us for a look ahead to the midterm elections and 2016 presidential race. we will examine the latest developments in ukraine with kurt volker. and a look at congressional salaries and other benefits that members receive. " -- liveon journal every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. c-span, created by america's cable companies 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. a few weeks ago on "the communicators," we had the executive vice president of comcast to talk about a proposed merger between comcast and time warner cable. this week joining us is senator al franken, democrat of

minnesota, who is on the judiciary committee. he's chair of the judiciary technology and the law subcommittee. >> privacy technology and the law. >> i apologize. yesterday at the hearing held by the committee, you said that a merger between comcast and time warner cable would result in fewer choices, higher prices, and even worse service for your constituents. how do you come to that conclusion? >> because that has been the case when there is consolidation of media. telecommunications media. that is what is happening here. comcast is the biggest cable tv and it in the country, is the biggest internet broadband company in the country wanting to buy the second-biggest cable tv and third-biggest internet broadband company.

that is just too big. comcast hast, but about 12% or 13% of all television programming after it universal,c -- nbc and there are 20-some channels such as bravo and msnbc and cnbc, and in fact, we talked a little bit about that merger or the acquisition of nbc universal in the hearing yesterday. i talked about it. when we were discussing that -- i was against that one, too -- brian roberts, the ceo of look, wesaid -- compete. it's ok for us to buy nbc

universal because we have to compete with all these other distributors. cabletioned time warner is one of those competitors. he said at the hearing with us that we are not expanding our distribution. it's ok for us to vertically integrate this way. they cannot have it both ways. they are trying to have it both ways. weone hearing you say, look, compete with time warner cable. in the next couple years later, competeh, we do not with time warner cable. that's literally what they said. they're completely contradicting themselves. now,they have this power they are going to control so much broadband in the broadband on theand they say --

cable area, we are competing with directv and satellite tv. if you get direct tv or satellite or any kind of satellite tv, you still want to be on the internet. you will have to go back to comcast. when they have been talking to their investors in these talks with goldman sachs and all the other investment banks that have investment in it, they talk about how -- we are going to bundle. we're going to use this power to leverage. that is what they say. that is their job as a corporation, to make as much money for their investors as possible. they were mischaracterizing what the market looks like, and this is going to -- their service is terrible. i sent out an e-mail asking views on tell me their

this merger. i got 100,000 letters and e-mails. people talked about how lousy the service is and how they can only go to comcast. cohen said -- he thanked me for pointing out how bad their service is. i said, you're welcome. >> senator franken joining our conversation on "the communicators." thanks for joining us. i'm going to start with something that david cohen said on wednesday. there is nothing in this transaction that will cause anyone's cable prices to go up. do you believe cohen's commitment? do consumers trust comcast when they promise that there is not a way for the cable prices to go up through the steel?

>>-- this deal? >> i don't know how he says that when in one of his first phone calls about this deal, he says prices may go up faster than they have before. that seems contradictory to what he said right at the outset. aboutcast has talked giving up some of its subscribers on the cable side to ameliorate concerns to the fcc, to keep under that 30 threshold folks of talked about for a long time. is that enough here? is giving up some subscribers enough to address your concerns about comcast's bigness? >> that 30% threshold was about one sector. they will have a 30% threshold on cable tv. they will have a bigger threshold on cable internet. and then, plus that, they have 12% to 13% of all programming.

the original 30% was about having it in one sector, like cable tv. that is very different when you have all of these pieces that you are putting together, and that you can leverage. they have shown that. they have shown that they do. we had a dispute. we had a discussion about mr. cohen's filing to the fcc and doj. he had a footnote in which he said there was only one condition that was put on us by the fcc and doj that they even looked at. they were supposed to create a fordalone broadband package people, so they could just get the broadband and would not have to bundle with cable tv. did not that, but they tell anyone. they basically did not market it

raid -- it. he said that was the only one. i said, really? did not also follow the other commission, one of the other conditions on bloomberg. the reason i brought up is a cablebloomberg news, financial news network. one of the conditions was that you have neighborhooding. you put the cable news stations all next to each other. you have cnn next to fox, next to msnbc. if you're watching those things, you can switch from one to the other. there, andut cnbc that is a financial news network. they were supposed to neighborhood bloomberg. comcast, because they bought nbc's cable stations, they own cnbc.

