals. the copyright service has demanded under partial withdrawal. so, from that standpoint, it makes sense. we're in a situation now where millions of spins equals tens of dollars. that's what it comes down to at the end of the day for my house at my family. >> thank you. thank you all for your testimony. >> thank you, mr. koontz.

it's not my honor to -- it's now my honor to recognize my friend who happens to be an actual song writer, senator hash. >> we're happy to have all of you here. i'm pleased with our leaders for holding this hearing. let me just ask this to the panel. last june, we wrote about the consent decrees and being in licensing practices. i would ask unanimous consent that that record be placed in the record at this point.

why would allowing for arbitration disturb the free market? these seem like common sense changes to me. maybe we can start with you over that end. >> we akbree with you. to be clear we're not asking to terminate the consent decree. we're merely asking for the changes that senator hatch described. our request for alternative dispute resolution seems to be a win-win for everyone. we should be able to reach consensus without time consuming, incredible costly

federal litigation that gets repeated, again, in a second rate court proceeding with our competitor b.m.i. with a different judge that leads to inconsistent decisions. bundling also seems to be a win-win for people. services offer require more than one rate not just the rate of public performance. if we could offer to be a one-stop shop for them that seems to be a proficiency benefit for everyone. partial grant of rights? i'm hearing concerns regarding transparency. we believe licensees have the right to know what they're licensing and from whom.

the protections of civil rules of procedure and the civil rules of evidence is what allowed pandora to discover the behavior that the judge ultimately concluded was coordinated and that the benchmarks that was introduced as allegedly competitive benchmarks weren't. without those protections, my concern is that we choose the cheap answer, not the right answer.

our experience has been that arbitration is really not any less expensive or time consuming, frankly. what you give up is the expeer tees of the rate courts. you have protections within the federal court system. these are proven venues.

and have been relied upon by both parties for many years. i don't think that throwing the baby out with this particular bath water would be very good to do. probably under the category, be ware what you wish for. >> all i can say is these issues show how our back is against the wall. we have no say in what guides us as far as the way the rules are written. it seems like certainly when we get into lawsuits and we need all the relief we can get as far as that goes because we get

pounded pretty quick. >> i think for especially considering bundling and arbitration, my concern is ultimately it would increase the experns of the smaller rights holder. or, for arbitration, there were a lot of transparency concerns for me on that side. in order to have a true, free market, we have to know what you're buying in order to figure out how much it should cost and, also, i would note that on the

song writers' side, the future music coligsz they have brought up concerns about transparency. >> i think my time is up, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for this hearing. >> have you ever paid such a fine? >> no, sir. >> how many time social security that fine in your experience, your knowledge, been imposed? >> well, in the context of --

there's hundreds if not thousands going on right now. >> i can't give you an actual number. >> okay. because it was brought up. you brought that up. >> yes, pandora was threatened by music publishers. >> i want to know how real a threat that is.

and i think this is why mr. miller is saying that on the digital area, there is just an imbalance. and i don't want to get into this is about p.r.o.s today it seems very ironic that the per fomplers get nothing and the song writers, there's an imbalance for them. here we've just got the exact reverse.

here, we have the exact reverse. the digital space is nothing, practically nothing. it adds up after billions of plays to a little something. but this ain't no way to live -- earn a living. >> it will be demoed by the end of the week. >> and i would get what? half. >> okay, half. >> would you like to know what that's going to equate on a screen? >> yeah, on a screen, i'd like to know. three plays. can i talk to the whole panel here a e about this issue? and i know it gets into something we rrnt really discussing, which is the right of the performer.

>> what would it sbal where it would sort of equalize and i know that the performers would go, oh, great. how would you equalize this more? >> mr. franken, if i may, you should recall that the largest record label in the world owns the second largest publisher in the world.

at the end of the day if rights holders believed that there was a different drigs of the royalties, royalties. i'd like to point out that

outside the yietsds often times, those two copyrights versus the sound recording and the musical composition are equally valued. so our proposal would be as part of copyright reform, we have platform neutral, technology neutral laws. and we let the free market reside of what should be the value between those two rights. that doesn't make much sense

to me. the equity act would consider rates to other holders such as performers to a fair market rate. inkredsblely inkredsble porpt for a judge to have all the right information about how the money flows. >> okay, thank you.

now, this sounds like a good idea, but who would pay for it? >> i think the answer i can give is pandora would certainly be able to share that burden in creating such a data base. it's vitally important for the transparency that currently lacks in the system. so we'd be more than happy to contribute to its creation. >> the consent decrees are over 670 years old. in light of the significant advancements in the music industry, the use of making any modifications to the decree. >> thank you, senator.

i think we have to be a little bit more mindful of the fact that the nature of the music services and the distribution models may change. there may be modifications that could be undertaken to address those types of issues. but the actual anti-competitive nature of the p.r.os, and the market power that we build in this space doesn't change. and the nature that their rights that they're administering dubt change. it has to be within the construct that allows the market to function. you're going to have a difficult time having an efficient system. >> well, thank you.

