>> there really isn't much manufacturing in the united states. >> because of because? >> there are a lot of things. there are policies that do not promote the building of those factories in the united states. the whole supply chain is built up in asia. there are some suppliers coming. we expect one supplier to build in new york. >> how long have you been ceo? >> i became ceo five years ago. we are 25 years old now. i took over as chairman as one year ago also. there is another director. he is a good guy to talk to. i run the company now. >> also a joining us on "the

communicators" this week is paul kirby. >> the obama administration says they want to identify 500 megahertz of spectrum. why is that spectrum needed? >> some of the things they are talking about is to try to get large chunks of spectrum to get the broadcasters to move. we have some experience with that ourselves. before the digital television transition happen, we were able to convince some broadcasters to turn their systems off and let us broadcast. it will be more difficult getting it away from some governmental users. we have ideas about how you might be sharing of spectrum. any way we might determine that

will open up the use of spectrum, whether it is one direction all because most systems have to be to directional, or used with another licensee that has primary access. we are trying to build technology that the -- that satisfies all of those things. people are using a lot of data on smartphones. in a few years, we are going to see more data used in one month that was used in one year in 2008. that is compared to 2014. people want access to all of these things on their bonds, videos, games, --on their phones. >> before the broadband plan

came out, they said we needed 800 over six years. now they are saying 500 over 10 years. is it one of those things where you get to the point where you always need more? >> you always need more and more. it is a scarce resource. it is more and more popular for people to use their phones in this way. as we look out into the future, we are born to see wireless technology embedded into other things. -- we are going to see wireless technology embedded into other things. we believe wireless is going to be embedded in all of the things in the the environment smartgrits and other applications. i think -- smartgrids. >> the fcc needs authorization from congress, something called

incentive options. how difficult do you think it will be to get to that and get the spectrum and get it cleared for the wireless industry? >> the only experience i can go back to is the digital television transition. the fact that money could be generated for the treasury caused us to get over some objections that were brought up at that time. the digital television transition went fairly smoothly. as long as there are incentives for broadcasters, we will be able to get through that in a reasonable timeframe. given what is going on in congress, you do not know. politics can entry. >> you talked about the incentive options. to get to 500 mhz, how much of that will be through an incentive options.

>> there are 300 mhz that the broadcasters are occupying right now. part of the spectrum they are occupying they will continue to occupy. 120 mhz will come from the broadcasters. there are 90 mhz that are being used by satellite people. the plan is to use broadcasters and satellite spectrums to get through the incentive options. >> was there is a market system, you see who wants to participate and wants to go over the air. most people are getting their content to cable or satellite today. we will see how that goes. they can put their local content out on their -- that other system. do they want to run that electricity? are they reaching a bigger subscriber base?

we found that people were willing to make that trade off. >> can see chips in smartphones be made to use spectrum more you patiently? >> that is something we have been working on heart. we were responding to a request from the energy -- from the industry. the problem is that we have done a lot of things in digital communications theory to get radio story efficient. what you are starting to see now in the lab is that people are going toward the wider band with systems. you can understand that that is a difficult thing to clear. there is one other trick that is up our sleeves. you can get network and the devices closer to each other. sometimes the wire list --

wireless lan will run faster. we need to have good connectivity to be pieces of the network that might be in your house or your office. we are starting to see the beginning of that. some people are selling cell sites or the network. we have seen things like 10 times of the improvement when we do things like this. this is an interesting new way to look at it. >> paul jacobs, is there enough technology coming to prevent a spectrum crisis or a brownout? >> i am not sure. we are in a brownout situation for some users. there are a lot of situations that have to come together. there is no silver bullet.

this is an issue associated with the net neutrality debate. it is it the companies are using band with efficiently. however much they use the is not cost them anything. you might look at a cellular operator who is trying to be patient using 50 times less capacity to run -- who is trying to beat each patient -- be efficient using 50 times less capacity to run a voip operation. we believe people ought to have access to whatever they want on the internet. we think there needs to be a mechanism so the consumer can understand what did they are using up a lot of bandwidth for

this application or a little. my analogy is today -- to a car. i need to know how much i can use from my gas gauge. i need to know how much capacity i am using up at a given time. you cannot complicate a own -- complicate a phone much. can we put in some measures so that that will cause application developers to be more each fission. lot of developers -- developers to be more efficient. this will impact the people who are using large amounts. that is the way i look at net

