2000 American Technology companies. We produce the greatest, coolest, most amazing event in the world. That is the ces held each january in las vegas. We will get to that in a moment. For some of the Member Companies . Everybody would expect to see at your local best buy. Startups as well. The you take policy positions . We have very strong and clear policy positions. We are very strong in certain areas. We stay out of other areas. What is one policy position . We believe strongly in the concept that innovation is a good thing and we should foster innovation. It is something that is in our dna. We excel at it. We want to make sure that people can create something without having to get permission from government. We want to make sure that the United States is the leader in innovation. We try to push policies that favor innovations. What did you learn at ces this year . Wilbur ross was there with many other government officials. He spoke to our board and said, coming to this event gives me faith in the future of our country. Its the optimism that innovation produces. Its the sense that we can improve the human condition. We can live better. People can live safer, healthier, longer lives. They can get better education and communicate and have greater mobility. The production, clean water, things like that. The most fundamental problems are being resolved by innovation and technology. How many exhibitors . Over 4400 companies exhibiting. Almost 3 million square feet of exhibit space. Attendees . 170,000 people came from around the world. Over one third of them were from outside the United States. Joining us today is rebecca kern with bloomberg government. Shes the Capitol Hill Technology policy reporter. Thanks for having me. I went to ces and saw the exposition floor and a lot of the policy sessions. I wanted to dig into the fastest areas of growth you are seeing at ces this days. Theres a lot of health and wearables. Where else are you seeing growth . Health is one of the biggest. Technology is now an alternative to a lot of surgery and drugs and things like that. We are growing by leaps and bounds. The is so Much Technology can do. Mobility is very big. We see self driving cars and electric cars and hybrid cars. We also see different forms of mobility, including urban mobility involving things, helicopters. Theres all sorts of electric scooters and things like that that are getting people around. All forms of transportation. Yesterday, talking about transportation. You testified at the house energy and Commerce Committee about autonomous vehicles. Could you share some of the thoughts you shared about at the hearing yesterday and the biggest take away . Theres a tremendous opportunity we have in the history of mankind where we are losing one Million People per year through death and injury from car accidents. Most of those accidents are human error. 94 is human error. Its a tragedy that does not have to occur if we get it right. We will empower disabled people. There was a witness who was blind, representing blind people, in favor of this technology. Theres also older people as well. We are all aging. Getting someone back and forth with doctor is a big deal. This a competitiveness battle going on. Major countries like china and others that are trying to lead on self driving cars. We have a lot of the technologies and silicon valley. There are so Many Companies out there who are part of this ecosystem. We have to get it right from a Government Point of view. Ces has become a car show. It is a show with most every major car company there. They are showing things. It is not a consumer show. Its a show where the entire ecosystem is there. They are doing deals. To succeed in any business, you have to do deals across the industry. We have chip companies, Different Things that consumers need. We have brand names. Consumers want to replicate their life at home. They want to put it in their car. Internet access, audio, video, geolocational devices. There is only Different Things you can do. Are we ready for Driverless Cars . Consumers are voting with their pocketbooks. They are spending a tremendous amount of money. Almost are cars sold now have features, all these things which may cars safer. Were starting to see a real dip downward despite the fact that we are driving more miles, the death rate is starting to go down. Sometimes, it is based on miles and speed limits and things like texting on driving. We are starting to see a great trend that im hopeful will continue. Where do you envision legislation happening in the space . The house is looking into some form of legislation. It has been tried before. What are some principles you would like to see . Legislation went through the house and Nothing Happened in the senate. The trial lawyers changed their position for some reason. Its a challenge. It will affect auto parts replacement and tow truck drivers. All these legacy businesses and jobs are different. I dont think its our obligation as a country to make sure that lawyers have jobs. I dont think we should allow lawyers to control legislation. They see every new technology as an opportunity to sue or preserve the status quo. We face that. We know that a lot of things, status quo industries trying to protect themselves. With the Motion Picture industry, recording equipment, we see what they are doing with the internet. They are trying to impose liability on internet companies. Same thing with hotels. Theyre trying to shutdown airbnb. Between the Movie Companies and airbnb, they are trying to shut down a lot of new competition. Americans have the right to do that. What makes america greater is that our government doesnt listen to them. We favor innovation and progress. Thats who we are as a country. Not protecting the horse and buggy companies in the industry that is