>> ms. matthew, again, can you tell me what your experience has been with the rate clerk process? and how does that process impact song writers. these rate court preetings sometimes last years and require an appeals process to the second circuit. we think any form of alternative dispute resolution is better than the process we have now. for every dollar that we spend that goes to outside council, to lawyers, those are dollars coming out of the pockets of the song writers. >> all right. let me go with mr. harrison, again.

we compete most closely with the radio both for listeners and for ad dollars. so if we're going to have a distribution-neutral distribution-neutral structure, the rate would be appropriate.

some song writer groups have expresed concern over the direct licensing deals. under these confident shl arrange ts song writers and components don't even know the details under which they're supposed to be paid. do any of you have any ideas about how to address that particular problem? anybody want to take a crack at that. >> one of the any knowledges that pandora did last year, admittedly, it's geared towards

recording artists to sign on to the service and see how their music was performed. >> if the consent decrees are modified at all they should be modified in a way to create better transparency throughout the system, both for licensees, for song writers for the pros, for that matter.

if anything comes out of this hearing, it should be that. >> thank you mr. chairman i appreciate that courtesy. >> i'd like to thank you and the ranking member for raising this meeting. this is an important topic today. in recent years georgia has played an increasingly important role in our nation's industry. everyone can agree that the music marketplace has really undergone radical changes in the last few decades since the b.m.i. consent decree was made

in 1994. by the way, having singles by brian adams and boysiimen. 234 '79 all d.o.g. consent decrees would contain a sunset provision, as you're well aware. they would terminate the decree within ten years. this is in response that strengthen the penalties for sherman act violations. the policy was perspective, but worth considering in the context that we're looking today.

can i get a quick description from each of you regarding the characteristics of the music licensing market that trumped favoring a ten-year sunset. and for witnesses who favor the elimination or amendmented of the consent decrees. do you belief it applies here? the hypotheticals are not a hypothetical. this woept happen if we don't make our changes.

it is the greatest fear for the song writer that we are running out of time. >> thank you. >> senator, i think the key issue, what makes this exceptional and suggests that sunset isn't appropriate, is most of the time when sun set decree is entered, the behavior that gave rise to the consent decree goes away. at the end of the day, they are horizontal agencies and seek a price for what otherwise would be come peeting cat logs chl. unless that behavior changes, et doesn't seem to be appropriate for there to be abusive market power and supercompetitive rates. thank you.

i think where the market is more free in this particular area, it becomes more competitive. within a con struck that it could be regular lay. that makes them very unique. it makes them necessary if you're going to continue in the world and have ascap global rights and all of these others plus the large publishers that

represent, if they can operate, and, as a collective the way they do, there has to be a con strukt. or they will engage in that competitive activity. in a perfect world the consent decrees can go away. so we would hope that we could find ways to modify it to give us some relief. it's just curable to what we do now. i don't know what any of that means, but i do know this. the only days i circle the calendar for are the four days your b.m.i. check is coming. do whatever you have to do to keep that.

>> senator, i agree that the consent decrees have been in place for an unusually long time. i don't think anybody at this table would be happier in we made the con sent decrees unnecessary. we have this federal court case where the publishers coordinated with each other but we should, obvious, always be reevaluating as we go forward. >> thank you, all. thank you, mr. chairman. >> i think i'd like to start with mr. dowdle in this round.

they don't have total control. let me just ask you that question, can a broadcaster remove a specific license southerlies catalog from itsds service? is that possible? >> they are relatically possible, not practically possible. and here's why.

we have various types of programming tlout our air waves. we are able to do that exactly. but for a very large -- if you identify the music, you can figure out who owns the copy right. a lot of the stuff that comes in fween we don't have that editorial control. we couldn't do it if we tried. therefore, we're at the mercy, literally, of these pros. everybody this's going to come to us and say if you don't license from me, i'm coming after you. we have no way to avoid it.

>> it wouldn't change in the sense that the producers or the syndicating programming, they don't identify whose music they're using. i don't know if it's within the realm of possibility that we'll have every single producer to provide music to us in our programming, identify music. if we were king, it would be a different place. >> ms. griffin i believe much of the pressure on the department of justice to make changes to the consent decrees may well stem from the threat of

full withdraw from the publishers which would seriously threaten the current blanket license scheme that we have in place today. we do have statutory licenses for certain uses and copyright law. if we can come up with a statutory license that also protects competition and provides transparency helps artists get paid drektly, we would support that. but, at the time we don't have that for these kinds of uses.

>> can you tell us whether it makes sense to have this quasi regulatory system administered by a handful of d.o.j. regulators and a handful of judges? in terms of the consent decrees where they are now i would say having expertise in how markets are working which is very important here, and, for the federal judges, they are impartial. they understand the law. they are able to obtain all of the facts. it's not that we can't consider new ones. >> thank you. my time is expired.

senator? >> thank you. ms. griffin, one of the things that we know is that regardless of the con sent decree review you're talking about some other things i think you said there would be a problem from a con sumter standpoint. but the little guys it would be nearism possible for them because of the expense. and, also, i would say that the

transparency play is an issue here. it's difficult to bring in an anti-trust lawsuit against somebody if you don't know that they are coordinating. >> very good. mr. don? you want to weigh in on that at all? frankly, i don't know if there's a con strukt. we're not very big, frankly. for us to be left with a private anti-trust enforcement entity is not very appealing. talk abtsd an expense? that's not an expense spread over an industry. it's not even a prakt kal possibility for them. and so i just don't think that's a really workable solution? >> i just wondered. i wanted to get people's views. that has been thrown out. >> of course. thank you, senator.

