or jeopardize passage so the president can sign it into law right away. listen, i'm still fairly new to the senate, but i have been here long enough to have noticed something. one breakthrough has a way of leading to other breakthroughs. one show of good will was a way of spreading good will. this jobs bill if we move it forward can be followed by many other in the greater good. let's start here and get this economy creating jobs once again and show that we can come together when it's needed most. in closing, you must remember, we're americans first and we need to put our country's interests before partisan interests before partisan political interests.

>> and each country you make it. the united states taxes your global income. you're taxed twice for the same income. the it makes the u.s. companies anti-competitive and literally forces them to leave their money overseas. this is over $1 trillion of money that is parked overseas. it doesn't help the u.s. economy. so what the thought is here when we need some economic stimulus, we can have this

money come back here, pump back into the economy at a lower tax rate, say 5% or 10% and even tied to jobs or capital investment. that makes sense this is a deadly arsenal. it makes us noncompetitive as a country. >> there was a similar policy that was enacted in 2004 and according to this report, this didn't actually help much. love the companies that took advantage of the policy ended up using the money to increase executive pay rather than investing. would this be different than what happened in 2004. >> it could be tied to more jobs, it could be tied to capital investment. it's an easy thing to do.

they're trying to position this as a tax give away because it's those companies will pay tax on that money. they won't. they're not going to bring it back to the united states. the important thing is we recognize that these companies are american companies. they're making money. it's a good thing. they're owned by mostly u.s. shareholders and we should want them to succeed. it's very difficult whether companies putting something into dividends and you could tie it. it's an easy bipartisan solution and a democrat, other democrats and republicans are now proposing that type of policy change. policy change. >> mr. shapiro, wouldn't it -- we want to deal with it long term. this is a short term economic fix that wants to make sense. this is a territory portion of it. change the

>> lead is still with the other issues. the complexity of the corporate tax rate which is overwhelming the loopholes -- that is pretty important. this is another recommendation based on the deficit reduction committee. we must reduce the tax rate. such as the are and d tax credit we need to go back to the rnd -- why has not -- why has that not been a permit? >> it is temporary. the members of the committee can say we will do this for you. if there was total tax overhaul, i would bet most people would

say the we do not need the tax credit. there is more rational tax system. we have never asked the government for any money for ourselves in any way including transitions. i am uncomfortable talking about this. >> obviously, this letter was to the super committee. i am wondering how the measures that might reduce taxes would in fact be something the super committee should take up? >> in the overall premise of this, we are talking about strengthening the u.s. economy. you have three choices. you can raise taxes, you can cut spending, or you can grow the economy. growth comes from innovation. if you have a growing economy, a lot of the other issues go away. our view -- political system, our nation should be under the

business that president obama laid out in his address. when it comes to the various regions a lower deficit, good strategic immigration policy -- those are the things that makes sense. then i would like to pick up the last piece of the spectrum. the chairman of the fcc mentioned at the spectrum crunch -- there are not enough frequencies to be used for wireless devices. i'm wondering if you can explain that a little bit. why you think there should be more spectrum for wireless devices? >> technology has changed as -- five years ago, there were no smart phones. beginning with the iphone, the sponsor is 25 times the data stream that the bones did five years ago. tablets use up to 120 times the

data stream. these products have become our economic growth. economic growth. we want wireless broadband. we need the spectrum to do it. there is the broadcasters beckham that may be available. the proposal the fcc had is bipartisan supported and is voluntary options by the broadcasters. we're not saying get rid of broadcasting, but there are a lot of new stations and that there is plenty of spectrum available. give them the right to auction off that spectrum to raise money. the estimates are anywhere between $15,000,000.40000000 dollars. -- $50 million-$40 million

there simply is not enough wireless to support the pull motion videos. >> don't a wireless device makers also have a responsibility to use the spectrum more efficiently? >> absolutely. solutions are being developed by relying heavily on wi-fi. you go to a local network, but still mathematically, half of the americans have these smartphones and the tablets will be the highest project -- products. we anticipate growth for years to come. we need a system that will support them. in your letter to the deficit reduction committee, it is important to make more spectrum available for mobile broadband

including the benefit of unlicensed use its. what you mean by that? >> horizon and at&t -- there is a portion of spectrum we use today that is all sorts of innovative products. the garage door opener, cordless telephones -- people come up with innovative products that come to rely upon. if you want to produce something, there are standards in terms of being a good neighbor. that produces tremendous amount of innovation. it is important. it will spur economic activity and create jobs. >> should the companies that might take advantage of an unlicensed -- why should they not -- why should this company's -- compaies peg?