out there. You have a tech liability field. It has been in place for over 20 years. We are now hearing conversations in Congress Looking at trying to break that apart a little, amended in certain ways. Make a contingent on political speech neutrality. You are not allowed to have these protections and less you are ensuring speech online is neutral. That has no bipartisan support right now. Do you forsee cracks happening in this congress . If i do my job right, they shouldnt. Senator josh hawley has a very promovie industry bias. He doesnt like the technology industry. Hes gunning for an award. And then you have joe biden who has said some of the same things. The Motion Picture industry is very strong, a powerful lobbying group. If it wasnt for section 230, the internet today would not exist. Theres a reason that we have five times the number of unicorns in the United States than europe despite the fact that we are culpable in size. We foster innovation. We said, this is a great technology. It sounds confusing. All it means is if you are an internet provider, you are not responsible for what individual consumers are posting on your website within certain exceptions. It is a First Amendment thing. That is something which has allowed us to grow. If this happens, if section 230 goes away, will google and twitter survive . Yes. Will a new startup survive . Absolutely not. Theres a problem there. This is not about these great people saying, we are concerned about consumer things. Some senators are falling for this. It is a ruse. They are trying to say, this is something that is hurting americans. This is about the First Amendment and someones right to state their opinions online. We are dealing with the coronavirus thing in china. The Chinese Government shut down the internet and the doctor that warned about it. Now, we are dealing with a major health issue. They are shutting down the government. We are not china. We have a fundamental belief in the First Amendment. That is what is embedded in section 230. Whether that can survive, i do want to have to find out. We dont want to see Congress Erode section 230. It was Just Announced that britain is developing an office of internet regulation to be called offcom. Is that a slippery slope . It is the name of the existing British Telecom office that is out there. They have been reasonable. Britain has been reasonable on a lot of these issues. We will see where they go. Their approach has been, we cant innovate so we will regulate. Theyve been unable to innovate. It has been one of the challenges they recognize. They are trying to change and somebody different ways. We will see what happens. I think that they pulled out of the eu because of the regulations they were imposing that britain didnt like. I would be surprised, given british sensibility, if that is the direction they are going in. I think the brits will be looking to innovate, free up some of the strictures they felt because of the eu. Im not losing sleep over that. Maybe i dont know enough. Speaking of europe, they passed one of the largest privacy regulations in the world right now. We are looking at doing something similar in our congress. What are the prospects you see for a settled privacy bill moving this year . What principles would you like to see if such a bill were to move . Its a great example of good intentions. The fact that it is across europe is a good thing. We copy it very similarly. It makes it better if there is a global sentiment. That allows anyone to start a business. What we are most concerned about is not that having 50 states with 50 different rules, ruining american business, granting money for their state. What makes america strong is the fact that on a national basis, we have a large innovation hungry population. We create and we invent. When we construct that by having 50 different states with 50 different rules, thats a big problem. The number one thing is a national standard. Lets stop giving incentives for trial lawyers and attorney generals to sue businesses. We want to know whether something is legal or not and we will follow the rules. Especially if it can be done on a national basis. Lets not incentivize every lawyer to do it. The problem i have with lawyers, i am a recovering attorney, they have huge classes and they pay a lot of money. Anyone can get a law degree. Its not that big a deal. You have people with a license to sue. They use it. Theres only so much of a lawyer tax a competitive disadvantage is the number of lawyers we have. If we have an issue with another competitor, we should trade what they have for our lawyers. We have some new lawyers. We need to reduce our numbers. Its out of control. Provision lies, where do you want to see privacy moving . You would like to see one national standard. Youre in support of preemption. Heres the deal. We face competition now in three ways. We have ourselves, europe, the europe approach is privacy everything. They have very little innovation. You have the right to be forgotten. You could do some really horrible things and to race your whole internet history. Thats what they do in europe. Thats the law. China goes the other way. There is no privacy. They know everything about you. Its unacceptable to us and the europeans to say that this is what a government does. To me, its like goldilocks and the three bears. I would rather be right in the middle. All these new technologies require information and data. I was talking to the head of a Major Medical department. Im lucky if i can get 4000 data sets. The chinese have 400,000 and its no big deal. Privacy is great. Theres a tradeoff in privacy with whats reasonable. We value privacy in our room information. Not in every situation. If safety is involved, is health is involved, we give it up a little bit. We always will and we should. With