>> and do you see any changes to the consent decrees that you think would work with the concerns that have been raised here? >> i mentioned transparency. i think that's huge. it's been mentioned by everyone and agreed upon by everyone. transparency in the process has been, historically, a real problem. i know that. i used to license all of the music used in intel commercials. finding the song writer and the record label was a real problem. >> mr. pinkus, you want to weigh in on this.

the problem is that it's afached by the courts to the digital licensing problem. digital licenseing is much easier done on a drekt basis, then, for example, television licensing. that's a very good argument for why partial withdrawal ought to be allowed to occur. >> mr. miller? >> well that's one of the million technical questions that's probably beyond my pay grade. i will say, as far as things such as transparency that i

think could be relevant to part of your question if i have a hit song, a million plays on the radio is kind of a threshold. they send us a plaque at a million plays. if i had one of those every now and then, you know what i'm raising a family and we're doing okay. now we get into situations where we see 50 million and a hundred million spins? we can't even comprehend. and i understand it's a different medium and we can talk about the internet and technology. we get transparency on that.

how is that fair? where is the middle ground? i mean, under those numbers if you move that ledger around just a little bit, doing what i do is a very profitable business. apparently, music is more popular than it's ever been. and everyone will tell you that. >> senator i think it's important, and, as mr. miller talks about a million spins on terrestrial radio and noted that it's a different technology, you know, internet delivery is a win delivery mechanism. it's not a one-to-many-like broadcast. if you wanted to do a real apples to apples comparison, if you were to take a million spins on pandora to reach a million people on z-100 you'd only have to play that song 16 times. if you wanted to reach that same million-person audience in los angeles, kissfm, the largest radio station in los angeles

you'd only need to play that song 21 times. pandora means spins on a traditional radio broadcast. >> all right. thank you. >> thank you. i have a question. in your testimony you talked about, i think, both the value of the consent decree and the harm that would be caused if composers and publishers would withdraw some of their rights without withdrawing all of their rights. you didn't address, i don't believe, the two changes that have been proposed to the content decree of bundling additional rights. could you give us your view. >> thank you.

i did address arbitration. it's a second choice, even if very poor choice. you don't know anything about the industry. what you do know that these courts have deep experience and a lot of history with these consent decrees. they understand the underlying dynamic. in the federal courts you have a lot of tools available. having both sides able to engage in that process freely and openly so the full play of information off the tribunal. you don't necessarily have that. i think the substituting arke inging

arbitration is not a good solution. as to other licenses, from my standpoint music companies and there's maybe something to look at in allowing these pros to administer additional rights. they're competitors are doing that. global rights is able to. they're going to compete going forward we should take a look at that. >> let me ask, if you had your choice, would you abolish the consent decree or just make reforms to it? >> i'm sorry if i had my choice would i -- >> would you eliminate it or just reform? >> in a perfect world i would

eliminate it. we don't live in that perfect world. our immediate concern is keeping high value writers and publishers in the system. if the system goes away everybody loses. licensees lose because they will not have access to millions of copyrights to clear at once. consumer lose because one the money stops flowing, or once the songs stop flowing, the money will stop flowing. we're mostly concerned about song writers because they are not going to be capable of licensing 700,000 establish mments in the united states and millions of establishments outside the united states which mean they will not get paid arnd their works will be infringed. >> why would eliminating the consent decrees be preferable in a perfect world?

>> we belief the free market works. without regulation we think you get to the right result. as copyright owners we believe this principal that you should control your assets whether it's a real property asset or an intellectual property asset. you should have control as that owner. it takes that control away. >> thank you. >> you made an interesting point about the one to one relationship of streamers versus broadcast. in your opinion today, i think mr. miller's concern about being injustly compensated when you normalize in that way do you feel like the streamers are justly compensating? >> pandora is the highest form of radio, we play more in

royalties. i think the best performing song by mr. miller on pandora is "country girl" which i believe was recorded by tim mcgraw. pandora would have paid around $7,000 to mr. miller his two co-writers an six publishers listed on that song. candidly pandora would have paid close to $90,000 to mr. mcgraw and his record label. i understand the disparity is a motive to seek to modify the decrees. at the end of the day if pandora is paying 50% of its revenue to the record labels and the solution is to pay 50% to the publishers, i can't make that up on volume. if there's going to be a, if the disparity is going to be solved

it's going to have to be solved by the copyright owners themselves, not on the backs of services like pandora. >> i have a general question for anyone that would like to speak up. mr. harrison was talk about this database to increase transparency and senator hatch mentioned it. in your opinion is that a good idea or a bad idea? we can run down the line. >> as stated earlier we support transparency. >> what would you have a concern with the concept what harrison has proposed or you feel like you're achieving it? i'm trying to get a sense for this net new idea and whether you have a specific concern with it and for what reasons, if you do. >> my specific concern would be practically how one would

require cooperation throughout the entire sector especially with unregulated actors, our competitors. i know that ascap and bmi is fully willing to cooperate. i worry if others don't cooperate, licensees will never have access to the full picture of data that's required. >> do you have anything you'd like to add in terms of your rationale for it? >> we know the database exists. we know the publishers assign unique identifiers. i've downloaded the catalog and sent it to our systems. the transparency piece has to go far enough to allow us to

understand not just the owner of the song but also what sound recordings have been made of that song. >> i think this is one of the issues which mr. harrison and i agree in terms of the open availability of data. my position is the market is taking care of that problem. where the market can take care of that problem is better than regulation taking care of that problem. one area where we disagree is i understand that mr. harrison's comment about not being able to pay 50% to each party but i would also say i'm not sure that i feel as a small business ordinary reason it's my responsibility to subsidize a public company. >> i think it is problematic with everybody involved.

let's start there. let's start at 90%, that's a pretty good place to start. if you can get the other actors in piecemeal that's okay but let's start at 90% and see where it goes. >> they can speak to that much better than me on the technicalities. it's called southern girl not country girl. that's important. words matter. that would be $7000 split six ways. it's the number one song in the united states on tim mcgraw. >> under the issue of a database i agree that moving forward on trying to figure out what that would look like and how to get as much information is possible. there's a lot of details a lot of actors have been talking about including the copyright looked into this issue. i do not think the market is handling that right now.