they want as many eyeballs on cnbc as possible so they can charge as much for their advertising on cnbc. that's how the game works. that is how tv works. if they put bloomberg in the neighborhood, people go like, i would like to watch bloomberg. i would like to sample that. i want to see bloomberg's financial news network. and then they might like it. they don't want people not watching cnbc. the put bloomberg way in nosebleed seats so people could not find it, would not find it right -- it. they did not put it in the neighborhood. that was leveraging their position, which is what they talk about when they talk to their investors. conversation had a with one of the big wall street

banks who was complaining, we do not think you are leveraging your position enough. the executive from comcast said, we are. customer, we are going up four dollars or six dollars a month for internet. asked mr. cohen, aren't you going to use this -- that is your job for your investors, to get them the biggest return on investment. aren't you going to use this leverage to do things like bundle? told theird investors after this deal was announced that we are going to tell our call center people to push bundles, to push it. this goes back to that earlier condition that they were fined on, where they put standalone

broadband but they did not tell anyone. you call into the call center. mr. cohen in his answers was very careful. he said, we have instructed our call center people to when asked , thatstandalone packages doesn't mean they bring it up. they told their investors that they told the wall street banks, we are going to push bundling. we are going to upsell. this is going to cost people in my state, a minnesota. it's going to cost consumers more money. we have seen the cost of your $19.95able packages from

until 2010 go up at more than double inflation. usually when technologies get better and better, the price goes down. you saw that in computers and big screen, flat tv's. consolidation, and consolidation means leverage. this leverage on who supplies them, who supplies the set top boxes, and who supplies routers -- this is very, very troubling. propose tod you increase competition than in the cable market? >> the first thing i would do is tv let the largest cable company by the second largest cable tv company. that is where i would start. my job here on the judiciary

at these hearings is to raise my concerns. -- he seemsems like like a really smart and great guy. he earned his way. him tough was to ask questions. they have 107 lobbyists on capitol hill. they are swarming capitol hill. 100,000 -- i had 100,000 people write me their objections. the first thing i would do is stop this deal. i would not let this go through. it's up to the fcc and doj. , i would like to

change gears and talk about another major issue here in washington, and that is surveillance. you have been one of many folks on capitol hill who called for more transparency and the sort of information the government is collecting. what are your prospects for reform this year? what do you think about the other efforts on capitol hill to change the way the nsa collects and uses surveillance data? >> i have a bipartisan bill. senator dean heller has bill, which -- i believe in transparency. i think the american people should be entitled to understand how many americans' information and how much of it is then being accessed. in the metadata program, which the administration has changed now,

and they are essentially going to do it where the phone companies keep the data and you have to get a warrant to do that -- i think that is a very acceptable change. americans needt to know how many americans' data is actually looked at very -- at. the metadata is just the number called from, the number called to, the time and date of that: the duration of the call. it's not any content. now we are going to get a pfizer order to warrant to look at this stuff. americans want to know just how much of our information is looked at, how many americans are caught up in that. that is something americans are entitled to know so they can decide for themselves if this is the right thing to do. i voted against both the 215 and

702 authorizations. i cosponsored transparency amendments to each of those. when they did not pass, i voted against them. that is capturing the internet traffic of people, non-americans, overseas, who we are known to have some kind of terrorism. that is very important that we do that. think it is absolutely crucial. the statute says you're not supposed to take americans' -- like inwn bomb maker is doingy bombing case traffic with somebody in colorado, and that guy is talking about bombing the new york subway, that is when it's good to be able to get his phone

data. and seecan go in there that he's talking to a guy in philadelphia and together they are plotting to bomb the new york subway. it is important that we have these in place. we just need transparency. guys are in prison. is the surveillance side of things. on the commercial online privacy side of things, there's been a lot of talk of oohing something. talk about transparency and new ng something. talk about transparency and new rules. >> i have a bill that passed last congress through the judiciary committee, a privacy measure. right toou have the allow people to take your location information and to give them permission to do that, and permission to keep it, and

permission to give it or sell it to a third-party. --t of this is stocking stalking apps. some of the first testimony came from the coalition of battered women. they gave some hair-raising testimony. they talked about this woman in northern minnesota. she was in an abusive situation. she went to domestic violence center at a county building and while she was there, she got a text from her abusers saying, why are you in the county building? are you going to the domestic violence center? that scared her, and they took her to the county courthouse to get a restraining order against the guy. there.s on her phone is, why are you in the courthouse? are you getting a restraining

order against me? stalthat is stalking, gps king. would start to keep records on this. doj only has records from 1996 on the number of gps stalking incidences. then, 25,000. think of how many more people have smartphones. there has been an explosion of the use of smart phones since then. this would make the manufacture and marketing of these stalking apps -- they are marketed as, follow your girlfriend and see if she is cheating on you. >> on both location privacy measures eu have introduced and him on the broader issue of the electronic communications privacy act, reforming the 1986 law that governs digital due

process, what are the prospects for movement this year? leahy cares about these issues. i have republican colleagues who care about these issues as well. my hope is that we will get to and senator leahy, a lotan leahy has written of the laws in the past. i think and hope we will get to this. >> what is the next step in regards to the comcast-time warner cable proposed merger with regard to the senate judiciary committee? >> i don't know. to see is due more hearings, but we will see. >> -- us do more hearings, but we will see. >> have you shared your views with the fcc and doj? >> yes.

as soon as the proposed deal was announced, i wrote to both the doj and fcc to express my concerns. senator al franken, democrat of minnesota and member of the senate judiciary committee. thank you for joining us on "the communicators." what did you hear from senator franken there, specifically about comcast? >> it's not over is basically what we heard from senator franken, not just because he wants another hearing, but because there are hearings still to come. the house judiciary committee plans to hold its look at this deal. they might hold another hearing on this, partly because comcast filed its formal documents with thefcc just hours before senate judiciary committee ultimately held its inquiry. what we heard from senator franken is that there are plenty of pressures on capitol hill.