competition and advancement, people prove that they are willing to give up their information for the greater good. It should be on a voluntary basis. The Business Community needs standards to follow. We will follow them. Dont kill all innovation in the name of protecting innovation. If anyone has lost a loved one cancer and we can get yours, this is something we need to share information on. Hopefully people will do it voluntarily. Are we aware that we are sharing this information . Health care information is more sensitive versus commercial information. The reason that facebook and google are Free Services is because you are sharing information. You are getting ads that are suited to you. Some people dont like that. We are moving to a narrow where there are standards. They govern how these devices share information. No one is talking about that anymore. The industry has set up guidelines that they follow. You can opt out. These are things which are common sense guidelines. Its just a matter of having voluntary guidelines. We cant afford to choke innovation. We cant afford it for our own health and safety. Do you think more people are comfortable giving their information to a private Company Rather than the government . We do give our private information in our tax filings. There is im not going to say the government will ruin everything with information. I think if you trust the brand of the company, that will be the next competitive field, who is the name you can trust with privacy and your own information . Apple is a great example of a company that people trust with your information. Samsung is another great example. They have done a great job of keeping people keeping peoples information private. We have seen action in californias ccpa. Can you give us an impression . It went into effect didnt worry first. January first. It is not enforceable until july 1. We saw a flurry of activity. These companies have a lot of lawyers. It may affect funding or their ability to start a business. It was not a bad thing. It got me off of a few mailing lists. I dont think state should have their own laws on this. We need a national standard. It is chilling. If we have to follow 50 different states, that kills the startup community. The Big Companies can do with 50 states. Its more extensive for them. Its difficult. You have to explain to consumers in different states what you are doing. How can we get to a National Standards . Stc recently announced they will start looking at mergers. What do you think of this retroactive look back of mergers . They have not indicated they will take action yet or not. Do you think this look back is warranted right now with the size of these Large Companies . . The the federal trade commission has a normative authority. We talked about competency policy. This look back at acquisitions going back several years, i find a troublesome. It was so long ago. I would be overwhelmed with millions and millions of documents. Maybe they will find something they think is interesting. Tearing apart a merger that occurred 10 years ago i dont how you would do that. I used to be an antitrust attorney. I think a company has a right to know what they are doing is legal or not. Those Companies Made acquisitions that followed the law. Ftc approved many of them. Now to say we are looking back, that scares me. Sometimes, government lawyers try to create new areas of law. If you are a business, you have a right to know what the law is when you do a business transaction. It should be clear. We have to challenge congress on this. What is the law and how can a business follow it . Dont create new theories because you dont like something that happened 10 years ago and theres a change in political administration. Lets deal with the future. If you have a new policy, make it perspective. To make it retroactive is not fair. Its not the american way. The white house chief Technology Officer also attended ces last year. Is it important that the white house have a cto . Absolutely. The first chief Technology Officer in the world was my best friend don upson, the secretary of virginia. He did something amazing. He made an effort to standardize the law of commercial business on the internet so business could occur. It was a bipartisan effort. It took over the world. Thats the standard today for the world. A chief Technology Officer and government has a clear job. He has continued the work of the Obama Administration in every major renovation area. Thats a lot of what has gone on with the trump ministration involving technology. They say, heres the path and the policies to make it happen. There has not been this shift in change from one administration to the other with technology for the most part. Its really important that companies and businesses are looking forward. Technology is changing so rapidly. We know where we want to go. We know how we want to serve our people so they are healthier and safer and better served. We also know that it makes sense to have someone with thats their job. He has done a fabulous job. His predecessors did a great job. Are we on the right path for 5g . Every 10 years, theres a new g. Faster, better, bigger wireless. If it was not for wireless, our economy would not be as healthy. We would not have the jobs we have. We are on the cusp of 5g. The technology is there. There are standards being worked out. There are all sorts of different ways of doing it. Its not like theres just one standard. Theres different sorts of spectrum that can be used. Our government has determined that one of the Chinese Companies is putting us at risk if we use the technology. I dont know. I trust the government there. I we are in a bit of rip and replace. We are very focused on how we get to the broadband, to the rural communities. They are suffering without any