but i though still in its infancy, the broadband marketplaces undergoing staggering disruption. in 2013 alone the broadband marketplace grew 29% to 126.6 million subscribers globally according to research. and according to findings earlier this week by bernstein, and equities research firm, google -- early success in the kansas city market demonstrates their service could make it to 30 million homes over the next several years. i am encouraged by the prospect of this expansion, especially considering google's announcement earlier this year it plans to roll out service in atlanta and parts of georgia's fourth congressional district as

well as other cities, combined with similar services, the rollout of all networks across the country promises more and better options for consumers online. it's my strong believe technology is one of the most important tools for empowering all levels of society. we must keep an eye to protect future innovation within this marketplace but also keep in mind disruption already occurring in the video and broadband marketplace. i encourage the department of justice and the federal communications commission to keep this in mind as it considers the effects of the merger upon competition of the video in broadband marketplace. before i yield back to the chairman, i would note earlier

this week the wall street journal reported the proposed merger of comcast and time warner is already having a ripple effect in the video and broadband marketplace. many companies already are looking for new ways to compete for customers. it's my hope that the groundwork we lay in today's hearing will serve as a strong foundation for future hearings on competition in the communications video and rock band marketplace. with that i yield back. >> i would like to recognize the full committee chairman. this committee on antitrust regulatory reform and commercial law is a subcommittee or judiciary committee. this time i recognize the

chairman of the judiciary committee for his opening statement. >> the cable television and the internet have become as american as baseball and the apple pie. we have watched the nation cheer on our favorite teams, and on occasion glimpse history changing before our eyes on television. the internet is used to connect family and friends to students to the world and vital components of the economy. today the judiciary committee will provide a public platform to discuss the proposed combination of comcast. given the importance of these services to our constituents and the economy, the transparency afforded is integral to the

overall consideration of the merger. as we discussed the proposed merger we should be mindful. the rapid technological developments that have taken place in the cable and broadband markets have been remarkable and unpredictable. we have seen the growth of cable from a nascent industry that only offered a few dozen channels to one that delivers hundreds of channels, now even in 3-d. gone are the days of rushing to the living room to watch the news, sports, or a favorite show when it starts at 7:00 or 8:00 or 9 p.m. now consumers can watch content wherever and whenever they would like. these have not come without a cost. cable bills have risen at nearly twice the rate of inflation over

the last 17 years, including a six percent rise just this last year. consumers who have grown tired of rising cable bills have begun cutting the cord and are looking to new, emerging ways to create content. that's how the free market is supposed to operate. consumers have greater choices. today's hearing will examine whether the proposed merger would impact competition in the cable and broadband markets and explore whether consumers would benefit from the combined scale of the joint venture. proponents of the merger argue it would spur innovation, increased choices, and improve service. critics raise concern regarding the influence of the post merger comcast and key aspects of the cable and broadband markets. we will hear the views of both

sides of the debate today and allow the panelists to test theories about the future of the industry. i look forward to hearing about this important issue. i yield back the remainder of my time. >> i would like to recognize the full committee ranking member, my friend from michigan for his opening statement. >> thank you. when was the last time -- we ran out of tables. i'm sorry. we only have eight here today. we consider the proposed acquisition of these corporations, and if consummated, it would enable the combined entity to control approximately 30% of the

national cable market and at least 40% of the high-speed broadband internet market. it would also dominate 19 of the 20 largest geographic markets in the nation, including new york and los angeles areas where comcast currently is not present. currently comcast owns the nbc television network, 10 owned and operated television stations, the telemundo spanish network, nine cable networks, and nine major metropolitan areas and the motion picture studio universal.

not surprisingly, the sheer size and scope of a proposed merger, which would extend well beyond cable television have raised concerns. several consumer groups, including the public knowledge free press, the american antitrust institute, and consumers union have raised concerns about the proposed merger, and i ask unanimous consent to offer a letter from consumers union dated may 7, 2014 for the record. >> without objection. >> neither we nor the competition enforcement agencies should prejudge any deal. there are a number of issues

concerning competition and consumer welfare but i would like as many on the panel to address as possible. witnesses should address whether the combined comcast time warner cable would have such market power that it could discriminate against rival content providers, because according to critics, the merged company would have the ability and incentive to discriminate in favor of comcast time warner content, including nbc content. it would have almost 30 million subscribers being unable to distribute on the video distribution network. it could potentially be fatal to non-comcast affiliated programmers. ultimately, this could give

