>> please, everyone, warmly welcome former president bill clinton. [applause] >> thank you very much, and sanjay, bono, alicia, senator rubio, congresswoman lee, muhtar, and all the other people who have been on this program. let me begin by just saying that if you're a great deal of gratitude. as you said, bono, in a remarkable article in "the new york times" today, or what has been done. i appreciate the announcements made today by president obama, and my friend carlos. i think elton john for what he said. i want to recognize one person

who was not there today, either by satellite or in person, bill and linda gates of the gates foundation. they have helped us keep countless people alive in the fight in the last 10 years and i'm very grateful for them. we're going to the question and answer session, so i will be brief. everybody knows what the problems are. the global fund, that they will not have new grants come with serious budget problems in the united states and we had a little glitch in this testing program was prevented power of microbial gel, but i really believe that will be resolved in favor of continuing it here but it's important to remember that the death rate of 1.8 million people last year is lower than it has been.

at least 700,000 lives have been saved. so that's the dilemma. how do you get from 700,000 to two and half million, and how do we get fewer people infected? i think that what secretary of state said the other day about the end of aids being inside, because of early intervention, through a arby's, because of male circumcision, because we have the power to virtually eradicated prevention of mother to child transmission, that's all true, but we have to focus on how we propose to do that given the current economic reality. we depend on you, bono, and all the rest of you to try to get more money out of the united states and other contributors to the global fund. but i want to say that if you look at the resources that are out there now, the phenomenal work done by pepfar as it's already been said, the good that has been done by the global fund, the good that has been

done by unicef which we worked with, that's responsible for three quarters of all the kids in the developing world on aids medicine. staying alive. it's obvious to me i think what we should do. i think we of the clinton foundation to our health access initiative, are working on new ways to further lower the cost of the treatment programs and to extend them more into the rural areas where people still don't have treatment available, and to reduce that number of 60% of the people with hiv who don't know their status. i think it's also important to remember that half a world away from you and me, there's a fascinating meeting going on about the whole nature of aids in south korea and the need for greater transparency. the president of rwanda gave a remarkable speech yesterday in which he said while the countries that receive aid need

to be more transparent, the countries that give it need to be more transparent to, in terms of whether the money is being spent as well as possible. i know this is one of my obsessions, but senator rubio, you talk about how this was an opportunity for you to work in a bipartisan fashion. one thing that a screen for bipartisan resolution is to increase the percentage of american a.i.d. dollars actually going to the people for the purpose to which it was intended. united states and many other developed countries by giving even higher percentage of their income to aids than we do, only spent half, sometimes even less, embarrassingly, and half of the money appropriated in the countries affected on the people designed to be helped. so i think at this time of tough budgeting, one of the things we

americans should do, just as we lead the way will under president bush's leadership with the pepfar program, and just as president obama intends to continue it, we ought to take a lead in spending a higher percentage of the money we do allocate in the countries, on the people designed to be helped. there's a lot more money there than people know, and we could make a big difference. [applause] the last thing i'd like -- the last point i would like to make, sanjay, is the aids epidemic is coming back in america, especially among gay men, primarily african-americans. and the spending programs have been pared back, especially those that require state match for budgetary reasons. now, in 2014, if the provision of health care bill providing for universal coverage comes

down, we'll be able to overcome that. meanwhile, we are stuck where we are. on average, the treatment in america costs about $10,000. we have, our genetic program in africa and lower income countries and latin america and in southeast asia, providing the medicine itself for about $120, and single pill treatment for just under 200, children receive it for about 60. one of the things i think we might consider is bills on an agreement that i made with president bush interesting enough what he said pepfar money be spent on these generic drugs made primarily in india and south africa. if the drugs had been cleared by the american food and drug administration, the fda is being safe and effective. and almost all of our medicines were, so i think we might

consider a two-year emergency period where we could provide, not we, my foundation, anybody can do their duty not to work with us, but we can get the medicine to the states for a couple of years until the economy picks back up and then we could resume with the ryan white and the other programs doing it one of the way we did. but i'm very worried to death rate is going to go up in america simply because the budgetary constraints on the state, if we don't do something like this. meanwhile, you work on more money and i'll work on lowering the cost of delivery, and we can all lobby for a more effective expenditure of aid money, not just the united states but in the of the countries of the world. thank you. [applause] >> president clinton has graciously agreed to take a few questions. i'm going to allow our panel weighs in as well. sunshade, talking.

