hillary. [applause] >> i am now excited to welcome to the stage our next keynote speaker, martin o'malley. [applause] throughout his 15 years of elected executive experience,

martin o'malley has established himself as able regressive later eager to solve big problems facing communities. governor o'malley has served in daily every level of government -- in nearly every level of government, as the mayor of baltimore, and as the governor of maryland delivering results for his constituents. as mayor of baltimore, he improved education, crack down on crime while improving police accountability and drove investment to the local community. as governor, he sighed marriage equality bill -- he signed marriage equality into law and made maryland's public schools some of the best in the country for five years in a row. [applause] no matter the role, governor o'malley has a ways but working families first and offer the american dream. please join me in welcoming martin o'malley.

[applause] mr. o'malley: thank you all. thank you. dr. maguire, thank you very much. it is a great honor to be here tonight with all of you fine members of the iowa democratic party and the resilient city of cedar rapids. my name is martin o'malley. i am running for president and i need your help and tonight, i would like to talk with you about the american dream that we share. you and i are part of a living self-created industry called the united states of america. we have been given a gift, not an old car to be tossed aside or

treated and when we are done with it, but a country. we must accept this gift with an open mind and an open heart if we are to give it to our children and grandchildren and a stronger and healthier -- in a stronger and healthier condition than we received it ourselves. our ability to give our children a better future depends on the strength of our country. [applause] let me ask you all a question. how many of you firmly believe that you have enjoyed a better quality of life than your parents and grandparents, raise your hands? second question. how many of you believe justice for emily, that your children

and grandchildren will enjoy a better quality of life? raise your hands. that my friends is the question at the center of our table of democracy. whether we are still that country where regardless of where you start, through your own hard-working talents and love of family, you can still get ahead. whether we are still that nation that finds a way in every generation to include more and more of our people more fully in the social, economic, and political life of our nation. fdr told my grandparents in their day, not to be afraid. john kennedy told my parents that to govern is to choose. i say to you that progress is a choice. i am not dealing candidate for president in the democratic party who holds progressive values but i am the only candidate for president with 15

years of executive experience. [applause] as a big-city mayor, and as a governor, turning those progressive values into action getting things done, new leadership, action, not words. in baltimore, we took action to save lives by reducing record high violence to record lows. we increased drug treatment to thousands of our courageous neighbors from the scourge of directed at him. in maryland, we took action to raise the minimum wage to create jobs and make our state number one and innovation and entrepreneurship. [applause] driver's licenses for new american immigrants, marriage equality and a ban on assault weapons. we did not just talk about it, we got it done. [applause]

we took greater action, not less to make our public schools number one in the country. we took action to free college tuition four years in a row in order to make college more affordable for more families. we fought and we won and we expanded family leave because when women succeed, america succeeds. [applause] as a nation, we have come a long way since the wall street crash and the bush recession of 2008. as our country teetered on the brink of a second great depression, we elected a new president, barack obama to move us forward and that is exactly what he is done. [applause]

64 months in a row of positive job creation. our country is clearly doing better. but most american families are not. the heart truth of our times is this. 70% of us are earning the same or less today than we were 12 years ago. that is the first time that has happened this side of world war ii. there is a growing injustice in our country and an economic inequality that threatens to tear is a part. while the power have -- wealth and power have been so concentrated in the hands if you that it has taken opportunity out of the homes of many. this did not happen by accident.

powerful, wealthy special interests have used our government to create in our own country and economy that is leaving a majority of our people behind. the promise of the american dream is on the ropes and most days it is not even a fair fight. 50 years ago, the nation's largest employer with gm. the average gm employee could send a kid to college with the equivalent then up two weeks wages. my father, like so many of his generation, went to college because of the g.i. bill. today, we are sadly our graduating kids with more college debt than any developed nation on the planet. meanwhile, as wages flatline or decline for most of us family-owned businesses and farms are finding it harder and harder to compete with ever larger concentrations of

corporate power and monopolies. get this. last year, wall street bonuses alone totaled twice what every american working at minimum wage earned combined. tell me how it is that not a single wall street executive was convicted of a single crime related to the 2008 meltdown. not a single one. [applause] what have we come to as a nation that you can get pulled over for a broken tail light but if you wrecked the nation's economy, you are untouchable. mainstreet struggles. mainstreet struggles while wall street source and this is not the american dream, this is not

how are our economy is. it and this is supposed to work. we can do better. [applause] we must return to our true selves. our economy is not money. our economy is people. all of our people. the stronger middle class is not the consequence of economic growth, a stronger middle class is the cause of economic growth. [applause] therefore, we must take action that actually lives incomes and wages again for all americans. can we all agree that no american family who works hard and plays by the rules should have to raise their children in poverty? [applause]

so, let us take action to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour wherever and however we camped area -- however we can. let us pay overtime pay for overtime work and expanding social security. let us make it easier and not harder for any worker to join a labor union and collectively bargain for better wages. [applause] [cheers] can we all agree that every american family should have the option of sending their kids to earn a college degree, debt-free, then let us take the action to make debt-free college

a reality and an option for every american family. a new era of american progress. calls for a new agenda to rebuild our cities as places of justice and opportunity. it calls for a new national security strategy and new alliances that are more forward seeking and acting to reduce threats and a new american era of progress calls for a cleaner greener, renewable energy future. [applause] and i am the first candidate but i am not the last to call for moving america forward by 2015 -- by 2050 201 -- to a 100% --

creating new jobs and creating new opportunity. none of these things happen by chance. they do not happen by accident. to get wages to go up, there is another thing that we need to do and that is to get 11 million of our neighbors out of the underground economy and into the opening light by passing comprehensive immigration reform. [applause] there are also a couple of things that we need to stop doing. as a party, and as a country. among them, giving a free pass to the bullies on wall street. we must reinstitute -- and we must reinstitute it today. we must prosecute financial crimes and if a bank is too big to fail and too big to jail and too big to manage, then it is to big and it needs to be broken up