neutrality. >> you said wireless provider should not be subject to the same net neutrality rules at wired lines. does it help the industry to have something rather than more down the road? >> the net neutrality mindset has come from the fact that we have a lot of band with down the road. when you have to dig up the ground, they become expensive. on the wireless internet, the spectrum is already constrained. the networks are constrained. we have to treat them in some way that acknowledges the fact that it is difficult to get more spectrum. we avoid this issue i was

talking about earlier. application developers might not optimize as much as they should or could. >> how can you incentivize those application developers to use less spectrum? some carriers have said they have an incentive. they said, we have a spectrum crisis. we want the applications. how you provide incentives to application developers? >> it is going to be difficult. what you need to do is get transparency to the consumer so they can see their bucket of minutes is being used by a given application. >> they see an application that is going to take up too much. it is not worth my money. >> we think that is one mechanism. there are other mechanisms that are not dynamic like that.

you can use the analogy to an electric grid where you have stickers on your refrigerator that says this one is expected to use so much over this. time.d of "theis is see spam's communicators -- this is c- "pan's "the communicators program. >> behalf -- there have been internet reports that you are going to shutdown flow television. what happens with flow television. >> we have stopped our direct consumer sales. we were dealing with a partner

up a television device. it did not affect the sales through wireless operators. if you have it on your own, it is still operating. what we are looking at is a couple of possibilities that we have structured that look at it from an economic standpoint. one may be to sell to another party. there are a wide range -- there is a wide range of interested parties. the other thing is to run it as a pipe. the companies are interested in downloading magazines and newspapers. we had conversations with a device manufacturers and operating systems manufacturers who want to be able to download updates to their software in a single and double-a simple and easy fashion. it is going to come down to

what the right economic decision is for the consumers who have used the service. we will take care of those. if anything changes, we will discuss it to -- discuss it with the shareholders. >> why has this not been more successful? >> i think it was a broad range of things. we have found through watching the way people use the service that there were things they liked a lot. live sports were good. breaking news was good. episodic but -- episodic television was not good. we think the model will change. you will still have wide spring -- widescreen content. it might come over a broadcast mode we have designed for a cellular network. it may be done over a wide by --

wi-fi in your house. i believe strongly that we will still have local television. it might be in a different form. >> do you find that technology companies understand your needs? >> sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. everybody knows there is a problem with bringing the best and the brightest to the united states and sending them home. it is hard getting them to act. if you talk about things where we have positive interactions, the spectrum of options and

those kinds of things, we were able to interact well. we are hoping the immigration things will get salt, education, basic research by ending -- get solved. one area we are concerned about is tax policy. 90% of our revenues are offshore. we are subject to present tax. u.s. companies have about $1.40 trillion of so-called offshore money. if you can imagine that that could be brought back into the u.s. economy, that would be a private sector stimulus. the problem is getting the score right and getting it so it can be brought in. it is difficult. we continue to talk about it. we talk about it in the context

of a new factory where we will be able to build technology. we have a display technology and we are building a factory in conjunction with some partners. if you talk to policy makers, they think it is because labor -- because of labor costs. labor costs are a low percentage of the cost of building these displays. it is the capital cost of building that factory and putting the equipment in it. we cannot bring that money back into the united states without incurring a 40% haircut. we build the factory in taiwan and you pay 100 cents on the dollar. you bring it back to the united states and you pay 50 cents on the dollar. >> does qualcomm maintain a washington-based office? as ceo in chairman, how much time do you spend focus on

policies that are created out here? >> we have a washington office and we have had one for quite a long time. i end up spending more and more of my time in washington. they're a business roundtable meetings. once or twice a quarter -- i am hear frequently. >> with the new congress coming in, a lot of people say the issue is bipartisan so we do not think republicans have more control. a lot of things have not gotten through. there was legislation on inventory that has not gotten through. there are incentive options that people are waiting for. when republicans have more control, what will that mean, good or bad, or wireless? >> it is hard for me to a handicap that one.

we will move ahead no matter what happens in the elections. this will provide money to the incumbent. it is something that everybody recognizes that we need. sometimes people cannot get access to be content. on a personal level, people get it. it constituents get it. if there is money the office can generate, there are good reasons for legislation to move forward. >> paul jacobs, the white house is now for its enthusiasm about technology. what have you found in the obama administration? >> the fcc is always interested in technology. in this administration, it has been different for me. now i am a ceo north dakota

chairman. i have a higher level of access -- now i am a ceo and chairman. there is intellectual property whether it is new technology in the patents. people are understanding that that is a critical component of the economic well-being of the united states. we are getting more traction with those concepts. i am have been personally involved in this for the last five years. >> he mentioned education. can you give us a sense and explain to the viewer that you have an initiative that looks into education and health care and reach out and look at ways wireless can help. can you give us a sense of what you have done their?

