Skip to main content

tv   Communicators with Representative Mike Doyle  CSPAN  April 8, 2017 6:31pm-6:59pm EDT

6:31 pm
unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service america's cable television companies. it is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. ♪ democratic senator mike doyle of pennsylvania is the new breaking men are on the energy and congress subcommittee on technology. he is our guest. beforeould start come up we get into specific issues, given the atmosphere in washington and capitol hill, are there issues you think that can be found and worked on in a bipartisan manner when it comes to telecommunications policy? mr. doyle: sure, and i think the energy and commerce committee history of bipartisan communication. we've put out more bipartisan bills out of our committee than
6:32 pm
any other committee in congress. subcommittee, there is widespread agreement on broadband deployment and getting more spectrum into the market. i think those are two areas where democrats and republicans certainly can work together. ranking memberw on the subcommittee, what you bring to the table? mr. doyle: i think my perspective is i came to congress not to represent companies but consumers. mind, i havein always been a strong advocate for competition and innovation. when companies compete with one another, one of the ways they compete for that business is they innovate. in areas of the country where you see competition, consumers they lower prices and latest innovations come at latest state-of-the-art equipment and services. where there is no competition, consumers do not see that. i have been a champion to make sure we have a market where
6:33 pm
companies can compete on a level playing field and consumers can benefit from that competition by new, innovative recs and lower cost. host: your home area of pittsburgh has become quite a technology area. has.oyle: it really i have lived in pittsburgh all my life. my father and grandfather were steelworkers. we used to be a one horse town. we have a much more diverse economy, in part of that economy , we arey is technology a technology center. robotics is big in pittsburgh and also energy. is soan economy now that diverse that there is not any one industry that could cause us some of the hardship our city went through during the decline of the steel industry. it is exciting to watch. host: joining our conversation hill." orter from "the
6:34 pm
i want to talk about an area where there is less bipartisan agreement. earlier in the month, congress repealed the fcc's rules providing super protections from isps collecting data on things like web browsing habits. , senate republicans voted uniformly to pass it. on the health site, democrats picked up 15 republicans. i want to know what you were able to do to get this over to your side of the aisle. think first of all, if you would go outside in the street right now and grab the first 50 people you could talk to and ask them if they think it is a good idea to allow their internet service provider to sell their personal that without their permission, i would bet you could not find one person amongst that 50 that would say it was a good idea.
6:35 pm
we made that very clear during the debate. this took place in the senate initially, and it was done while we were debating the health care bill. it pretty much went through the senate without much fanfare. the house picked it up immediately. i think consumers get this. the fcc was just trying to implement a rule that does three basic things. if an internet service provider wants to use your personal data, wants to market your personal data, a have to ask your permission. that was first. second, they have to take reasonable measures to secure your data. thirdly, if there is a breach, they have to notify you that your data has been breached. those are three simple basic consumer protections that i believe the vast majority of americans agree with. the reason the fcc did this is because when the internet service providers were tolassified from title i
6:36 pm
title ii, they no longer had jurisdiction over privacy matters with regards to internet service providers. it were no rules in place. what these rules attempted to do, and they were promulgated over a six or seven months period and finally reported in october, was make sure there were some consumer protections in place that were enforceable, and what the republicans did with the cra is basically event the rules from going into a fact. most of -- into effect. reactedthe public has negatively. when the president signed the cra yesterday, i did not know the --notice any republican going to the signing ceremony and i don't think the president himself had any publicity around the signing of this cra.