before it breaks us up. [applause] and we must stop sending american jobs and profit overseas with bad trade deals like the transpacific partnership. many of you remember the return on nafta. it was notada. we traded away good manufacturing jobs in towns and we got back empty promises and empty pockets. i am fundamentally opposed as an american to secret trade deals that our congress votes on before we are even allowed to read them. your republican governor, terry branstad has shown us the

direction their party would take us, cutting taxes for big corporations and then telling you, that iowa does not have the money to invest in your own children's education. welcome to today's republican party. they once had leaders and visionaries. lincoln, eisenhower. now, they create traffic jams and dismiss science. [applause] and now, the leading candidate for president is donald trump. after his racist hate filled comments, the los angeles times ran a headline and i quote -- republican field divided on donald trump's comments about mexican immigrants. divided. as in not sure he is wrong? if donald trump wants to run on

a platform of demonizing immigrants, he should go back to the 1840's and run for the presidential nomination of it know nothing party. -- presidential nomination of the know nothing partno-nothing party. in this summer of anger and frustration and discontent, if you become doubtful about our countries brighter future, just talk to young people. you will seldom find among them climate change deniers, someone who wants to discriminate against gay couples, or someone who was the bash immigrants. -- who wants to bash immigrants. the poet laureate of the american dream bruce springsteen asked once -- is a dream alive that don't come true or is it something worse. whether that dream is made

through again for all american families or not, is not up to the big banks and it is not about the big money trying to take over our elections. it is up to you and me. it is about whether we can still have the ability of the people to move our country forward. you are a vital choice to make and i need your help. after this election is over, when a child asks you who you voted for, i want you to be able to tell that child i voted for you. when you see a dad's wedding through another long shift in order to give his daughter a better future, i want you to be able to tell him -- i voted for you. when you see a mom working long hours at two jobs for the dream of sending her son to college, i want you to be able to tell her -- i voted for you. when you see a young father who hungers for a job to feed his family, i want you to be able to tell him -- i voted for you. we are democrats for good

reasons because ours is the party of the people, hours is the party of action, hours is a party that will rebuild the american dream and make the promise real for all americans again. god bless you iowa. god bless the united states of america. [applause] [cheers] >> and now for our next keynote

speaker, senator bernie sanders. [applause] [cheers] bernie sanders is in his second term in the u.s. senate at the endorsed candidate of the vermont democratic party. prior to that, he served 16 years in the house of representatives. senator sanders was appointed to the democratic senate leaders as the chairman of the committee on veterans affairs, and is now the ranking democrat on the budget

committee. in 1981, he was elected to his first of our tro terms as mayor of burlington, vermont. during which time, u.s. news named him as one of the 20 best mayors in america. [applause] as a student and civil rights activists in the 1960's, he was a frontline champion for equality. he was arrested protesting housing segregation at his college and marched on washington with dr. martin luther king jr.. senator sanders was consistently defending working and middle-class families and stood up for the excesses -- and stood up against the excesses of corporate america. please join me in welcoming senator bernie sanders. [applause] ♪

[cheers] mr. sanders: thank you very much for that generous introduction. my wife jane and i are delighted to be in the great state of iowa with you tonight. i am also delighted to be here following other remarks from great democrats who have dedicated their entire lives to public service. i think them all. -- i thank them all. let me begin by suggesting something to you that i think few candidates have to say. that is, even the reality of economics and politics in america today, no president, can

bring about the changes we need in this country unless there is a political revolution. [applause] what that means in all honesty, is the powers that be in washington, the billionaire class, the coach brothers, the lobbyist, the corporate interest, are so powerful that nothing will get done unless millions of people stand up and loudly proclaim -- enough is enough, this country belongs to all of us and not to a handful of billionaires. [applause]

my point is that no president does it alone. we need a massive movement from coast to coast. so that republicans understand that when they give tax rates to their billionaire friends, when they tried to cut social security or medicare, we know what is going on and that vote will be their last term in congress. [applause] here is something else that all of us should know. the day in our great country we are the wealthiest country in the history of the world. today. in the history of the world. but most americans do not know

that because almost all of the wealth rests in the hands of the few. america now has more wealth and income inequality than any major country on earth and it is worth -- worse today than at any time since 1928. the issue of income and wealth inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, it is a great political issue of our time, and together, that is an issue that we will address. [applause] let me be as clear as i can be. there is something profoundly

wrong when the top 1/10 of 1% own almost as much wealth as the bottom 90%. there is something profoundly wrong when one family own as much wealth as the bottom 40% of the american people. there is something profoundly wrong when millions of workers are working longer hours below wages when we have the highest rate of child in party in the industrialized world and almost all new wealth and income goes into the hands of the few. enough is enough. that has got to end. it -- together, we will end it. [applause]

this campaign is sending a profound message to the billionaire class -- you cannot have it all. you cannot have huge tax breaks when children america go hungry. you cannot continue to send our jobs to china when millions of americans are looking for work. you cannot hide your profits in the cayman islands and in other tax havens.when there are massive unmet needs in this country. the greek of the billionaire class -- the greed of the billionaire class has got to and, and we are going to end it for them. [applause] but it is not just income and wealth inequality.

it is the fact that we have millions of people working longer hours below wages. and that is why we have got to raise the minimum wage to a living wage. no one in america works 40 hours a week should be and that is why i have led the effort in the united states senate, not only against permanent normal trade relations with china, but i am pleading it against this disastrous transpacific trade agreement. when 33% of white kids between 17 and 20 who graduated high school are unemployed, when 36% of hispanic kids are unemployed, who graduated high school, when

51% of african-american kids who graduated high school are unemployed, we need a massive job programs to put our people back to work. [applause] when our infrastructure, our roads, bridges, our rail system, is crumbling there is more than enough work to do. let us rebuild our infrastructure. creating millions of decent paying jobs. today, the united states of america embarrassing way remains -- embarrassingly, remains the only major nation on earth that does not guarantee health care as a right for all people.