>> it was founded by my thought the. it came out of academia. our hearts are close to education. we meet a lot of educated workers. there are many people have engineering degrees. education is critically important to us. we have done a lot of donations into education, roughly $100 million in donations over the last 10 years at various levels and for various things. there have been research projects our universities and training teachers in stem education and incentivizing ex- employees to go back into schools to train people. we are excited about using wireless to improve education, to get children the ability -- or students, the ability to be connected to the curriculum, to

each other, and do that 24/7 outside the boundaries of the classroom walls. we have a program that we funded called "project connect." we have students in an algebra class who, when they were giving -- given cell phones, scored higher on standardized tests. they could use technology outside of the school. a story was told at the conference that the kids were explaining on blogs to each other how they would solve different kinds of problems. the kids could learn from each other. they could get feedback from the students, parents, and teachers in a low-stress way. they are communicating over the phone much the same way we text message. we can keep track of how learning is going. a teacher would be able to see the students that are responding

better to a particular program and students that are responding less well. we all talk about these tablets. i think we are going to see the text book transformed. it will be a living thing. it will be adapted to the person using it. it will be more multimedia and step up 50 pounds of paper printed on a ball that a kid carries on their -- in a book that a kid carries on their back. they don't have access to a lot of the things they have outside the school. if you can use some of these technologies, you can improve their outcome and it will be a big win. >> there is a policy angle to that. in september, the fcc adopted a

program that would allow technology to be used outside of school grounds. >> we are focused on that. we hope to see that program grow. we are concerned that we will have the same thing about the digital be by. mobile phones are less expensive things. it seems likely that the cost aspect can be managed a little better. having erate to help out is a good thing to include in any mobile device. >> what is your level of support or non-support of the public safety spectrum set aside? >> we like the idea that public safety should have access to spectrum. we decided that because of the constraints that were put on it,

we did not want to take it and go above the minimum bid. it did not get thinks -- it did not end up getting sold. we need to make sure the incentives are there so that the system gets billed out. having it done by commercial operators is better. you can amortize the cost at a larger -- at a wider range. they have made investments in the various types of technology. they have the ability to use the systems where they are needed. when they are not used they can be used for commercial use. >> so access, but not necessarily devotion. >> yes. that will work well. it will get public safety users access to more commercial equipment. as long as it is in the right range, the equipment is built

for you to use on a tablet. they can use the same tablet and lower the cost for them. that is going to be a critical thing. >> in washington, the issue has been -- your viewpoint is that regardless of how it turns out, your chips will be in whatever equipment is used. they will probably use commercial devices and your chips will be in there. is that an accurate statement to make? >> i think it is going in a reasonable fashion right now. we do not need to inject ourselves so deeply into that debate. they can run on different technologies. there has been that debate.

does the government need to mandate a particular technology for this or not? the chips will take care of that. it is the number of bands that cause the added cost. i think what we really want to see is a road block. we want to get the spectrum on the market. we know there is the man on the public safety side and the public -- and the commercial side. we think there can be a happy compromise. >> finally, has qualcomm helped to develop a silicon valley because of your side and where you are located? >> we have attracted a number of telecom companies in san diego.

san diego is well set up for wireless. it is also well set up for biotech, which has less to do with us. we are looking at this notion of wireless help, which will get center in san diego. the notion is that you may wear sensors on your body that may talk to your own and monitor things and talk to your health care provider when it needs to. there is a huge opportunity there. there is room for productivity improvement -- improvement in health care. and those devices will use more spectrum. >> but not wireless spectrum. >> the call will top cellular to the network. there may be wireless developed

in this thing. >> thank you both were being on the "the communicators." >> our live congressional coverage resumes when the senate returns monday. both republicans and democrats will hold off of the floor leadership elections. no role calls are expected until wednesday. -- roll calls are expected until wednesday. watch live coverage on c-span 2 at 2:00 p.m. eastern. also a hse subcommittee meeting on the corruption charges against representative charles rangel. he is accused of failing to disclose $600,000 in