>> when you pay, you get restricted use. restricted use. everyone can go into the park and play. any entrepreneur with an idea can enter that. they can get their monopoly use, which is fine. they can do a lot with it. unlike new users -- it produces so many great products what is the family radio or a concert, or the garage door opener. and that there are a lot of different parts of congress -- the super committee has a separate bill dealing with spectrum. how do you think this is going to get done? what is the most likely avenue? it is in the president's jobs

bill. is that the main way you think this will get done? >> the important thing is it has bipartisan out support. bipartisan out support. they get multi licenses that they never pay for. whether the super committee is going to result the bigger issues of the country is -- nobody knows. if they do, this is going to be in there. if they cannot, we have a lot of other issues as the nation. this is a solution that helps cut the deficit and spur economic growth. >> gary shapiro, are the community needs different than the business community? >> i think they might have the need for brightest people. that is what has made this country great. we have attracted them since our birth. until september 11th and we shut

our doors, and now it is very difficult for tech companies to get the people. we are not welcoming them. they are the growth in the economy. this is where maximum growth occurs. we do have needs you have to be able to move people around. you need to assign someone -- we are blessed the this is a country where you can fail. it is not a badge of dishonor. we have a question in nature. we have every ingredient we need to be the most innovative country in the world. but to be our strategy as a country. that tech community -- i would include the creative community in that. the music industry, motion picture industry -- we are the world to attack innovators.

-- world's innovators. >> back to the letter to the deficit reduction committee, with regard to these as they called for the number of employment base pieces for highly educated workers who work permanent -- and at work at the says -- work visas and repeal the number of applicants per country? >> we have attracted the world's best and brightest and we need -- all our forefathers came here for a better life. education is an export of hours. we get these really bright people and we educate them in the math and science and we give -- and then we kick them out of our country. that is crazy. republicans and democrats agree on this. that is not a good policy. we have to get this legislation

and through which allows citizenship. we have to be strategic in our immigration policy. all of this discussion about illegal immigration, that is at issue. who do we want here? we want bright -- we want people to contribute to our society. there are proposals out there. our country -- every internet company, which we dominant the world and -- our tax policy and trade policy increasingly encourages -- rather than creating jobs here. >> i want to go back to the earlier question there are a lot of issues but not necessarily deficit reduction issues. what is the purpose of including visas and other issues in your recommendations to the deficit reduction committee? >> it will come from raising

taxes, cutting spending, or economic growth. we have stalled as a country. a lot of companies are going abroad because there is not growth in the net states. we must be a growing economy. a growing economy will solve the jobs problem, they will go a long way to solving the deficit. we should be focused on growth rather than focusing on attacking business. we have to say, business is good. we want jobs here. one innovation here. that is with this is about. it is not only the federal government, state government as well. every one of the government's has assumed that we will grow 8% per year. we're not growing at 8% per year. we are facing a huge financial challenge in this country. we have to try to get that 8% growth rate. whether it is democrat or republican, we have to get together to start getting these policies to allow economic

growth. you are watching "the communicators," -- brendon sasso is a reporter. and unemployment is still an 9%. people are having a hard time getting jobs. what you say to the person who just graduated with a degree and that they cannot find a job and that these companies want to hire foreign workers? >> first of all, there are several million jobs available in the tech companies where we do not have experienced people. i would go to any college student and say, look at the jobs. it started during yourselves. -- start during yourself.

maybe it's good for society, but we need skilled people. foreigners take my job, that is really not the case for the most part. those doubts are going overseas because our policies encourage them to go overseas. the american employers -- there are not american employers who would not hire americans. they are citizens and have kids and they want a better country in the they will always give the jobs to the americans over someone overseas. >> the letter does mention protecting intellectual property as an important issue. obviously, there are bills in both houses to protect -- you oppose those bills? why are those bills not be appropriately to protect property? >> trademarks, copyrights are very important. domestically and internationally when we are dealing with china, we have to recognize that we have to do

everything -- they cannot make copies of our trademarks. they cannot read it off. -- rip it off. this legislation is aimed at pirates websites. it is not that we oppose the principle, we oppose the fact that all of a sudden they are -- trying to shut down out website without the government. you are shutting down the internet in a very large way. this year, the government shutdown 50,000 websites because of one child pornographer. these are the kind of mistake you want to avoid. you went to avoid a legitimate businesses from being shut down. these bills are good, but let us modify them so that americans

are protected. >> what are the changes needed? >> we've been excluded from the discussions all along. discussions all along. they have dropped legislation in. we need to see process. if you have a right to answer, respond, you have to have a process to make sure you are shutting down the right website. yet to make sure you are not shutting down thousands of website. that is a democratic congressman -- as well as republicans said that these bills are unacceptable for the future of technology. >> -- >> my understanding is that the bill has some sort of appeals process where the website get shut down, you can appeal and say that this is a legitimate website. is that not enough? >> your website is shut down and

you have the right to go through a government process for an appeal and meanwhile, your customers or lost for how long? when blackberry has an outage, it affects millions of people that you mentioned at the content community, what do you manchin -- what you mean by that? >> they live and die by government regulation. some are among the way, we've lost sight of that because of lobbying. content copywriting has expanded 13 times. the penalties are outrageous. people go to jail. if you rip-off a cd, the prison sentence is so much more than if you actually physically stole a cd from a record store. it is a phenomenal fund-raiser.