i voted for the affordable care act and it has done a lot of good. there are still 35 million americans with no health insurance and many more who are underinsured. now is the time for us to say -- loudly, and probably, america will join the rest of the industrialized world with a medicare for all, single-payer program. [applause] when my republican colleaguescolleagues, as they have done for years tell us that we've got to cut social security despite the fact that millions of seniors are trying to survive on $12,000 or $13,000 a year, we say no. you are not going to cut social

security, we will expand it by lifting the cap on taxable income. my republican colleagues in the senate talk about family values. y'all know what they are talking about. if family values says a woman does not have the right to control her body. i disagree. they say a woman should not be able to get the contraception she needs. i disagree. they say that our brothers and sisters who are gay should not be able to enjoy the same marriage right that heterosexual couples enjoy. we disagree.

but we also have family values. not based on hatred, but based on love and compassion. when a woman has a baby, she should get 12 weeks of family and medical leave to stay home with her baby. [applause] now there's another issue out there that must be addressed. perhaps, the most important issue of all. that is to understand that the supreme court's decision on citizens united is moving this country toward an oligarchy form of society because it is allowing billionaires to buy elections with super pac and unlimited sums of money.

the acceptable any american conservative, moderate, or progressive. that the koch brothers alone will spend more money in this campaign cycle than either the democratic or the republican party. when one family spends more money than either of the two major political parties brothers and sisters, that is not democracy. that is the path of oligarchy. that is why citizens united must be overturned. i have not made many promises in this presidential campaign.

but here is one. no nominee of mindless more will be made unless the woman is clear that will vote to overturn citizens united. and furthermore, we've got to go further. we've got to move the public funding of elections so that anybody can run for office without being dependent on the wealthy and the powerful. at my table this evening i have seven or eight wonderful young people. everything that i asked them to join me night highlight a tragedy in this country. these young people collectively oh more than $1 million in student debt.

i have introduced legislation and will fight as president of the united states to make certain that every public college and university in america is tuition free. we must also significantly reduce student debt. it isn't safe that people in this room are paying 8%, 9%, 10% interest rate when you can refinance your home for 2% or 3%. i'm not going to do that. and when we talk about our stability as adult, that means we have the moral obligation to

make certain that we lose this planet for our kids and our grandchildren in a way that is habitable. it is an international embarrassment that my republican colleagues refused by and large, technology reality of climate change let alone are prepared to do anything about it. in my view, this nation must and can lead the world and transforming our energy system away from fossil tools to energy efficiency and sustainable energies life when, solar, and geothermal. -- like wind, solar, and geothermal. and like everybody in this room i want to see an america where

when young black men walk down the street, they will not be harassed by police officers. they will not be killed, they will not be shot. [applause] to his credit president obama did something extraordinary the other day. he had the courage to go to a federal jail and talk about the absurdity of a criminal justice system in which one out of four male african-americans will end up behind bars. that is not the america we believe in. and that is why we believe that

it makes more sense to invest in jobs and education, not jails and incarceration. and to our 11 million brothers insist more living in the shadows today, we say loudly, we are going to bring you out of the shadows and on a path toward citizenship. and we are not going to divide families up. brothers and sisters, we are the wealthiest nation in the history of the world. there is nothing we can't accomplish. do not think small. think big.

think about a future where the kids get the best education in the world. where young people have the jobs and education they need. where women's rights are protected. that is an america we can become if we stand together and not let them divide us up by race gender, bisexual orientation. let's say together, let's remake america together. thank you very much. [applause]

>> i am honored to bring our final keynote speaker, jim webb. jim webb's career is defined by a lifetime of public service. he started out serving his country as a marine in vietnam where he was awarded the navy ross, the silver star medal, two bronze star medals, and two purple hearts. he then served as assistant secretary of defense for reserve affairs before becoming secretary of the navy in 1980 evan. in the process, he became the first naval academy graduate defer -- serve as the civilian head of the navy.

he was elected where he wrote and cited the passage of the post-9/11 g.i. bill. jim has always stood up for those in need and we are honored to have his passion in the democratic party. please join me in welcoming jim webb. [applause] jim: thank you very much. i've had the pleasure of serving with bernie. we had the pleasure of serving in the same campaign cycle. bernie, you always fire me out. i'm here to turn the lights out tonight, and i appreciate the invitation to be here.

this is the center of where we need to change america right here in the democratic party. it's amazing to see the energy tonight. after what was just said, i would like to ask those that have served our country to stand and be recognized. [applause] one of the great moments in my life, passing the post-9/11 g.i. bill, i wrote it and was sworn in. introduced on the first day i was a senator. there were a lot of people that thought we would not be able to pass the most comprehensive veterans legislation since world war ii.

i would like people to consider this when we are talking about those of us that would like to be your president. he built a prototype. a leadership prototype in the senate. over the objection of the bush administration. and since that time, more than one million of our post 9/11 veterans have been able to have the kind of education that bernie sanders just talked about. get your tuition paid for, get a monthly stipend and get you a true first-class shot at the future. i was also noticing what i was looking at the program tonight only the supporters mentioned on the back page, only about 10 of them are from organized labor. i would like to say that i'm very proud of the fact that i

and the only statewide candidate in the history of virginia that walked the picket line during a campaign. those of you know the risk that was involved in that. i am also the only statewide candidate ever elected with two purple heart and three tattoos. we see so much demonizing of organized labor these days. and when i look at that, it will be considered the most successful economic system in the world. if you want to measure it by the balance of payments, germany has a higher balance of trade on average than china does you look at their corporate set up, they have had organized labor.

we need to america that organized labor is not the enemy. it is the friend of the working people. it is the voice. it is the way to turn these economic issues around. we got a lot of problems. we have heard eloquent remarks tonight about those problems and i would like as consider what you would want in a president in order to start turning these issues around again. i would say that we have resident that can articulate the values of the democratic party and worked at the same time across party lines, achieving bipartisan anhui the country forward in a way that we have in the past.