enormous sway over the kind of content that is available to the public. the witnesses should also address whether the combined comcast time warner cable could emerge as a gatekeeper of the internet and might be able to stifle as some have already alleged. recently netflix signed an agreement with comcast that would allow netflix to directly access comcast customers rather than paying companies to carry traffic between its servers and comcast customers. on the one hand this could be seen as a simple, straightforward reddish

transaction. paying comcast to connect directly instead of sending traffic to other companies may simply have been categorized as a smart business decision, but netflix raises its concern, asserting it was forced to pay comcast for reliable delivery to comcast customers. the netflix ceo reed hastings and david wells explained that the internet is a long-term

threat for profit for themselves and cost for everyone else. the comcast time warner merger is approved, the combined company would produce even more anti-competitive leverage to charge interconnection tolls for access to their customers. the real question is not what affects the merger may have on netflix per se but on the next netflix that might emerge as an alternative to comcast video distribution business. would a combined entity be able to use its potential leverage over high-speed internet access to stifle potential competition

in this way? i conclude on this point, to the extent there may be competition concerns, i would like the witnesses that choose to discuss whether imposing behavioral revenues would be sufficient. as a condition for approval of the comcast nbc universal transaction, the fcc and the justice department require comcast nbc to take affirmative steps to foster competition, including volatile compliance with net neutrality as well as steps to get the public interest. comcast has indicated it would extend the same commitments to its proposed acquisition of time warner cable. additionally, comcast has

entered into an agreement to sell 1.4 million subscribers and to invest another 1.2 9 million subscribers to form a new rival cable company. nevertheless, some observers are concerned that behavioral remedies were ineffective and unenforceable to the extent comcast might not abide by them. we should consider whether such commitments should be strengthened and made enforceable to better protect the public interest with respect to comcast proposed acquisition of time warner cable. i look forward to the testimony.

thank you for your time. >> i recognize the vice-chairman of the subcommittee for his statements. >> i will be brief. as a free-market conservative, i am on the record as stating i don't think government should interfere with the extent they don't violate antitrust laws. i don't think it should be destroyed by government intervention. there are some concerns we think should be cleared up. the final one will be how programmers are able to compete in the marketplace and gain access. we have new ways that may make this moot, but they are probably 10 years out. you have video on demand delivery by google, amazon,

microsoft, yahoo!, and apple. there is a concern these compete with video on demand services native to cable providers. i am concerned also about the percentages of spanish-language market this merger would have been the overall national crisis. even though comcast and time warner don't compete and any markets to speak of, there is an overall accepted pricing as there are more layers in the internet game and what people pay on an average basis is based on that.

i am blessed in corpus christi, texas, by living in a community served by two competing cable providers. the capital cost is high, but as we are seeing in investments by google and other companies, multiple options are becoming available. it's the short term i'm worried about. i do hope some of the witnesses will address short-term versus long-term competition and availability, and finally, finally, i think we should talk a little bit to distinguish about what is delivered in real time in what is important to be delivered in real-time. sports and news events. as opposed to entertainment content which is shifting to an on-demand or pay-per-view model.

through services like netflix or itunes store. i have been looking forward to this hearing for a long time. i hope we can get it cleared up. >> we have a very distinguished panel today. we have a remark about the table been so long. this was an attempt to balance the witnesses. when you add a witness, you have to balance them on the other end. i hope that balance is fine. the first witness is david cohen, executive vice president of comcast corporation. he has responsibilities that include corporate communications. legal affairs. community at -- investment. in other words, everything. prior to joining comcast in 2002, he served as a partner and chairman.

one of the hundred largest law firms. prior to that, he served as chief of staff to ed randel, cheap -- mayor of philadelphia. welcome. >> thank you. >> i will introduce all the witnesses. then we will go back. our second witness is chairman and ceo of time warner cable. he has served in that capacity since january 1 of the year. he first adjoins time warner in 2005. since that time, he has served the company in various

capacities, including president am a chief operating officer, chief financial officer -- prior to joining, he held various positions at time warner inc.. including senior vice president of mergers and acquisitions. before joining, he practiced law. mr. marcus received his ba in magna cum laude from brown university and jd from columbia law school. he was editor of the columbia law review. welcome. our next witness, mr. matthew polka, is president of the american cable association and 850 member nonprofit