one-way valve what you said here at the income in terms of his drug costs, if you could just for a second give us a peek behind the curtain. you described great discrepancy in cost for treatment in a state in which you been able to do for your foundation in africa. how did you do that? i mean, what does it take to get these drug costs so much lower? were you bartering? are you cajoling? how do you do it? >> well, i think there were three things involved. the first the most important thing we did was to go to the major manufacturers and ask them to change their business model. but keep in mind, this would not have been possible if it hadn't been for the global fund, if it hadn't been for far, if it hadn't been for bilateral donations. if we had had all this money flowing in a situation it would have been possible. the generic drug manufacturer

charging about $500 a year for treatment for adults and 604 arv for children when we started. and there were operating on i thought a flawed business model. they were operating on the assumption that there have low volumes and uncertain payment so they a high profit margin. essentially you might run a small town jewelry store in the united states. so we asked them to change to a grocery store model, very high-volume, very low for treatment profit margin, and actually certain. in return for which we work to improve the productivity of manufacturing and supply chain, and then we worked in the countries that asked us to come in and help on improving their forecasting and their delivery mechanisms. so that they cut their own costs. and after that we did exactly the same thing where there were

no generic producers with aids testing and equipment. and that worked really, really well and we had a lot of big companies and wealthy countries come for and lower the unit cost. then we tried to integrate the treatment of mother to child prevention with maternal health care, with all the other things so we could have comprehensive and, therefore, lower cost treatment in rural areas, primarily in africa and east asia. so we've been doing all those things. you've got to make the money go further, but you don't have to make the suppliers lose money. all the suppliers are making more money now than they were when they were charging much more for aids medicine. even though about forming people are getting their medicine off these contracts, the truth is everybody can get the medicine

within 10-15% of our cost-cutting as it would be immoral to charge this price for these contracts and charge everybody else more. so it collapse the entire price structure in the developing world. it's been a wonderful thing. there's more we can do. we're working on more now. the gates foundation has funded most of what we do. elton john has also helped. so i think we'll have more progress on that front, but while the world is going to this economic crisis, we have really got to him at his do better, as well as try to improve the efficiency of the $8 better spent throughout the world. >> you had a question but i'm going to ask congressman lee, he talked at the end of his remarks about the issue here at home as well. and not to lose sight of that. do you have a question? >> president clinton, good to hear you and to see today and thank you so much for your leadership. i believe you signed the first

global hiv/aids and tuberculosis relief act in 2000 right at the end of the presidency which set the stage for the framework for the global fund, so thank you again. let me just a couple of things. as it relates to the domestic pandemic here in america, we have come and i love your idea about the generic drug possibilities and i want to talk with you to see if that makes sense for those of us on the hill who are very involved in this to see if we can work with you to figure out a strategy. because we have so many people waiting, you know, for their medicines now in states, florida, california. with long lists which to me is immoral and unethical. we have to forget how to provide these medications for people, very quickly. in terms of what's taken place with the african-american community, of course we know here in america, african-american women have the highest, the newest rates, highest rates of new infections

to african-american men, gay, bisexual men can we talk to all this earlier and we have to figure out a way, a comprehensive strategy to help reduce the stigma. that's part of it in terms of our education and have to figure out about a way i think in america to do that. we also have to figure out a way to convince people that it's okay to get tested. community activists have been phenomenal in pushing leadership to get tested in the churches, for example, my church is phenomenal. we haven't aids ministry but i think it's important for all of us to come forward and get tested publicly. members of the congressional black caucus does it together several times. ipods and was tested in south africa. and so, with young people, and in alliance came once this was get tested. so i think here in our own country, we have to look at best practices that have taken place elsewhere. to really begin to figure out how to develop a massive and

bold strategy so we can begin to end aids here in america and throughout the world. and so thank you again for that idea, that suggestion. and you know, we're going to follow-up and they got away to move this. you know we are going to do that, right? so see if it makes sense to serve for the generic drug profit business. >> let me make a suggestion here. first, thank you, barbara, for everything you've done. and a member how you were out there in my second term, we're trying to come to grips with this. you were one of the very first people that really understood what was at stake, but let me just make a suggestion. i think you should go to the pharmaceutical companies who are the major suppliers of the trend tends to the clinics in america today. we have a clinic a couple blocks from my office in harlem that has a couple cases, about an 85% regular take rate peaked in really well. and i think of the last time i

checked the project of $10,000 a year, but i love these companies also provide medicine at much lower cost to the pepfar program. that is, pepfar allows the funds to be spent in countries where it works on both the big pharma arvs and the generic once it had been cleared by the fda. so i think if you want to them and said to look, we understand that this is a whole economic picture for you. we understand that you have to get certain revenues in the countries that are better able to pay, like the united states, to make the economics of what you do in africa and elsewhere work. but for the next two years, every state in the united states is on a balanced budget. some of these programs requires state matching funds. they are cutting back wherever they can, and they are really making life or death decisions

based on too many dollars were too many demands. so help us figure out how to do this for two years. you know, and then after two years i think, number one, the economy will be stronger. number two, the health care reimbursement system will be different. even if you could do it for a you would make a huge difference to a lot of these states are in desperate shape, and they don't like doing this. but if you look at some of the other health care decisions that we are not here to be discussed today, they're pretty agonizing, too. they have faced some terrible dilemmas. so i recommend we don't try to jam this through our get around the big pharmaceutical companies. i think we should ask them for their support of this proposal or of a variant of it just to get to the next two years but everybody knows what we're up against you. it's not like they will lose money because the money is not there to buy their medicine. so there's got to be a way for us to work through this just for two years.