bernie sanders just mentioned criminal justice. in the fact that the president this week -- some people had been convicted unfairly. this broken criminal justice system. political advisers told me i was committing political suicide. we stuck to those issues. we put a piece of legislation forward, but in terms of creating a commission that would examine all of the different intersecting holistic issues that have affected our criminal

justice system, we got a bye and from 100 different states across the country in supporting this. including supreme court justice kennedy and the american bar association and the organizations all the way from the national sheriffs association, to the aclu and the marijuana project. the only bill where the marijuana project and sheriffs association were both on it. we lost on the senate. it was 57 votes. i raise this issue in 2011 after we lost on the senate floor and i suggested that the $14 million, put that in an executive order and we can truly bring the best minds of america together and put together the right kind of solution that will

affect those kind of things. and i would say tonight, it has now been nine years since we started working on this issue. i would ask that the president consider taking one day, writing this in negative order, getting this commission together, and let's ask the whole criminal justice system. and i hope you will consider this, that of all the responsibilities of the president, none is greater than that of being your commander-in-chief. i've spent my entire life in and around the united date military. i served in vietnam as a marine. i spent five years in the pentagon, for them as executive. i've served as a journalist

around the world. including beirut in 1983 when the marines in beirut. some will horrible explosion that killed over 200 of our american soldiers. i was in afghanistan as a journalist. i understand how the american military work. i understand foreign-policy issues and i will assure you that if i were president, i wouldn't have never urged an invasion of iraq. and i would've never voted to authorize that proposal. five months before the invasion, i wrote a piece in the washington post warning that this would be a disastrous strategic really are of historic proportions, that we do not

belong as an occupying power in that part of the world that would empower iran in the long run in china. in that it would unleash sectarian violence inside iraq and turner soldiers into terrorist targets. if i were your president, it would not have authorized the use of military force in libya during what was called the arab spring. i warned repeatedly that use of military force in libya did not meet the test of a grave national security danger and would have negative impacts in the entire region i am still working with simkins turns about the agreement that was just signed with respect to iran. i would not sign any executive

agreement establishing a long-term relationship with iran if it in any way it's the balance of power in that final region of the world. and particularly if it accepts iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons. i will never accept directly or indirectly iran's acquisition of new your weapons. -- nuclear weapons. at the same time, i would make it clear that we have strong national security risk and we need to address them. we talked a lot about these other issues that everyone is in strong agreement with tonight. let me speak about my view of what the american dream really means. i call it the american trifecta. when our system works right, we

have a safety net under people who need it. who have fallen into hard times or have retired. and then if you can truly make it, you can go all the way in this country. what does it look like when it doesn't work and what is it look like it does work. i will never forget the experiences my mother had growing up in utter poverty in eastern arkansas. she was one of eight kids, three of whom died in childhood. not childbirth. there was no educational opportunity there was social security at that time. she picked strawberries. at the age of 17, he said her hands felt like the bark off of the tree for having to work so

hard. she gave me the energy i have today to be standing in front of you today. it was franklin roosevelt programs that gave people in that part of america the safety net under them and the chance for true fairness. and when it works, i think the journey of my life -- the entire extended family got on a boat to the south china sea, like hundreds of thousands of other vietnamese at that time. dated not know if they were going to live or die. when you think of our obligations as a country we had no legal obligation to go save hundreds of thousands of vietnamese and bring them into this country, but we had a moral obligation that we did that.

they took her family off the ocean. she grew up in new orleans and started working in a shrimp factory when she was 11 years old. neither of her parents spoke english. we could have said, wait a minute. it we don't have any obligation to these vietnamese. we did not do that. the greatest americans in this country today. she had a fair shot.

when i tell you that i would like to be your president. help us in this journey. thank you very much. thank you for being here. all of you. >> let's give another round of applause for our fantastic presidential candidate. and let's give another round of applause for our wonderful hall of fame into the.

i want to thank you all again for joining us on this very special night. a truly incredible night for being in iowa democrat. it's the end of the evening and i will keep it short. i want to see you and all of your neighbors on top tonight. i'm not going to see all of you knocking doors, making phone calls and talking about why it is so important to elect democrats put iowa's families first. we are going to turn iowa blue. so please have a good evening and be proud to be democrats. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> speakers will include florida

senator marco rubio, donald trump, dr. ben carson, tech to send her to use my cut, former texas governor rick perry. bobby jindal. rick santorum, and wisconsin governor scott walker. >> politics, books, and american history. the road to the white house features presidential candidates and begins in iowa. we are live on c-span from cedar rapids where the democratic party hall of fame dinner is. all-day saturday. we are live at the family leadership summit. interviews with two republican presidential candidates. lindsey graham and john kasich.

saturday morning beginning at 11:00 eastern. we are live for the 17th annual harlem book fair. talks on african-american identity and race and politics. in sunday night at 10:00, and poultices the greatest issue a single u.s. is immigration. saturday afternoon starting at one of hockey's, we are live at the symposium on first ladies from florence harding to michelle obama. speakers include an author historian, and executive of the first ladies library. and from the national archives in case he, how the u.s. government used propaganda to persuade it is to join the military, by were bonds, and keep national grid.

the congressional internet caucus advisory committee held a discussion on musical streaming and the congressional role. members talked about how profits are distributed to artists and writers. >> a few more weeks to recess. who has more power in digital streaming marketplace? in conjunction with the international -- caucus itself, the cochairs are senator leahy.