6:37 pm
they arehink particularly proud of this and they know how the public has reacted. have another shot at this fight, what would you have done evenly to win and get more republicans to your side? mr. doyle: i wish we had more time. this came up quickly before we could organize more grassroots support. i think the other thing that worked against us was we had many republicans who wanted to vote with us but they were some of the same republicans that had just voted to send health care bill -- well, they did not actually vote because the bill was pulled. they felt to do this twice euro might be difficult. we talked to many republicans who agreed privately that the certainly was not a good movement for the party. it is kind of ironic that they use the cra, which is a rather blunt instrument, to do this. the of us know what
6:38 pm
commissioner is planning already with regards to reclassifying ii.isps to title i think it was a mistake by the republicans in the senate and crae not only to do this but put members in a position where they have to vote for something that the public has roundly rejected. the arguments in favor of the repeal of the privacy rules was it did create parity with the rules affecting isps. mr. doyle: i disagree with that because it does not have parity until such time that the isps are reclassified to title i. right now, the ftc has no jurisdiction over the isps as long as they are in title ii. as we see today, there are literally no rules and no call on the beat. the chairmanf moves forward to undo that neutrality and reclassified the
6:39 pm
isps back to title i, they would fall under the jurisdiction of the ftc. right now, there is the parity because there is no rules. host: is that net neutrality fight going to be a big one? mr. doyle: let me say this, when those rules were first being promulgated, the ftc sued for million -- received 4 in mills from consumers about net neutrality. if the commissioner tries to undo this net neutrality, which is so popular and the public is so much in favor of it, this is not something they can do with a cra or rush through. this is a process that will take some time. i believe they will hear from literally millions of americans who do not agree with the action the chairman is about to take. democrats sitand
6:40 pm
the with republicans, will public outcry over privacy be a point of leverage for democrats to use? mr. doyle: i think this is all part of it. the reclassification affects both. i think obviously, if this is become the past -- is to come to pass, the public will have something to say. we want stronger consumer protections. the handheld device in your life top, your entire life is on these devices. your medical information, financial information, personal and family information, information about your children. a sense that the internet service providers and the people who are handling this data are not using this data strictly just to make money for
6:41 pm
themselves, but they are getting your permission and that they are protecting your data so that it is not hacked, and if it is hacked or breached, they let you know right away that it has happened so you can take action. that is what we are going to fight for, no matter whether this is done in title i or title ii. i would venture to say that most people think the net neutrality rules put in place by chairman wheeler, i believe are very popular with the public and provide safeguards for the little guys come up basically. compete on a level playing field with the big providers. i think that is important. experts, people on the side of cable, cable groups themselves, make the contention contention that -- vigorously that the ftc can
6:42 pm
handle these consumer complaints. why do you think it has to go to the fcc? mr. doyle: the ftc has no rulemaking authority. their action comes after somebody is harmed. a provider has their privacy rules and if they are not doing what they say they're going to do, someone can file a complaint with the ftc. the fcc rules i believe were stronger consumer protections. if set out rules ahead of time for isps saying, you will ask people permission before you try to market or sell their data to someone else. you will safeguard their data, take reasonable measures to do that. you will let them know if there is a breach. and theles are set up internet service providers have to comply with those rules. it is a much stronger consumer can -- consumer protection than what is offered by ftc, which
6:43 pm
doesn't have rulemaking authority. if we want parity, i would like to see parity along the lines of what the fcc has done to protect consumers, and not simply the ftc. a lot of the internet service providers are basically saying, trust us, we not going to do anything bad. not, but they will there is nothing in the statute right now that says they have to and there is no cop on the beat. we are trying to set down a set of rules which we do not believe were heavy-handed that puts the consumer first. ali: another argument some would try to advance is that free markets are capable of handling these sorts of issues and it is not in comcast's best issues to do something that would agitate its consumers like conduct a policy they are finding to be unpopular. why is this not sufficient coupled with the ftc
6:44 pm
regulations? mr. doyle: republicans are always talking about free markets all the time and what free markets decide. these companies are in business to make money. any problem with that. i am a capitalist and i understand companies are in business to make money. but we have something going on today that has not existed in the past. -- there's information is nothing these internet service providers don't know about you. they know more about you than you know about yourself. -- what youre saying your doctor, where you do your banking. they know everything about it. i think that puts a special responsibility on these internet service providers to abide by a set of rules. the idea that they just say trust us, we will not do anything that would make you mad and hurt our business, i don't think that is good enough in this day and age. i think the public expects us to
6:45 pm
protect them from these things. these are not heavy-handed regulations we are talking about. these are rather direct, simple things that all isps can follow, and i think most, by the way, are following that information already. with the exception of whether they prefer to see people often out. opt in or ali: the cable industry argument tothat is they are not able collect the sort of data under these rules and internet companies can, and consumers are not protected from internet companies. why should companies like google, netflix and twitter be able to connect -- able to collect that sort of data as verizon?o at&t and mr. doyle: there is a difference.