right now if you look at the biggest licensors you may be able to download a list but there isn't a guarantee that's what they currently control. at some point this was our catalog but we will not promise you that's what's in it on the day you license which brings up huge liability concerns for someone trying to enter the market. >> mr. pincus. >> with respect to my business that's not the case. we're approximating open data as close to a realtime basis as practical. one of the majors has disclosed all the information including shares. >> thank you for testifying. >> thank you. >> i don't have any additional questions. thank you. >> mr. harrison.

we've got two different types of royalties that end up getting paid in some circumstances. i want to establish on the decent decrees and another established under the crb under that copyright royalty board. those established under the latter as i understand them are substantially higher than those established under the former. you've got one set of royalties that go to those who wrote the song and another set of royalties that go to those who recorded the song. why should there be a substantial difference between these two rates? >> well, senator i think as i mentioned earlier i don't believe pandora is in the best position to value the relative con tritributions of the song versus the recording.

i think that's better left to publishers and song writers and artists and labels. having said that, if you go back to the early royalty board proceedings, what you had was executives of companies that owned both record labels and music publishers with the ratest that should be paid to perform a sound recording should be higher than the rate was paid to the music publisher because according to executives the record labels invest significantly more in bringing new music to market. as i said i'm not in a good position to make those relative value judgments. at the end of the day, the copyright owners themselves have made those arguments. >> if the department of justice decides to allow partial withdrawal, it will likely impose other requirements on the pros, including increased

transparency, changes to board membership, some of these things mentioned earlier in the hearing. will additional safeguards be sufficient to ensure a competitive market if publishers can partially withdraw? >> without seeing the details of not just what the suggestions are but the language that's intended to be used, it's hard to judge. ir p >> i hope they wouldn't do that. do you think those things would be sufficient? >> as i said without seeing a full list of what the department would propose and then actually read how what language is used to implement them it's tough to have an informed opinion.

>> when ever we consider the potential increase in prices in one market it's important to consider it's potential affect on related markets. in this case related markets might include not only other music licenses but such as performance rights for sound recordings but also prices at restaurants and bars and at stores that play music. what affect might increased rates have on prices for other music licenses or for goods associated with music? >> i think as we take a look at what's really happening in those very rare instances where actors in the market are negotiating with each other. there's a couple that have been reported in the last couple of years. you have one major label who's

entered into an agreement that where prices have been at play for many of those things. we don't know all of them because they're not transparent with all that information. if the reports that have been received are true there's been an equalizing in those deals of different prices for different rights throughout that deal. i think that's very instructive. the market itself, as mr. harrison has said the market when allowed to operate is able to equalize those rates. there will be an affect. i can't foresee what that will be. it will be an affect if you unpeg one rate, it will be an affect on other rates. it's ironic the provision in the copyright act that's ascap has

complained about was placed in that regime at their request. now they want to unpeg it because they don't like the way it's operating presently. if you do unpeg it, be careful what you wish for. >> good observation. i understand you're a song writer. you had a long career in music before your time in broadcasting. you come with a unique set of perspectives to this panel. do you think the consent decrees are necessary to preserve the benefits of our system or do you think they would be achieved outside of the decrees? >> what i can say is i believe the system has worked. all the parties have taken their turn in various scenarios coming to the tribunals as their set up now and taking advantage of those forums and arguing

whatever issues they had on the decent decrees. playing with taking those systems down or fundamentally changing them, we have to be looking at very carefully and cautiously. it is a system that's been working. i don't know what we would be looking at. it's lard to say whether something that would be replace em ing them would be better or not. i hesitate to change something that's been working. ing them would be better or not. i hesitate to change something that's been working.replacing them would be better or not. i hesitate to change something that's been working. >> it's not just unknown but unknowable but we know what the other it is? >> exactly right. >> thank you. i'm going to keep the record for this hearing open for one week.

that will include keeping it open for written questions. i want to thank all of our witnesses for coming today. this has been a very helpful hearing. your testimony has brought a lot of insight to the table. this important and pretty complex issue. this hearing stands adjourned. thank you.

new congress best access on c-span c-span2 and c-span.org. yesterday the state department said it's reviewing 55,000 pages of hillary clinton's e-mails. after a review will make them available online. >> that is consistent with what we have been discussing

internally. let me just give you a brief update on kind of where we are. we'll release in one batch at the end of the that review to ensure that standards are consistently applied throughout the entire 55,000 pages. we expect the review to take several months. that hasn't changed. i'll have more information about the website, hopefully soon. the only documents from that 55,000 pages that we will review for a separate, earlier release of the approximately 300 e-mails already produced to the select committee. those will be review and released prior to the completion of the entire set. those will be posted and made available. >> even if you haven't filed a request you'll be able to see these? you're going to put them up public public publicly? >> they'll be publicly

available. >> all -- >> we're using standards. >> do you have any idea, i realize it might be hard for 55,000 pages to have an estimate. 300 seems easier. >> it's 900 pages but just the 300 e-mails. it is shorter than 55,000, technically by mathematics. i don't have an estimate on that piece. let me add one more thing. i think brad asked this last week. we'll identify with basis for any redaction. >> did anyone ask for a electronic version of this as well as the paper?