it's been around for almost 20 years and created basically to do educational discussions and found the fair and balanced way on these really interesting in the innovative internet policy discussions. in these issues have gotten more interesting, more and more new. thanks for showing up today. it is really important. i would like to send my thanks to them because this particular issue, i remember having some fun with the title. we are not trying to pick a fight between congress and taylor swift but it gives me some latitude for me to hang myself in this together this russian. if you want to follow the conversation, it is #policy stream. we will be posting information and audio after the event and

links to the c-span streams a you can enjoy the conversation that way. our next event, in remote access to stored e-mail of constituent. it will be on the twitter account as well. keep checking the twitter account or upcoming events. i am the least qualified person to moderate this discussion. i'm not a copyright expert or an internet music x for. but i am a person that is always shocked at what the government role is in the music that we listen to. it's really interesting and it's not really well-known. i might be in a good place to keep this at a high level. and if we come out of this six waning and having a better understanding of the role congress plays, how it affects

the music you listen to over your favorite nervous is, and how artists get compensated and negotiate their compensation that would be great. we are not trying to get into any discussions about legislation on the table. my understanding is the house -- the house judiciary committee's copyright in this area. other agencies are also looking at this issue. we thought we will down a good basic understanding of how this works in a very general level. you could take a full credit course in georgetown or a gw. and the entire semester, maybe not really understanding this entire marketplace. if you are an economics ager, do your phd thesis on the rate setting aspect and you probably still wouldn't understand this entire complex space.

mike wrote a piece trying to break down these a great and he said it is fractal he complex. it is a really good description. we're going to keep it high-level and keep it at that. about if congress were taylor swift is more powerful and this internet streaming marketplace you might've have read that she had a disagreement with the most valuable company on the planet a couple weeks back and wrote a letter. and within 24 hours, that most valuable company on the planet changed its mind. it was a breathtaking display of power. her twitter followers just gob smacked by how powerful she was. he pleaded to her to save the

whales and create sensible gun control and maybe better climate change policy. it is that display of power that is interesting. it can also affect you. everybody is listening to music on their favorite services and accessing it in different ways. it is really kind of immediate to all of you and the american people. that was not the case 10 to 20 years ago. it is interesting that today everybody is invested in this. we wanted to frame this as a discussion, not to pick up i but you really show the role congress plays a bit of mangled legislative his or he. you go back to the original copyright act for the constitution. i'm only going to go back as far as 1995.

congress passed the digital performance right down recording act, limited only to digital transmission. basically, internet transmissions and that is the scope of what we are talking about today. it created that in 1995. , it is the sound recording on your tape or on your digital file whether it be in mp3 or streamed to you from the service. that is the sound recording, that performance. and we can get the detail little bit about. always for non-interactive transmissions. you can't control the song you listened to.

you can fast-forward one but there are a lot of companies that do this but modify is probably the best-known. the act requires those services that they as editorial license control that space and interactive internet trends missions. or you can select the music you want thick songs you want. you don't own them but they are streamed to you. that is kind of like the spotify model. and for that, congress says he will have to negotiate a life's agreement with the copyright holder. in 1995 when they passed this act, we can talk about spotify or pandora, but what were you doing these a 1995? -- musically in 1995?

many of the people on the hill were busy being born. generally, it was a long time ago. who was streaming music, no one would raise their hand and even if it were, it would probably the pirated material. those are fcc's from a college server tucked away somewhere. for the latter are of that decade you started to see more and more sophisticated piracy and the introduction of the three lawyers. i had a nomad. other people had rio. you take your entire cd library and you ripped it into your mp3 player that would only hold 12 songs or something. at a really low bit rate.

in 2001, apple introduced a massive ipod. it was in 2001. and you could put your entire cd catalog into the ipod. and in 2003, itunes came out and you can download songs one song at a time. $.99. you kind of phone that song. it was kind of the streaming situation or the internet distribution system of the day. piracy kept going. it was running in parallel, of course. it wasn't until later that pandora and other types of streaming services started coming into the fold. and again, those are the non-interactive services were they just kind of stream. you fast-forward one, but you get what you get in a certain genre.

that has grown tremendously over the past several years. all of this is going in europe, there is a company called spotify. you could select the songs you wanted to listen to. it finally washed up on u.s. shores in 2011. we have this really amazing marketplace. and what we are going to do is try to explain the role in all of this. to start us off, i will introduce our speakers and maybe ask folks to later on simply, the different types of roles that government has and how it works out. audience questions and answers. it is going to my right.

we also have julia who is the vice president of global policy for sound exchange that is a country born out of the 1995 act. to her right, we have karen erickson who is the future music coalition, an interesting advocacy group. and jonathan potter is with the app developers -- app developers lines. kind of explain this and a little more detail. my understanding is that taylor swift was not available for this panel. these are for really great speakers. we would have to have a panel of 100 people to represent every part of this particular

ecosystem. we will do our best to latest all down. a variety of companies that i mentioned. he might explain the music services you have in your pocket. how does this all work? a really quick overview of that. >> thank you, to him and thinks the internet caucus for inviting me. in 1995, i was sure for them streaming music company historically known as muzak. wikipedia told me it was the first streaming music company. the first band to stream was in 1993 at xerox parc. they streamed at the way to australia. when i think about internet

music. we are just talking about streaming which is just straight or meant. think about the variety of services online today that if come and gone over the years. i group them into four basic business activities. there are twists and turns on each one. tim was asked me to talk about some of the business and the rights and royalties. to layout your basic business model, one of them is just internet radio. take your radio station, put it on the internet. in the purest sense of internet plus radio, think about your local radio station. that was mark cuban's second company.

he did very well and so betsy yahoo! for $6 billion. that was your pandora model. at the basic level think about it as preprogrammed or consumer influence. pandora is probably the best model of that now. you can specify to shuffle. you want to hear a mix of songs that you like and you know.

you can take it from your collection. the next traditional model that is morphed. our, sam goody? no? they also used to sell their familiar -- paraphernalia that your parents didn't want you to have. $.99 a download, $1.29 a song. as he on that song you go to any device you want. the branding is interesting. he wants to do higher bit rate

streams and he has pulled his music down from the services that young people listen to. he has clearly defined his audience as my parents. i love neil young. but he put his music out on a tracks. the most interesting business model is conditional downloads or subscription services that let you do a variety of things. rhapsody. title. another one where the star thinks it's going to make a difference. those let you do almost everything. you can stream repackaged stations.