6:46 pm
if you go on google and you don't like google's privacy , andy, you can go to bing if you don't like bing, you go.go to duck duck a lot of consumers don't have choice in internet service providers. if they don't like the policy, they are out of luck. i think the difference is consumers have choice with other vehicles that are regulated by the fcc. they do not have -- regulated by the ftc. a lot of americans do not have choice with having multiple internet service providers where they can say, if i don't like what my cable company is doing, i will go to my phone company. unfortunately, that waste is not exist for many americans. ali: do your constituents specifically, who are not pleased with these actions, what can they do?
6:47 pm
are there future fights they can support? mr. doyle: i think you are going to see a lot of people involved in the net neutrality order. if the chairman moves to undo net neutrality and reclassify these isps, i believe, just commentsthe 4 million the fcc received when the implementation of this order was put in, i think you are going to see a groundswell of people that are going to get involved in this. i think the privacy battle has awakened them that this is coming, if anything. ofhink people are aware where the chairman is moving next, and i think they are getting prepared for that. i think you are going to see a real battle over this. host: representative doyle, have you got any inside word on the two vacancies in the fcc? mr. doyle: i don't.
6:48 pm
i hope they are filled soon. i would like to see a full complement of commissioners. i think the fcc works best when they are at their full continent. this administration has been moving unfortunately very slowly in making these kinds of appointments and getting these positions filled. my hope is that sooner rather than later, we will hear names and the senate can get to work. i think the first will be a one seeone appointment, we will a democrat and a republican probably nominated at the same time. i hope that happens sooner rather than later. there any commissioners whose candidacies you are supporting? jessica rosen seems like the most likely option. senator schumer has a supported her as a key voice in this kind of thing. mr. doyle: i have not currently supported or been pushing any
6:49 pm
person for the appointment. both the that democratic and republican nominees to the commission are people that are going to put consumers first and look out for the little guy and spur competition and innovation. that is what i am looking for. anyone who meets that definition will have my support. host: given the time we're in right now and changing technology, is this a good time to reorganize the fcc? mr. doyle: i don't know if there's ever a good time to do it, but the fact of the matter clyburn's termr is ending i think in june. i think even the chairman by the end of the year will have to be renominated. obviously they could stay on. commissioner clyburn could stay on until they make the reappointment. i think to have two vacancies right now, most of us would asfer to see those filled
6:50 pm
soon as possible. my hope is that the administration, they are up to their neck in alligators these days, that eventually they find time to put forward some names that the senate can vote on. host: you talked at the beginning of the interview about areas of cooperation, and one of those was a broadband deployment. ,hat have you and your chairman marsha blackburn, discussed along these lines? mr. doyle: we want to see more broadband deployment. part of this involves how we ease some of the regulatory burdens, especially on federal lands and other ways. we want to make sure if we do and infrastructure bill that broadband is part of that infrastructure. the senate i believe has $20 billion in their proposal or infrastructure. i think that is a good start. we want to make sure we not only hit unserved areas but that we also deploy in underserved
6:51 pm
areas. many of us that represent urban areas still have parts that are underserved and we want to make sure that is part of the formula as the go forward. i think there is a basis for bipartisan cooperation on that, and i have expressed that to chairman blackburn, and i think that is something we can certainly work on together. has this latepye in the version two subsidy policies a little bit that could help consumers that would not be able to afford broadband, the money to do so. do you have any concerns that as broadband deployment continues into rural areas, people might have access to the broadband but not necessarily the means to pay for it? mr. doyle: if they don't have the means to pay for, then they don't have access to broadband. a lot of republicans seem to have problems with federal subsidies for anything. the fact of the matter is, in
6:52 pm