there may not be as many critics who share his very serious concerns, but plenty of them who have lots of questions and concerns. >> you attended yesterday's hearing. what did you hear from the other senators? were senator franken's views widely shared? was there some support for this potential merger? >> there were definitely questions about consumers and competition. plenty of folks are concerned that this could mean higher cable rates. plenty of folks are concerned this could affect broadband. comcast touched so many millions of more homes. there is a typical partisan breakdown over what the fcc and justice department should do here. simply don't think the fcc should take a strong hand to this deal. we only just got these documents. folks are only beginning now to prase them -- parse them.

>> one of the issues the david cohen has discussed is the fact that comcast is under net neutrality, the only company that operates under net neutrality rules right now because of the and bc -- nbc merger. do you foresee some conditions being put on this merger by fcc and doj? >> comcast said it would apply its net neutrality from nbc to time warner cable. that expires in a few years. the fcc's open internet rules are in total legal jeopardy. the fcc has to get back to the drawing board. you do argument is that not need a strong, new condition because the commission will have figured out by 2018 how to address net neutrality. plenty of members of congress want the fcc to do something on net neutrality. we heard that from senator leahy yesterday.

tosaid comcast has to adhere these rules. we will see what the fcc decides to do. aboutator franken talked 100 plus lobbyists from comcast on the hill everyday. to you run into these lobbyists? lot of comcast lobbyists. an analysis we did a political look of the four major committees that regulate comcast. comcast gave to practically all but a small handful of members. it canvases all of its regulators on capitol hill. you can look at city councils and individual proposals in the state house that comcast has lobbied on. it gave $50,000 to tom corbett. it shelled out huge bucks to defeat the paid sick leave bill.

you can find lobbyists everywhere. there is a lot for opponents to overcome. have started making noise about this deal. the question is whether comcast will round that out, given the amount it spends and its ability to talk in d.c. >> you talk to senator franken about privacy legislation. privacy has been stuck in the same place for so many years now. there is plenty of interest. something happens that facebook or google or another major tech company. there's a call to legislate on capitol hill. it doesn't really produce actual law. it never gets past the committee stage. the most folks are watching right now is surveillance reform , with all of the blowup after edward snowden's leaks. there was plenty of interest in doing something to rethink the authorities.

widespreadill pretty disagreement over what to do about the future of the government program. >> another issue we always talk about is the 1996 telecom act. is it time to rewrite that? and commerceenergy committee and the communications subcommittee led by chairman greg london have been talking about this for some time. they have been holding hearings. lots of papers and statements and things. they have not really started writing legislation. because the process will take so long, you have so many industries to wade through, it will be some time before we have a rewrite -- if we even get there. the thing that everyone is watching is the future of cable legislation, satellite television, where that goes from here. the house and senate have started talking about this

potential for reform. that will be the next thing that moves. as somebody who covers capitol hill, how do you see the comcast deal playing out? >> there's going to be a lot of noise made about this. with every hearing, there's more headlines and more stories and interviews done that draw attention to it. there's the good and bad of the deal. ultimately, congress does not have a say in this. fcc and justice department that can decide. congress can apply pressure. one of the things we saw in was a lot of members wanted the fcc to move faster and not use conditions in an aggressive way. the interesting parallel here is that while nbc and time warner cable are very different transactions, chairman tom wheeler wrote a lot about the importance of merger conditions.

a came up quite regularly during his appearance on capitol hill. plenty of republicans asked him whether he felt his previous writings were correct, that the conditionsse merger to stimulate market changes when it comes to big transactions. wheeler will be in the spot here. we have only heard murmurs from republicans. might fcc looks like it use pretty serious conditions and that does not sit well with republicans, you can see a bit of a clash between the agency and capitol hill. >> thank you for being on "the communicators." [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> on the next "washington journal" -- democratic and republican political strategists join us for a look ahead to the

midterm elections and the 2016 presidential race. we will examine the latest developments in ukraine with kurt volker. and a look at congressional salaries and other benefits the members received. liveington journal" airs on c-span every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. tomorrow on "newsmakers," we will be joined by bob goodlatte of virginia. he joins us to talk about legislative proposals to change the nsa surveillance program, as well as oversight of the justice department and attorney general eric holder. :00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. there's no question that congress routinely and administrations routinely do not speak the truth to the american public. it's not just about inaccuracies

what the affordable health care act would do, it is the absence of speaking the truth about where we are. >> where are we? >> we are now at a standard of living the same as what we had in 1988. we now have per family unfunded >> that needs to be spoken. the biggest problem i see with -- is the did now denial of reality. you can be a good person and deny reality. we all deny reality in some sense. we don't want to face them. the fact is, we haven't had the leadership in this country in a long time. i am talking presidential and congressional.