you can download conditionally. as long as you pay per month you can still listen to that music and you can port it to your device and take it with you anywhere you want. probably even to your hard drive in your car. those different business models are out there. some of them are free. they try to upsell you to a subscription price. pandora free is advertising system or did -- advertising supported. they're both internet radio. they fall under the statutory licenses that we will talk about.

i will tell you a true story. he was at a record company. two people listen to music at the same time. and the record industry executive said we have to charge than double. i think we can let two people at once. of course, like the cable subscription, it is for tvs at once. all of these services are legal, licensed. none of them have anything to do with tyrosine. it is a great thing. and they put billions of dollars

to artists, writers and labels and publishers as substitute for the fact that tower records doesn't exist anymore. >> i mentioned that the 9095 act was for sound recordings again. what you catch on tape and store in an mp3. there are other rights that make this -- alex is in a best position to talk about it from his perspective, the other types of rights can you explain the next lay her complexity? >> i want to thank the internet caucus for having me here. we will see if it sounds any good. [playing megan trainor] ♪

everyone has heard that song, i assume. does anyone know who the band is? megan trainor. does anybody know who wrote that song? this is the core issue. actually, there are two copyrights and every piece of music that you hear. there's a copyright in the sound recording that megan trainor made. that it's her voice and the orientation. everything you hear. and there is a copyright in the musical composition. someone sat down. i will tell you who. they wrote the lyrics and the musical notes played by the different instruments. you have a music composition and the sound of wording. for that song, megan trainor was one of the writers and kevin k dish is the cowriter. so you have some guy even never

heard of who is the writer of the piece of music that was recorded. you probably wouldn't want to go see him in concert because you don't know him. you're probably not one to buy t-shirts with his face on it. he is a writer. it is a completely different copyright and a completely different business than the sound recording business. i'm going to talk about the songwriter because that's who i represent. they have these two copyrights. copyright gives you the exclusive right. you are the person that has the right to do certain things. for music, you have the exclusive right to reproduce make copies of your work. you have the exclusive right to publicly perform your musical composition.

the other rights don't advocate music. to get to the core of what this panel is about, you have these exclusive right. you don't actually have the right to go out and size those rights in the free market and most cases. in most cases, your ability to license those rights is regulated in one way or another. i will give you a quick overview of what that is. when someone wants to publicly perform your music and talked about the 1995 act. songwriters have had the right to perform their works since the first copyright act is treated in 1789. when you want to publicly perform a songwriters work, a radio station, bar, restaurant,

pandora, modify. cable television or broadcast television. they've got to get the rights from the songwriter. imagine how complicated it would be if a radio station had to go out and find and negotiate with the songwriters of all the music that you hear on a radio station. on pandora, it is millions. it just isn't efficient. you can't have that kind of negotiation. >> names of people you never heard of. >> you have this market problem from a licensee side. it would not be able to find the songwriters and have negotiation with them over the right.

if you are kevin k dish, if you want to drive around the country and knock on the door of every bar and restaurant and concert venue and sit down with pandora and try to cut a deal with them, that crazy. you will be spending all your time on the business side and not on the creative. the market has fixed this and been going on since 1940 eight. performance rights organizations. as cap is the oldest of it. it has 500 -- 550,000 songwriters that have given them the light -- the right to license public performances. 550,000 songwriter members, a repertoire of over 9 million songs.

they go out and licenses all the entities that want to publicly perform that music and takes in royalties from the entities. over 700,000 licensees across america. taking those royalties, trying to figure out his music is played, how much. that business model has been around and is kind of an efficient way to make sure licensees and songwriters can meet and license the music. but in 1941, they decided to subject them to an antitrust consent agreement. 1941, you had the government as a backstop here, setting the rules for how songwriters these it is licensed through public performance and won't get into

too much detail. but that is one way the government regulate this marketplace. the government is going to control how rates are set and how much is actually paid by licensees to songwriters. that is the performance side and the regulatory regime. jonathan mentioned download. itunes and spotify. to do interactive streaming, you have to have a separate copy that you send a stream from. that world of how songwriters licensed reproductions it is a completely different regulatory regime that congress has control over. it is subject to a statutory license.

congress actually said if someone wants to make a copy of a musical composition, they are going to have a right to do so. you don't have to negotiate with the songwriter. congress is going to create a three-judge panel in the library of congress, determining the rate a songwriter will be paid each time their music is copy. the rate today is 9.1 cents. in 1909, it was to send. it has gone up a little. that is how copies are regulated. there's one area where songwriters write are regulated by the free market. every time a movie or tv studio takes music and, they have to

get the right from the writer. they are making a copy to include a tv show. that negotiation between the producer of the tv or movie at the songwriter is a free market negotiation. they have to get the right end of the songwriter doesn't like what they are being offered they can say no. . >> and we've only scratched the surface. composers right, we talked about having part of the system covered by the doj.

the copyright review board knows get back to 1995, the digital performance right sound recordings. it did a lot to explain the services you listen to on your phone and how that marketplaces grown and what has enable that the grown. the mi has enable songwriters to get compensated. the marketplace for the performance right congress made in 1995, julia can explain more about how that has evolved in the role her company played in that. >> i thought i would have to lay groundwork here, but we talked about the copyright.

it is fixed permanently somehow to be a recording. before 1995 and 1998, the performance rights were created there was no performance right percent recordings under federal law. there is no to collect royalties. the need to pay royalties developed. the industry collectively created the collect royalties and that was sound exchange. it was in the corner of an office, a group of people trying

to figure out, how are we going to do this? you go to every person that makes a recording? it is time-consuming and complicated. and in two thousand three, became an independent and nonprofit collective. find megastars, local bands major labels. we represent all recording artists and copyright owners which is normally a record label but it can also be the artist who decides to record for themselves and owns their own master recording.

our border flex that we represent the industry. it is half representatives of record labels, indie labels, major labels, their trade association. half artist and representatives. artist managers and artist unions. every dollar royalties is lit 50-50 between the copyright owners. that is something that is unique and is a reason that artists love sound exchange. people often point to sound exchange is the bright spot for transparency. and the recording industry.

we represent everyone. we appear and support fair pay for artists and copyright owners. that is the easy view. i have a more complicated view of you want me to get into that. >> not yet. the highest level, that goal is to make sure that creative people could get compensated quickly and services could get access in the most efficient way possible.