>> i don't believe so. i think this has been handled in a specific way for some time. >> on the next washington journal a conversation about the war powers act and the president's request to use military force against isis. our against is benjamin wittes. washington journal is live on c-span every day taking your phone calls tweets and facebook comments.

we continue our live coverage of the festival with panels on the obama administration, the future of politics and the issue of concussions in football. saturday morning at 9:00 eastern on american history tv, we're live from longwood university in form farmville, virginia. sunday morning at 9:00, we continue our live coverage with remarks on the surrender of the confederacy and immigration of confederates to brazil. find our complete television schedule at c-span.org and let us know what you think about programs you're watching. call us at 202-626-3400 e-mail us or send us a tweet. join the c-span conversation like us on facebook, follow us on twitter.

the democratic national committee released a report looking at why the party lost seats in the last midterm elections. the report says democrats do not have a single election strategy and should focus more on state and local races. florida congresswoman debby wasserman schultz is the chair of the dnc. she opened the meeting. >> i hearby call the 2015 winter meeting of the democratic national committee back into session from recess. the colors this morning will be presented by the call lawrence dun dunbar senior color guard. please rise for the colors.

>> please join me in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic which it stands, one nation, under god, i divisible with liberty and justice for all. please join me in thanking the color guard from the paul lawrence dunbar senior high school as the colors are retired. at this time, i would like to introduce the reverend dr. derick harkins to deliver

today's invocation. he just accepted a position as vice president of the union seminary in new york city. he's no stranger to the committee. in this capacity he was responsible for all aspects of engaging the faith community. he served as a senior minister in the new hope baptist church of new hope in dallas, texas. join me in welcoming back our own reverend dr. derick harkins. [ applause ] >> wish i would pray away the

snow today but that's beyond my pay grade. eternal god call us to high purpose. not the negative and small mindedness of division. give us eyes that see the vision of a just society for all americans. give us ears that hear the pleas of those who are far too often in the martingins and in the shadows. give us hands that work for what is right and just and fair. give us voices that are never stilled when the call for what is loving and caring should go forth. give us feet that move and are not dissuaded by the challenges of the day. give us finally hearts that beat with a passion for this great

nation that we all love. we ask these things asking for your abiding presence as you go before us as our guide, stand beside us as companion, as our inspiration and always dwell within us, amen. >> well said as always. before i introduce our first speaker today i want to take a moment to recognize all of our -- please take your seats which you're leading the way on doing already. i always have the privilege of introducing my colleagues and fellow officers who really are out in the trenches and cris crossing the country helping us make sure we can send our message to voters all across the united states. this morning is no exception.

i'll do that and apologize on behalf of our vice chair whose flight was rescheduled and have to leave already. we're going to go through the meeting this morning. we still will have the closed session because we want to give everybody an opportunity who's able to remain a chance to interact with the task force and spend some time giving them feedback and asking questions. however, know this is not the last time. if you have to leave, there are many opportunities between now and when the final report is developed and issues you'll have to provide that feedback. our national finance chair henry munos. our amazing secretary, the mayor

of the city of baltimore mayor stephanie rollings. donna brazile who is the vice chair for voter registration and participation. someone who's titles i enjoy listing our vice chair and the chair of the new hampshire democratic party, ray buckley. he's also a leader of leaders. we have a special aeedition this morning. i want to give tremendous mangthanks for his time and dedication. governor steve brashir of the

great state of kentucky has joined us as well. thank you so much. i appreciate that acknowledgement of them and the round of applause you have given them. i know that everyone is excited as i am about last week's announcement that our 2016 democratic national convention will be in the beautiful city of philadelphia. the city of brotherly love and sisterly affection. this says briefly, but since he was filled in addition to donna and other maybe it wasn't so briefly. we heard from him yesterday briefly. i've asked him to take some time today at our meeting to tell us and give a bit of a glimpse of what we have to look forward to with philly 2016 as we move in that direction. since being elected mayor in 2008 he's managed city government through the worst recession since the great depression by maintaining core services and reducing the city

spending. closing a $2.4 billion gap in philadelphia's five-year plan without compromising a single police officer, firefighter, sanitation or health center worker. that's an impressive accomplishment. mayor nutter has been committed to public service since his youth. prior to election michael served for almost 15 years on the philadelphia city council. he's a graduate of the wharton school at the university of pennsylvania and he's a fellow member of the democratic national committee. join me in welcoming the mayor of the city where we will dominate the 45th president of the united states of america, michael nutter, the mayor of philadelphia.

>> good morning. thank you very very much for this wonderful opportunity to address this incredible democratic national committee in this meeting this morning. it's great great honor. i'd like to ask that we join in cheering on and supporting our great chair who will lead us to an incredible victory in 2016. the work she's done to provide financial security for the dnc, focus on issues related to our challenges going forward while and thank the governor for his work and the task force. re-examining challenges from the past that will help us as we move this party forward, as we move our nation forward and for

all of that. she is our great leader. she's tough. she is strong. she is focused and gets the job done. for all of that and so much more we recognize and maybe come to our feet and recognize our great, great chair and the leader that she is. [ applause ] she's told you to sit down. to my friend and colleague in the work of mayors our secretary, stephanie rollins blake who i get to brag on a little bit as well. she's too shy to mention it. in a few months in june, in san francisco, as i am a past president of the u.s. conference of mayor i've had the opportunity to work with mayor

stephanie rollins blake on a variety of levels but within the conference she's a leader as she is here at the dnc. in june in san francisco this year she'll become the first african-american woman president of the u.s. conference of mayors. we could not be more proud and more excited about her leadership as well. some strong women leaders around here. some get nervous about strong women leaders. well you might want to get used to that. [ applause ]

madame chair, i'll leave that at that for the moment. all of our leaders here, i'm pleased to recognize the leadership team of the dnc. [ applause ] lastly, our great great ceo. please. [ applause ] we know as leaders for all the air time that we get we don't do this work ourselves. it really is the folks on staff making things happen whether for the chair and tracy and my good friend patrice and all the folks that work with the chair and the tag group that went all across the united states of america seeing these great cities. we thank you for your work and speaking of those cities, again,

phoenix, birmingham, columbus and new york city please recognize them for their interest and their effort and commitment in participation to this process. [ applause ] on a very personal level, my first convention was in 1992 in new york city. i was then a bill clinton delegate. the time i ran folks said why in the world would you become a delegate for a little known governor and at the time the poorest state in the united states of america who has no chance of winning. i said well that's fine. i'm going to be a clinton delegate. i think we know the rest of that story. i've been a clinton delegate every time there was a clinton on the ballot. we'll see how that goes. we are excited and thrilled.

