>> dr. zagarri, who is one woman from the revolutionary period we should know about but don't? >> mercy otis warren. she was the wife as a patriot, james warren, the sister of another patriot, james otis, from a very well-connected political family of massachusetts. but her brother, james otas, had been very active in the revolutionary cause, the resistance cause in the 17 sixties and then he went insane. unlike most women, mercy otis women had been highly educated. she was educated by a private tutor along with her brother. she kind of stepped in his place and began writing plays and poems and political tracks that attack the british tyranny and they are actually published in the newspapers in massachusetts and they were circulated throughout the colonies. so she was really important i guess you would say instigator in the coming of the revolution.

interestingly enough, too she then wrote one of the first histories of the revolution published in 1805 she was a friend of abigail adams and john adams and john adams actually encouraged her authorship and venture to history so she is someone that again has been forgotten but at the time was unknown because she was instrumental in promoting the revolutionary cause. >> on the front of your book is the painting. >> it's from the early 19th century and it's really an idealized vision of a woman and she's holding -- this is the war in the gura holding an american flag on top of that is a liberty

cap and that is a very famous symbol of liberty and in her hand as an olive branch and she is dressed not in classical guard but typical when the women were used as symbols or iconography but she was dressed in the costume of time and is a symbol of peace and liberty and women were very often used in that way in colombia the image that is on the capitol is an image of a woman and they were often invoked as the most visible symbols of the early american republic. >> we've been talking with professor rosemarie zagarri of george mason university. this is her newest book revolutionary backlash women in politics in the early american republic and just recently reissued is her books the politics of size representation in the u.s. 7076 to 18 50.

now an interview from george mason university. >> professor what is net neutrality? >> it is a series of regulations on broadband internet providers that limit what your service provides you with high-speed service and can do in terms of business models and pricing. so the idea of the so-called net neutrality rule is to limit the reach or scope of the local transport network that takes you to the internet in terms of your data traffic and allows you, the customer to access any kind of

supplication or content without the discretion of the broadband provider involved so it's basically of rules and regulations that limit the business models packaging of your local googled and company. >> december 2010 the commissioner michael copps said allowing gigantic corporations to exercise unfettered control over americans' access to the internet not only creates risks to technological innovation and economic growth but it poses a threat to freedom of speech and the future of our democracy. do you agree with this statement? >> very little of it. in fact, the unfettered market that he wrestles with is the market that has created what they call an open internet. that is to say we haven't had net deutsch of the rules until quite recently and they were

applied by the federal communications commission in december of 2010 and they haven't got it into a fact yet curious of for the argument that we are seizing the open internet by applying the new regime is a non-sequitur that is to say that we've developed great dynamism and protection of the consumer interest and tremendous innovation in terms of content application by having a world in which archival companies with a be transferred or application providers can try out innovative business models and come up with business deals to try to see what works and what is most efficient and that's what we've had and if you want to predict that you ought to expand in the future rather than giving different regimes. >> what about the commissioner cop's point that we are turning over a lot of the control to the large corporations which is, test? >> they are not turning over

control. the extent that the gatekeepers as they are called pejoratively have the ability to squelched consumer interest that's the system we've got it's not that we are turning over control but as the system that developed and it's been quite progressive and innovative in terms of competition and investment in these networks that now is essentially take about 70% of u.s. households to the internet at fairly high speeds. indeed there has been a complete the first filed under the net neutral the rule wasn't the july and telecommunications operator or a large-scale u.s. cable operator. was against a rather small u.s. mobile carrier called metro pcrs and indeed they have a very one would think innovative low-cost discounted program for people who want to get unlimited data, e-mail, text on mobile networks