>> the nonprofit collective designated by the royalty board to collect royalties paid for the public performance of sound recordings via noninteractive digital audio transmissions to u.s. listeners pursuant to statutory licenses that congress created in section 112 and 114. most of the first part of that sentence you guys understand because the terms of been defined by everybody else on the panel so far. you understand public performance, sound recording what noninteractive is. you understand that it's audio, not audiovisual. and that it is digital.

the fact that terrestrial radio does not pay artists any royalty is a big inequity. >> on your old car radio, the am/fm, you are saying that whoever broadcast that does not pay the artist, but they do have a radio with wi-fi, then they do. >> 2500 services. unless you think this is only spotify and pandora. it is webcasters like pandora. satellite radio, am/fm broadcasters that decide they want to simulcast online.

it is cable and satellite television systems that have music on them. the stations that are up in the big numbers of your cable channels. that is the complicated description. in 2005, when sound exchange made its first distribution of royalties, the total distribution was $20 million. last year, sound exchange distributed $73 million. this is where there is exponential growth. we really are aware of technology and music and where there is growth.

we get to the question about who is more powerful. congress created this and it's the platform on which the whole industry was born. this year will be closer to $900 million for artists. >> some definitions of power is just money. this is one piece, the congress just yielded three quarters of a billion dollars for artists. kevin has been asked to do a bit of cleanup. issue like megan trainer or she the guy that wrote the song? where do the powers of taylor swift come from?

>> there are two kinds of copyright embedded. there is a sound recording, the composition. the performer and the sound of running copyright owner. in the composition which compensates the songwriter and the publisher. we also understand there are different kinds of internet streaming. it funnels royalties to sound exchange and there is interactive streaming. it often requires direct negotiation with the owners of the sound recordings which is usually the record labels.

congress mandated that they have to negotiate. >> yes. >> they have to negotiate the licenses. it is statutorily created. and for unaffiliated artists people that don't have any record label at all wants to get your music on something like spotify, you go through an aggregator. these companies that can get your music stockton pretty much every on-demand listening environment. usually they take a percentage or a flat fee. it's a lot to digest. you can start to understand why the head of the copyright office was giving a speech about the next great copyright act and said something to the effect of music life thing being so complicated and broken benefit

get it right, we can get the whole statute right. musicians are doing their best to navigate all of this, the maze of policy structure. figuring out how to patch this together to resemble something like an income. they are working these new places and keeping track of these rapid development. it has to be time to write and record music. we try to take a lot of the information you just heard and crystallize it. and we did, but even this is complicated it is also useful

from a policy perspective. what if we just wipe it all the way and throw all of the middlemen? musicians and songwriters in a time to go around essential company that wants to life than music. 80 partners to bring the music and the marketplace. the performance rights organizations, publishers, and aggregators. there's just no way to do it themselves. all the partners need to be accountable entrance parent. and the important thing to understand is that with nearly

any partner some of the time were a lot of the time, they will get perspectives from artists themselves. different artists have different business models. where they are in a marketplace will determine how the hill about a particular development. with streaming, they've been excited about some of this shouldn't -- aspects. and there's a lot of diverse opinions because they are working on the scale of their potential audience. the goals are different. but rather than get too deep into the content of the critiques, i want to wrap your head around this stuff and give your framework for how to think about music policy generally.

what do artists need from streaming music and how to the decisions made by congress impact them? there are two big categories here. access audience and fair compensation. it's flourishing of new services has created incredible opportunities for artists who would've been shut out of the marketplace to really start driving and connect people all over the country and all of the world. there are serious questions we have to at about the economics for artists that don't have the kind of mass scale that taylor swift does. they can be difficult for congress to really know the impact is owing to be. the licensing questions and the structures allow for different service is.

there is a larger policy background >> as far as time goes, i think a good baseline going. have not gotten into what taylor swift is beyond this omnipotent being. is she a composer, dishing on the sound of orting sacco is she? what is her power come from? >> we do know that she is a songwriter and performer. >> she is also somebody that records for an independent label and that has been really important to understand because she has a degree of freedom to

speak out about his industry structures and the ability to pull her catalog and services that could the more difficult. you know that song, we are never getting back together? she talks about her exes. she said something about some in the record that cooler than mine. i thought that was funny because her records are indie records. plex taylor swift, she pulled her music was written to. she had the right because she is a recording artist, to pull the sound recording. she did not have the right to pull the musical composition so someone else wanted to record

the song that you just mentioned and put it up on spotify or apple, she would not have been able to pull that off because she is a member of emi and they are subject to a consent agree and they have to give a license. she was not able to pull her compensation. >> her powers are limited. what is limiting her power? >> the federal government has said that through the consent decree, any member of bmi are asked cap and that is 90% songwriters in the u.s., they have to license. any service, even before there is a price set. >> and spotify land, she has the power to pull her songs from spotify.

can she pull her songs from a noninteractive streaming service like pandora? >> the sound recording but not the composition. >> not the sound recording. in the land of pandora, it is a hypothetical. it gives them act as every of commercially available music. as long as they pay the statutory rate designed for that. and the artist does not have that. >> congress gave that invisibility to pandora? those types of things, we can go through each service and even

experts can get confused about that stuff. there is a chart that mike put together rate and how much this entire ecosystem is dictated by the rate that they charge. is it fair market value and other types of economic analysis even more so than the chart that kevin had. the government is involved in different ways that can control how these rates -- is not just fair market. it's open market. >> the rate standard -- it's a license. here we go. if you want to start a digital streaming service in the united dates tomorrow, anybody decides they want to start a digital training radios or this, you

have two choices. you can go to -- this is just on the sound recording died. you can go to every record label and copyright owner and try to negotiate a rate with them. start your service with whoever you're able to negotiate a rate with create a way to pay those people. or you can go to the copyright office, fill out a one-page warm with eight questions on it. give them a $40 check and you have access to every piece of commercially available music to use on your streaming service. the next thing you do is you call sound exchange. this is the kind of service i have, what is the rate that i pay? in that system, you pay a rate set.