we're honored, the city of philadelphia, the city of brotherly love and sisterly affection, we're honored to be the host city for 2016. as mentioned the other day, we have been preparing and we've been excited for some time for this opportunity. philadelphia is the largest city in america with an african-american mayor. we will have and the chair has insisted, we will have an economically inclusive convention in the city of philadelphia. every opportunity to include the incredible diversity of our city and our nation. we will look for those opportunities in the economics of what happens in a democratic national convention. you'll also be coming to one of the most diverse cities in the united states of america by race, by age by sexual preference and every other measure, philadelphia truly is

that microcosm of the united states of america. you know our history. located on the eastern seaboard. at the time the second largest city in the british empire. philadelphia was a safe port in a political storm. it's where our nation forefathers gathered and contended what form of new government we should have and how it should work. philadelphia helped to define what we know as democracy in the united states of america. philadelphia hosted the first and second continental congresss, declaration of independence, u.s. constitution. everyone should have life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. isn't that what we're really all about, 200 plus year later as

democrats? the people should be able to enjoy that you are lives. they should have liberty where they are and be able to pursue their happiness. that's what we've been doing for hundreds of years. we need to stay focused in that mission. there's always a lot of monday morning quarterbacking about what happened and what should we do and what didn't we do. some may have lost a little sight of who we've been and where we've been and what we're trying to do today. some may have let fear dictate their actions instead of principle. you know we can't and we won't do that in 2015 or 2016 or in the years going forward. we are the party of the middle class and not just those who are in it today but those who struggle daily working two jobs, putting kids through school, trying to get their own

educational attainment struggling to get into the middle class themselves. in philadelphia we have taken many of those same steps. you heard the president remind us of his comment last year at the state of the union. it was time to give america a raise. i sat and listened to that. i was struck by the president's words as ai listened. i sent a message to my team that it was time for us to give those who work for contractors with the city of philadelphia it was time within my power to give them a race. couple months later signed an executive order immediate lyly i signed eded an order giving them an immediate raise to 10.88 an hour and on january 1st of 2015, automatically raising their wages to $12 an hour with a consumer price index that every

january 1st they will get a raise. it's time to give america a raise. [ applause ] it's sheer coincidence but worth noting that just last week on the same day that bill was introduced in the congress to give paid sick leave across the country, i had the great pleasure of signing a paid sick leave bill in philadelphia at city hall that we strongly supported with our philadelphia city council. we can do these things. this is who we are. it's what we're about. we remember the great recession. some said let auto fail. the president said no. auto has come roaring back. some said we could not get health care. the president said we will. millions of americans have health care all across the united states of america. we put thousands and millions of people to work with an economic recovery program of $800 billion

with not only one republican in the house and three in the senate supported. it was a month into the president's presidency when after we heard about a post-racial environment, aren't we excited, let's support the first black president and a month later no one could stand up for americans but democrats all across the united states of america. that's what we do. [ applause ] we're the party of labor. we're the party of labor. yesterday i saw randy winegarner. welcome all labor who is in the house with us this morning. philadelphia is the city with

the strongest lgbt protection laws in the united states of america. we continue to strive to make sure that everyone understands that who you love and who's in your life is your business and there's been no prouder moment for me when finally the doma law was struck down. as mayor i get to marry couples. now i say when i marry my same-sex couples and now with the authority vested in me, finally, i pronounce you wife and wife, husband and husband, couple and couple or whoever you want to be because everyone should be able to have the same rights and privileges in the united states of america. [ applause ] lastly, we had an incredible history lesson given to us this morning at the black caucus

breakfast. chairman butterfield really needs to tape what he did this morning and every child black, yellow, white, green purple should hear what he said. [ applause ] i'll be nowhere near as eloquent as him. i will repeat the one thing i did say this morning. if you've not seen the movie "selma" you'll want to see it. this is the 50th anniversary of an incredible struggle in america for voting rights civil rights and human rights. the dogs the hoses, the lynchings, the abuse, the oppression. folks walked 54 miles from selma to montgomery. when i say to my folks back home and some you have i can't get

you to walk five minutes out of your house to a polling place to poll the rights that people suffered and died to give you the opportunity to exercise your franchise. no one can stay home on election day. it's a disgrace. it's an insult to the memory of dr. martin luther king jr., the active work today of representative john louis and so many others across the united states of the america because we know when we vote we win as democrats. when we vote we win elections. we need to make sure that everyone is not only registered to vote, that's a great part. if you're registered and don't go to the polls it just doesn't matter. we will give folks something to vote for. we will give folks something to be excited about. we demonstrated what we can do when we're active, energize and

engaged. we get things done. regardless of our status we're going to fight these fights because of the right fights to fight for americans all across the united states of america. i say to you, democratic party has made history time and time and time again. we're expecting history to be made one more time in philadelphia in 2016. it's our full expectation this not only will democratic nominee come out of philadelphia but that nominee will create history by having 12 straight years of democrats in the white house because the road to 1600 pennsylvania avenue comes right through philadelphia, pennsylvania. god bless you democrats. let's go out and win an

election. thank you very, very much. [ applause ] >> thank you so much mayor nutter. thank you major nutter. we are all so excited that philadelphia will host our convention. we look forward to working with you and your host committee and the people of philadelphia for the next 18 months until we reach philadelphia the week of july 25th 2016. as donna so el kwentsoquently reminded us tomorrow marks the 50th anniversary of the selma to montgomery march. it's something we recognize and hope to honor every day by the work we do as democrats. please join me and turn your attention to the screens for a

video commemorating this historic moment and highlighting the importance of protecting the right to vote.