today's world, if you're not able to be connected to the internet, if you don't have access to broadband, you are just not going to make it in today's society and economy. if we want to help people in rural america and underserved parts of urban america, and help them get into the middle class and race their economic standards, it is a good investment for the federal government to make sure there is not only deployment that the people have the ability to access to broadband. if that means we have to help some americans who do not have the money to be able to afford rock band connections to do that, i think that is a good investment. ali: is that something you are interested in pursuing legislatively? are there conversations about that among your colleagues, to bring this sort of legislation solution to fruition? mr. doyle: it is certainly something we are talking about. we recognize on the democratic
6:53 pm
side of the committee that we don't have president obama or a credit fcc chairman -- democratic fcc chairman in place right now, so it puts us in a position where often times we have to react to what the republicans are doing. that we intend also to push an agenda forward that includes making sure people have access to broadband. obviously, we were disappointed to see what chairman pye did with the lifeline program when we were trying to get more national deployment because of the patchwork way states were doing this. some had stricter standards than others and there was an effort to try to streamline that by certifying people on a national basis. but he has moved against that, and under a states rights claim. i think he puts it back in the situation we saw was causing a lot of problems. we would like to see that program streamlined.
6:54 pm
obviously it should be the goal of congress to make sure that every american has access to broadband, and not just the fact is there, that they can access it. that is important for the future and imported for our economy. growing our economy is how we will reduce our deficit. out of itcut our way or tax our way out of it, you have to grow your way out of it. one of the things we can do to help people do that is make sure that everybody has access to broadband services. congressman, is there any appetite on the democratic side for a potential rewrite of the telecommunications act? mr. doyle: we will see. that is something that has eluded us for some time and i don't think i have heard that it is anywhere on chairman walden's immediate agenda. i think we are going to be confronting a lot of the issues we were just discussing on the program first, but if and when the time comes, we look forward
6:55 pm
to being participants in that that is something that is legislatively possible. i don't think we're going to see it this year certainly. we will hold out hope that someday he can be looked at. democratic representative mike doyle is the ranking member of the energy and congress subcommittee on communications and technology. ali, what did we get to talk about with the congress and? ali: the interesting places the net neutrality fight is going to play out in. reclassification is obviously going to be the most fiercely fought over par. by that, i mean the title to iition of the -- title portion being used to justify ftc regulating internet service providers. this is something that senator hasn, senator wicker
6:56 pm
expressed a tremendous issue and handling. it will be interesting to see where arguments and fights play out. side, pye has showed interest in scaling back that neutrality but has not made moves on what he is planning to do. he gave a speech where he talked about increasing the fcc's focus on economics. the subtext was he wanted to look potentially for more free-market approaches to handle very differents from tom wheeler's fcc and will likely favor industry more and perhaps advocate less for the rights of consumers. host: from your observations with congressman doyle, do you agree there is room for bipartisanship on these issues? ali: it seems like there is. certainly on things like
6:57 pm
broadband, there is very little disagreement. when you get into certain arguments, there are very polemic situations where republicans and democrats, especially on net neutrality, have very little to agree on. the democrats had eight years in the white house and have the fcc for eight years, as well. a got their way on a lot of things and they will have to adjust. we will see how it plays out. host: are the two committees, are they shaping up to be activist committees? ali: in the sense that they are activists for consumers? host: in the sense that they will look out, discuss, perhaps propose legislation? ali: i would get the impression that that is the case. obviously we have to wait and see how things play out. with my conversations with chairman blackburn and chairman thune, chairman wicker, they
6:58 pm
have indicated a large interest. i think what they are waiting for is the fcc go forward and ye to make hisp moves before they interact legislation. there are also time constraints. there are a lot of things president trump wants right now that they simply cannot handle, that are keeping them from getting the issues they want. it is an issue of what they can handle right. host: ali covers technology for "the hill." this has been "the communicators ." ♪ >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. was created as a public service by ameri


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on