nationwide. metropcs offers you to do this and for $40 a month unlimited but does not allow on that network and video streaming. they don't support it however they did work out a deal with google, the odor of youtube, to allow their customers, $40 a month customers to get on limited youtube videos. that is discrimination under the sec net deutsch of the rules perhaps, we don't know yet because the company hasn't been at adjudicated although i will see in the fcc order the specifically singled out this kind of business model, the metropcs has hazardous and discriminatory basically in fight it. i wasn't one of the large operators one would think are the big corporations. this is a mobile operator that is trying to compete and at that time had 8 million customers one was the size of fries and for example and it was offering

discounted service to customers who don't want to pay higher prices so that was an option on the marketplace that was i think by any measure pro consumers of that is the problem in fact in regulating the internet. >> thomas and professor of law and economics here a george mason university and is director of the information economy project at deval school. what is the information economy project? >> we try to use the tools of the law and economics in the academic world a analyze public policy issues and the information sector and then we have academic studies, conferences and lectures by noted academics. these are innovators in the telecommunications and the media world. >> he's also written about cable-tv and the public policy. this is your newest book just coming out "and the fallacy of

net neutrality. is this a republican to the credit issue opposing and that neutrality? >> welcome you know, in some respects you could make an argument that certainly i think network neutrality became part of the democratic party platform a few years ago but certainly the democratic party split on that there's significant members of congress who are democrats who are very general hostile to let nature of the comely and on a, you know, republicans are probably more unified on that but certainly some of the policies that result began. in the bush administration with voluntary guidelines that were similar to the net neutrality rules we have today is a there's been republican support. >> what is the economic harm that can come to as vice?

>> or metropcs. in fact it's not just the internet service provider to read these are the firms providing application because they depend on the infrastructure built by tsp to have broader coverage and agree that higher speeds. so the directorate is that in fact their regulatory overhang that is opposed by matt neutrality will in fact discourage investment incentives and so you will get less dynamism if you have less opportunity as a network to engage in it innovation and different kind of pricing packages and in fact there's strong evidence in the past when the federal communications commission had open access regulations on the telecommunications providers

which is competing with cable modems for the high-speed internet access services in the market that these dsl services actually did have stuff and then when they lifted those rules into bills and three, to those in the five and a couple of deregulatory moves in fact the point of the united states is significantly shot up relatively the cable modem grows and just other factors. so there is strong evidence that these kind of regulatory interventions can be very negative. also point out that fiber to the homes is the most advanced sort of service. it's now available in a little more than 20 million u.s. households by the latest data. five of the homes couldn't be built in the united states essentially until there was a very flippant to deregulation. leyva say there would be no sharing obligations, no access requirements, nothing like open access for network neutrality.

finally in late 2004 when that regulatory determination was made you finally got bills held in significant parts of the u.s. with fiber to the homeland that is a high-speed service. it's expensive to build. xu the economics are not proven out very well but there was an investment that is in place and so a lot of people have access to, you know, ultrafast broadband as a result and that wouldn't have taken place under the regulatory regime that they would hope to accomplish. >> professor, why doesn't google's the advantage in the network neutrality rules as put forth by the fcc? >> it's a policy matter google does ask for the network neutrality and they've already for some time there is some question as to how vigorously pursue the last few years to make deals with other telecommunications providers to provide a watered-down version

but the argument certainly is they are at the edge content provider and certainly a successful one. they have a product that people are -- very popular and very valuable to internet users, so their fear is that they are not allowed to get access to network customers without the screen of the broadband on esp and they may be cutting deals with their competitors they might listen their market position that might be a less preferred business model for google. the other side is they are engaged all kinds of lessons but mullen mitchell business, so if you are looking at for a clear wider market of broadband service providers wireless that uses the fourth generation

technology that is partly owned by google and the of participated for putting in the google searches the default on handsets to lubber to delete to deliver it that is a violation of and for controlling the in fact the most important business event in the history of google according to the biographies of the company's neighbors in 2002 when google before went public and had cash in the bank paid america online the largest at that time in putting the federal trade commission with market power they paid to essentially displace the current version for the aol and become the default search. this was important to get access to immediately another 40 million customers that is the