>> what does a vote meaning? why do we march for it? why do we fight for it? it's been 50 years since we marched from selma to

montgomery. 50 years since we passed the voting rights act. our fight led us through bloody sunday to the halls of washington. the fight continues today. across our country the fight to vote that we marched for, that some died for is at risk. our right to vote is built on the continuing struggles of thousands of men and women whose legacy echo every time we cast a ballot. we must not forget our past. we must continue the struggle for every american's voice in our democracy because as dr. king said, we march on ballot boxes and we march on

poverty and we continue our march to the realization of the american dream. [ applause ] >> that was an inspirational video. the members of the dnc and fights that we engage in to make sure we cannot only protect the right to vote but expand it is inspiring for me every single day. we've come a long way but the fight clearly continues for the right to vote. our next item of business is our report of the resolutions committee. the chair will recognize co-chair of the resolutions committee. his co-chair is unable to be with us this afternoon. [ applause ] >> thank you. the resolutions committee met last evening at 6:00 to consider

21 resolutions. they were in combination of message and commemorative resolutions that have been e-mailed to you this morning. they're in your inbox. in addition to the resolutions that we passed, there was an additional resolution passed or submitted by dnc vice chair donna brazile. it was a resolution on the right to vote amendment. we're only 1 of 11 democracies in the world that doesn't have a federal guarantee of the right to vote. that we passed an executive committee and that goes into the packet as well. resolutions that the committee passed included resolution highlighting president obama and democrats economic accomplishments accomplishments, a resolution on expanding economic opportunity for women and families. resolution in support of comprehensive immigration reform

and the right of the president to use the executive order, power to state deportations. resolution recognizing black history month in the 50th anniversary of bloody sunday. a resolution showing that democrats stand with the people of france who lost lives tragically when terrorist attacked a french satirist weekly and kosher market. resolution reaffirming our commitment to state parties. resolution supporting health care education and job training for our service members. one recognizing the life and career of former new york governor mario cuomo. his daughter maria is here with

us today. i'd like to ask her to be recognized, if she would. [ applause ] we have a resolution commemorating the life and legacy of former boston mayor and a resolution honoring the life and career of d.c.'s own mayor marion berry. we passed a resolution urging democrats on all levels to support the right of the district of columbia to full state hood. thank you. i urge adoption of these resolutions. >> you can never take the staffer out of girl. thank you. thank you so much. that is the report of the resolutions committee. is there a motion to adopt the report? is there a second? is there a discussion on the

motion? all those in favor say aye. >> aye. >> all opposed no. no. the committee report of the resolutions committee is adopted. thank you so jim and hilda for their hard work. thank you. [ applause ] i've spoken to many you have this weekend about the democratic victory task force. and over the last several months as well. e i don't want to steal governor bashir's thunder. it has been wonderful working with and getting to know the governor over conference calls and hours of meetings. there were momentumss during this process we were completing each other's sentences. i'm honored to be his opening act this morning. i'm going to tell you this morning we're going to hear some

tough love. frankly, we need to hear it. i strongly believe that we have to look back in order to move forward. we cannot be too proud to learn. i love this party. i love standing up and saying i'm a democrat. our passion for this party only gets us so far. we cannot just say we're democrats. we need to do a better job of telling people our stories. telling them why we're democrats. growing up at my family dinner table i remember asking my parents why they were democrats. they're answer was clear. because democrats care about people. our government has the abilities to affect real change in people's lives. as a jewish family, as good citizens in the society, we believe, they would say, it's part of our responsibility to help others. we have a term for it in my

community, repairing the world. those kitchen table conversations conversations became the fabric of who i am at my core. i never looked back after those conversations. i knew i was a democrat. i'm sure for many of you it was the same. i wonder how many people in the room lived in a home where photos of fdr and jfk were hanging on the walls next to the photos of grandma and grandpa and maybe above them. you all know what i'm talking about. you also know what motivates you to knock on the doors make the phone calls, pull out your checkbooks. come on. something made you drag yourself out of bed and into a hotel conference room on a saturday morning in cold february to ride elevators that feel like they might as well be outside. seriously, i know all of you know what i'm talking about and i know what i'm fighting for.

i know why i'm a democrat. my parents helped lay the ground work for me but as an adult, there are two experiences. one exhilarating and devastating that i associate with providing clarity of what being a democrat means to mean. the first was having children. but even before i had my kids i knew i wanted to be a children's advocate in government. but as the parents in the room know all too well, relying on general intuition that children are the most vulnerable members of our society is not the same as actually being a parent. since having children of my own, it's almost impossible for me to make any policy or political decision without thinking about how what we do now will shape the world that my rebecca, jake, and shelby grow up in. being a mother has brought my mission into sharper focus.

understanding not only the threats that we hope to protect our children from but also the opportunities that we want to be sure are open for them. now, the other experience that reminds me why i'm a democrat was being diagnosed with breast cancer. at a time when you want to be strong for yourself and for others, the greatest sources of joy in your life all of a sudden become the triggers of your deepest fears. you can't help but think of the baseball games graduations, weddings you might miss. you wonder how many anniversaries you have left. sorry. even now, celebrating my 24th wedding anniversary this week -- [ applause ] healthy and cancer free --