g. Thats really important. It will get there. Its a question of when and how. At the ces, i convened meeting of two of our cabinet secretaries and european ministers. We talked about coming european and American Values in terms of privacy, liberty, they are very much in common. We have a mutual interest in making sure we get to the next technology, especially when china is harvesting data from everyone and they will have the data they need to do well in Artificial Intelligence and robotics. They have double the population of europe and the u. S. Combined. They are producing one million stem graduates the year. That is multiples more than we have in europe. They have everything they need in china to go forward. We have a sense of liberty and democracy and a shared interest in making sure that we are competitive and innovative as well. 5g is one of the chokepoints. Is huawei an exhibitor at ces or a member of cta . They are not a member but they exhibit at ces. Even though they cant sell in the u. S. Ces is an international event. They meet their customers from elsewhere in the world. I dont know if they will be next year. Speaking of 5g, are we on the race to beat china . I know we are heavily competitive there. Will that inhibit our growth in reaching broader 5g deployment . I dont know what it means to beat china. They will have more 5g because they have more than we do. Some of it, they were accused of taking. We have a good affinity with kia and samsung. Other companies have stepped up to try to make sure that we can go forward as western democracies and make sure that we can produce something which gets our citizens to what they want which is faster, quicker, bigger wireless pipes. We are into the 2020 elections. Im wondering what you think, whether companies are doing enough to address this disinformation online. Do you think they are taking enough responsibility in removing fake videos and such . We saw an instance last week of an altered video of nancy pelosi ripping up Donald Trumps speech, slicing it with other parts of his speech. Twitter and facebook decided it was not something to take down. Where do you think this conversation is heading going into the next election . A politicians love for beating up on facebook. They all use it. I have yet to see a politician elected to congress where if their ads were analyzed by journalists, it would be totally accurate. I looked at that facebook ad. I saw nothing wrong with it. That is what nancy pelosi did. Anybody knows that she wasnt doing it while they were recognizing the 100yearold guy in our military. You are stepping in dangerous ground if you think that facebook should make judgment calls. I dont want private industry making judgment calls about political advertising. I think political advertising is why we have politics fighting each other. Is there a more reasonable course we can take . Lets limit a timeframe for political advertising. Some countries cut it off. We have to get creative to level the Playing Field for politicians. If we start having Companies Making judgment calls about what is real or not, and that is the poster child, that was obviously satire and a political ad for anyone in washington. I cant believe that was the case. I think there are really false ads. Sometimes the New York Times makes a judgment call. They have a lot of time to do that and a lot of ads. I dont think its a fair burden to put on a company like facebook or others. To say, you have to make this decision. There should be a way that does not involve them. Thats not for me to say. Thats for congress to make a decision on. I hope they make one respecting the First Amendment. It has not gotten a lot of respect lately. Traditional media is saying, thats unfair. The First Amendment protects everyone. It affects political speech, facebook rights as well. We have to be careful. The First Amendment is being torn up on College Campuses and by traditional media. It is being torn up by attacks on facebook. The First Amendment is so central to who we are as a nation. Gary shapiro is president and ceo of the Consumer Technology foundation. This edition of the communicators and all others are available as podcasts. [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. 2019] cspan, your unfiltered view of government. Created by cable in 1979 and brought to you today by your television provider. The South Carolina primary is tonight. Join us to hear the candidates reactions to the results. Live coverage this evening starting at 8 00 p. M. Eastern. Listen on our free radio app. The white house did not release a weekly address from the president. Blumenthal ofd connecticut gave the democratic address, discussing background masss the same week as a shooting at a commercial brewery in milwaukee. I am proud to represent connecticut in the United States senate. One year ago, the house approved with a 90 n bill approval rate from the american people. Is simple. To keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. Not impose any additional restriction on gun ownership. It ensures that is you should not have access to a firearm, if you have committed a felony, you cannot skirt the law by buying a gun online or at a gun show. That is it. An enforcement mechanism to prevent dangerous people from accessing weapons. If that does not sound controversial, it is not. It is supported by nearly all americans, including a vast majority of gun owners. This basic, commonsense bill has been stonewalled in the senate five Mitch Mcconnell and a republican majority that cares more about their nra rating than the lives of their constituents. When i think about this issue, what i recall is what i heard from the Senate Gallery after we failed to reach the required 60 votes threshold to approve expanded back on checks after the sandy hook shooting. One