the standard used to set that royalty rate is in the law for webcasters. it is a fair market value rate. for satellite radio, it is a different rate. below market. >> you asked how the different rates and the compositions -- there are some really crazy result because of the regulatory structures. pandora streaming all about that base, it contains two copyrights. without a recording, their of the nothing to live too. what pandora pays to the songwriter and the performer are completely different amounts.

the performer gets 12 to 14 times more than the songwriter because you have these two different regulatory structures that use two different processes to set the rate. there are kind of conflicting and different regulatory regime's. >> i promise i will go to q&a and i have a hard top at one. i have time for one question. please make it a quick question. >> nothing about music with all. what does that mean? there is no music involved in that. >> i'm not familiar with the deal you're talking about. by question.

>> there is another party in these transactions. if somebody goes out to buy a cd, they can give it to their sister or donated to a charity. i wonder if you can address the sense of that. the license as opposed to a physical product. >> the first sale doctrine has protected consumers rights to resell copyrighted material if they are reselling or giving away transferring the specific item that they have purchased. if you buy a book, you can resell to the used bookstore or a cd. i believe that has been litigated a couple of times in the context of digital products.

the court said, when you're giving away the digital download that you purchase, you are reproducing that download in order to give it away. unless you have somebody your hard drive, you're not giving away the specific purchased item. you are giving away a copy of the purchased item and the first sale doctrine does not apply to copies just the item you purchased. >> you have a look at terms of service. it could really just be a license. and you have to be very clear about that. we had a whole panel on this issue alone. you can download the mp3 and you can own it as far as i'm concerned. the panel is called first sale no resale. and at the end i asked the panelists and mentioned a

service. it do they own it? copyright professors are like, i have to go look at the terms of service. i'm not sure. it's really complicated. that is just one slice of the entire pie. the answer is not easy. let me go down to who wants to take the question first. who has more superpowers in the internet music marketplace? congress? for taylor swift? is there any limit to taylor swift's power? >> while there is a statutory license, there is a limit because she can't take her recordings off of the services that are using the statutory license. if you want to crack at the rest of this --

>> sure. on the license side, the government is more powerful. the government tells her that she can't take her music off. >> she joined ascap or bmi. that was her choice. >> she could probably afford to have people go around to the radio stations. she is uniquely powerful, just because of her sheer scale, she could rise above that particular regulatory -- >> any songwriter can go to a nonregulated and nonconsent. >> i bet they give her an invitation if she wants. >> going back to taylor swift.

she is obviously tremendously powerful and getting the message about porting fair pay for artist out there. congress right now is looking at copyright issues, looking at music license inc. issues. there is one thing that we should do. we should make sure artists and copyright owners have the opportunity to get your market alley for their work. >> e.on on her rights, she has influence. if she wrote that letter to the most valuable company on the planet or a polite letter to congress, when they turn around in 24 hours? >> there are people we could ask. >> the rest of the independent sector has done a lot of the groundwork for taylor swift for that letter was public --

published. i used to think she was omnipotent until she got stuck on that stage thing at the national park on monday night. >> she could not just fly off of it? >> if we are going to use taylor swift is a proxy for artist especially if enough of them felt they that we should have a voice in how the market basis ruptured and it should not just the about competing business interests. the best outcome and the most power is when congress and the artist works together to create ongoing working relationships to it that bush dialogue and create collaborative and healthy solutions. >> look, taylor swift is at a

magnificent art in her career. she has influence, which is not to be confused with power. she can't undo the statutory license, and if they for the same amount or stream and the artist that nobody has ever heard of, it is a pretty interesting limitation on power as well. >> if you think about how the american public responds, we can look at polling and what kind of lyrics they put out. it isn't so high. i think taylor swift is clearly the winner in that one. it is served as kind of a baseline as congress starts reworkings of these and. it is understanding a little bit

of that. you have to take it, everybody is invest. i want to thank the panelists and thank everybody. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> on the next washington journal, they know how bert discusses developments in the 2016 republican race for president. and the former undersecretary of state for arms control and international security looks at within the ironic nuclear agreement, how it will be implemented, and the impact on the middle east. we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on faith book and twitter.

>> this weekend, the c-span tour travels across the country with time warner cable. to learn more about the literary life in history of kentucky. a savior who had a socialist political career. like if you had asked who has a bright shining star in american politics on a national scale someone is going to be governor or president a lot of people would of said ed prichard of kentucky. he worked in the white house in his early 20's and seemed destined for great things and came back to kentucky in the mid-1940's. was indicted for stuffing a ballot box and went to prison. that incredible promise just flamed out.

>> we also visit ashland, the former home of the speaker of the house. >> the mansion at ashland's unique situation. he rebuilt on the original foundation. what we have is a home that is essentially a five part enteral style home. and then added later of details added by his granddaughter and great-granddaughter and no one. >> theater sunday afternoon it to a lock on american history tv on c-span3. >> all five democratic candidates on the program for the demo that it party hall of a dinner in cedar rapids.

the annual fundraiser honors state democratic leaders. the candidates include lincoln chafee, former secretary of state hillary clinton, maryland governor martin o'malley, bernie sanders, and jim [applause] >> thank you. congratulations to all of the hall of fame inductees, a great group of people working hard to get democrats elected in iowa. [applause] thank you for inviting me to this night in cedar rapids. you will hear from five good candidates tonight with a wide range of passions and experiences.