[ cheers and applause ] . i can only imagine what would have happened if, in 2007, i was one of the tens of millions of americans who were uninsured or underinsured. how long would it have taken for me to know that the lump i found was breast cancer? when would i have finally decided it was worth the expense to see a doctor? how would i have afforded the crippling cost of care without insurance? so why am i a democrat? because thanks to democrats more americans today have access to quality, affordable health care. [ cheers and applause ] they don't have to make those decisions. why am i a democrat? because thanks to democrats, it's more likely that my children our churn will enter a work force where women earn

equal pay and will raise their own children in a society that doesn't discriminate on the basis of who someone loves. why am i a democrat? because thanks to democrats dreamers will get their shot to pursue the american dream. [ applause ] women can make our own health care decisions and we just might have a chance of tackling climate change before it's too late. but as dems, we know all these values become reality in one place -- the ballot box. the last term, the last several midterm elections have shown the democratic party two things. first, americans overwhelmingly support the people and issues the democratic party fights for on a daily basis. time and time again we have seen voters support ballot initiatives and legislation to raise the minimum wage, support

workers' rights and back amendments guaranteeing the right to vote. tat core of the democratic party that american equality is a belief for all and endorse that everyday. however, in midterm elections democratic incumbents and candidates have suffered devastating losses at all levels of government. since 2008, we have lost 69 seats in the u.s. house. 13 in the u.s. senate. 910 state ledgety seats and 30 legislative chambers and 11 governorships. enough is enough. [ applause ] enough is enough. that's why in november i assembled the task force to conduct a thorough assessment of the democratic party's role in recent elections. the mission of the task force is simple: examine the last several election cycles by soliciting actionable ideas from the entire democratic family as to how we

can improve the long-term strength of the national democratic party. the task force has collected and digest add great deal of research and information since november. during biweekly meetings the task force met with experts in a variety of categories including message and research development, targeting and mobilization voter advocacy and community building. each member of the task force has been assigned to meet with groups in their fields of expertise expertise, including elected officials, candidate campaign manager, general consultants academic donors and, probably, most importantly -- certainly most importantly activists and voters in every state. i just want to say i have that been so proud and thrilled about the earnestness and commitment with this which the task force members have undertaken this assignment so please join me in thanking them. really, as you see them today, thank them so much. i'm going to introduce them when i introduce the governor for his remarks but you should know

they've been listening and speaking with a wide variety from stakeholders from the grass roots level up and they'll continue working hard until their recommendations are finalized in june. the dean see conducted a post-election poll with 100,000 of our supporters. the association of state democratic chairs you should ray buckley's leadership conducted a survey of its membership and each of the campaign committees all contributed research and information to this task force and we will continue to work together. the work has reached into all 50 states to look at what it takes to build, run, and win political campaigns in america but the bottom line of what we food to do is educate people who are not in this room -- voters donor community leaders and activists and we need to do it through every channel possible from voter registration to candidate recruitment and training. as the dnc, it is our responsibility to be the vehicle which enables our candidates and party committees to take our

values, our believes to voters. while the task force has been talking about strengthening our party in the long term, the dnc has been talking about making the switch from the 2014 to the 2016 election cycle when we will elect a democrat as the 45th president of the united states of america. [ applause ] here's a few things we've been up to. in 2014, the dnc technology team continue to build on the tool set from the obama campaigns and the 2013 campaign. our teams offer training and assistance to democratic campaign and committee so that each tool that we developed was used to its fullest potential and deployed up and down the ballot. we've compiled world class data from more than a decade of campaigns, including voter and volunteer history. last year, even the smallest campaign had access to the same cutting edge advanced technology tools pioneered by the obama campaign in 2008 and 2012. the dnc has also developed

state-of-the-art analytics platforms to synthesize combine and enrich our targeting tools and processing. taken collectively, the dnc's data and technology programs were worth assistance in millions of dollars to state parties and other party exite tease. all of this is designed to get more people out to vote. later this year we'll recognize the 50th anniversary of of selma and the 50th anniversary of the voting rights act. since the security in 2013 struck down key components of the voting rights act we watched republicans seize every opportunity to curtail voting rights across the country. they pushed voter i.d. law, a solution in search of a problem that disproportionately impact our voters that are more likely to vet democrat. the democratic party has long defended the right to vote but last year representative shifts towards a more perot active mission to ensure every voter is registered and every registered voter is able to vote and every

vote is counted and that has been done under the incredible leadership of our vice chair donna brazile. so thank you don that. since launching the voter expansion project of last year's winter meeting, the dnc has worked with our state parties to develop voter expansion program including dedicated staff in more than two dozen states. those results are tangible. last cycle we motivated more than 10,000 poll observers and 3,000 poll workers. the dnc also made it a concerted effort to engage key democratic constituencies through a variety of avenues. our revamped constituency department under reverend doctor -- almost doctor regina thomases continues to work with our caucuses and panels to mobilize the democratic base and last september the dnc announced a seven figure paid media campaign to reach african-americans, hispanicsism with and young voters. diversity is the democratic

party's greatest strength, both the diversity of our supporters and our ideas. but we must do a better job in ensuring each of our parties, supporters and voters feel they are a welcome member of an open and accessible party. this is abimportant issue that we as democrats care deeply about and we, you and i must continue to look for new and innovative ways to bring more people from divorce backgrounds into our party and make sure they fell welcome and included and embed. . our chief diversity officer greg hinton had worked everyday to ensure the party's business practices and our commitment lives up -- that our party's business practices and our commitment to diversity live up to our expectations and as i informed the executive committee in december, the dnc has launched five fish tichs to ensure we reflect the diversity of our party and nation as a whole. firs