the members of the judiciary committee do not deal with money issues. you get a phenomenal amount money from the content industry. the tech industry is not as good at fund-raising. all the sudden, you have republicans and democrats getting all this money from the content community. >> another piece of legislation that is making its way through congress is representative mary's data security breach legislation. >> we do not have a position on that. as we go into the cloud -- these are really critical issues. how much of your information -- what is the responsibility of the company that uses it? there is a much more happening in the application gathering information about yourself and what rights you have. public policy can do with this

-- deal with these issues. when a credit card was first reduced -- introduced, there was concern about losing everything. the most you'll ever loses $50. that unleashed this great rise of credit cards which helped the financial system. it has helped society. we're going to find a way out of a lot of these issues, recognizing there is a trade-off between someone knowing about you and serving your needs. you cannot get a custom suits if know your doesn't size. >> if some the hacks into a website and still is your credit card number -- what about fraud or privacy issues? there is talk of a broader privacy protection. what you think about that legislation? >> we atlanta the proposals out there -- we have lots of surprises out there.

we agree upon the goals and that there are conflicting interests. the person protecting the privacy versus the interest of society everyone hates the health care law, including me. there are good things in there. you share information about actual things that happened on an anonymous basis with patience and we get a database of what the achievements are. since there is a trade-off between societal needs an individual needs, we recognize that the government plays a role in addressing the interests. >> back to your letter. we recommend you read greater investment in activities with clear economic benefits because of their transform to potential. programs that support basic scientific research, improve our rick -- in projector and create a 21st -- 20 for century workforce is smart. >> take our university system, which is the world's best. the government puts a lot of

money in there for basic research and development. it works out very positively for industry as well. there's a lot of work between the community and a private investment committed to introducing great things. there is only so much available. we have to be very careful. we have to say, what is the difference? we're not talking about being venture capitalist. there is a basic difference between basic research and applying the research. it should be at the highest level of basic research. when it comes down to an educated workforce, the government plays a role. do we want every person to go to college? i would argue that we do not. germany is a great example. they have two in tears. at those that are highly skilled people with education and they produce great equipment and their strategy as a country is precision manufacturing. the people at high status can

get paid a lot. they also have educated people and at universities as well. we have, for some reason, this philosophy that everyone has to go to college. does not make sense. if we won manufacturing, we have to change with collagen's are doing. -- colleges are doing. >> the letter mentions improving the government's id information technology. the federal government can reduce spending by more than one trillion dollars. how is that possible? >> technology itself is that agreed to the benefit of technology is that it saves money in the long run. companies investing in technology so that they can perform better, they can be more addition, they can get more customers. the government's -- at the state

level, various states have done this. the experience i have with the virginia department of motor vehicles is exceptional because they use technology very well. bertini as a state has said, we're going to invest in technology. the legislature does it. it works. our federal government would say, we have massive information -- let us invest in the i.t. infrastructure for better service. we should be there. why can our government be advanced? >> youa been around for awhile. the super committee is due to report about two weeks. what are the chances of any of your recommendations being included? >> the chance of the spectrum is well over 90%. on the other ones, this is my statement about innovation and what is important -- the feature

of our country. whether they voted to promoting economic growth, we will see. the odds of them doing something -- will alcee. >> the consumer electronics -- the consumer electronic show is known in vegas. can you give us a preview? >> it attracts people from all around the world. weird to have a larger show that we have had. last year, we had a lot of people introduced great things. it gives you hope and excitement about making a difference. it will be spectacular. i hope you are there. i hope you are there. >> gary shapiro's group is

consumer electronics. you can read it at c-span.org. brendan sasso is a technology reporter. thank you tenement. -- tenement. -- gentleman. >> tonight a live debate between herman cain and newt gingrich. that will take place in houston tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. you can also watch on c- span.org. >> see more videos of the candidates at the website for campaign 2012. from recent events to the earliest parts of their campaign. read the latest comments from candidates and political reporters from social media sites and links to c-span as media partners in the early