they might even allow us to get their medicine at the very bargain basement price, and get reimbursed later, let's say sometime within the next five years when the economy picks up again. there's a lot of ways you can do this, and i think it's very, very important. the other thing you mentioned, i think it's also important. there are, it's not 60% of the hiv-positive people in america doesn't know their status, but it's very high among people who are relatively recently infected. and i think we ought to look at the strategy that the secretary of state outlined for the rest of the world in terms of male circumcision and early provision of arvs and the prevention of mother to child transmission medication. and see how much of that we can apply here. i think we've got to rekindle

it. i think america just kind of went asleep at the switch, and a lot of the high risk community thought that aids was, first we thought it was only in america when it was raging in africa, and now we think it's only summer else and not in america. and i think this conference, one of the things this will do is to raise the profile of the resurgence of the infection in the united states. [applause] >> i think we're going to lose president clinton's a satellite feed here, that if you have a question i, that you want to make as well. >> well, you know, he's one of the great communicators on any subject. that we're listening to. just as we don't know, americans don't know, the world doesn't

know there's 5 million people who owe their lives to the united states, a lot of people don't know as a result of debt cancellation, which was kicked off i this president, follow through by his successor, there are 45 million children going to school in africa because african governments actually were very smart where they put the money that had been redirected from debt inflation. i don't think that president clinton gets enough credit for that. that is an astonishing figure, 45 million children going to school. [applause] >> the question relating to this issue, and others around it is if you ask a person on the street how they feel about this foreign aid business, we know that they will say, cut us.

if you ask them then to guess how much of the budget is spent on the subjects they will say 10, 20%. and when you explain that all development assistance is less than 1% of the government budget, they are completely taken aback. and then you explain all the lives that have been transformed, and in this one area, hiv/aids, 5 million lies from the united states alone, they think this is the greatest return on investment ever. my question to you, mr. president, bill from little rock, is how do we communicate that to the american people? because it's still a last dash and it's still a lot to ask of anybody, but how do we communicate the sort of, the value for money really and the bang for buck?

because we are trying but i'm not sure where getting through on that and you are a great communicator. >> well, first of all, let me go back to point you made. i've been looking at these surveys for probably 10 years, and if you polled the american people consistently, they say the first thing we should do in a budget crisis is cut foreign aid. and so you might be cynical and say well of course they would say that, those people don't vote or pay taxes. but as you pointed out, the real reason they say it is they believe come if you look at all the surveys, we're staying somewhere 10-25% on foreign assistance. and they think we ought to spend three-5%. then when you tell them we spend one because these other things have been so ingrained in them, they almost don't believe it. so i think that just the more you can say it, the more important it is.

the second point you have to make is that this works. it works for the people we're trying to help. so if you feel that there is a moral and ethical as well as a self interest reason to do this, you have to show that we actually have learned a staggering amount in the last 10 years about how to do this. not just in aids but other areas. in the third point i would make is that as the former defense secretary bob gates said, who served both president bush and president obama, it's a lot less expensive to make more friends and fewer enemies and it is to go to war and, therefore, this is an important part of our national security strategy. altering the time when there was controversy over the iraq war and america was disliked widely in many parts of the world, our popularity never flag in

southeastern africa because of the pepfar program, because people thought whether their kids lead to die. i think the visibility of the gates foundation and perhaps some of the work we did also helped, i will never forget when we went out, bill gates and i went out on a sunday afternoon to 100% muslim area in tanzania to announce what we're trying to do in malaria to merge it with the aids problem. and in a village of about 1000 people, 12,000 people showed up. now, they didn't come to see me. most of them didn't remember who i was, and i think they came because it was partly nobody was home watching pro football, but mostly because they were really smart. they thought this is about whether our children live or die. and i believe if we can get that

message to the congress into the country, that people care more about whether their children live or die, and anything else, and pepfar and the work of the american ngos and other efforts being made by a.i.d., they send that signal. we care whether your kids live or die. we want them to live. that is an enormous part of our national security strategy for the 21st century. and it's worth 1% of the budget. [applause] >> mr. president, thank you so much for your time. you look great, by the way. stay healthy, great travels, president clinton. and tony fauchi is here as well. he's the guy that i think many of us in the committee and the journalism to me turn to with our questions but you cannot have a discussion about the aids without talking about the science as well. dr. fauci sitting here in the second row.

can you just quickly, i think every speaker has alluded to this, but where are we in the science right now in terms of actually achieving this goal that people are talking about? >> thank you for the question. i think the difference now in the end of 2011 is that over the past two and half 30 demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that we have the wherewithal, if we implement it, to do what we are talking about. because years ago there was an assumption that if you put someone on therapy, thereby will vote might come down and if it comes down you may or may not inhibit greatly the likelihood that they would transmit their infection. but now if you look at the scientifically demonstrated effect of male adult medically

supervised circumcision, it's over 60% and durable enough them or four and a half years. the recent study this past year that was announced and the international aids meeting in rome this year of treatment as prevention is astounding. 96% decrease in the likelihood of transmitting to your heterosexual partner if you start earlier verses waiting. so when the president, obama, and president clinton and president bush were talking about the importance of implementing now what we have, so bringing up as the president said 6 million people from four, which they would translate to even more million as you get to 2015 is, in fact, going to skip the trajectory of the epidemic. so we think about infactions diseases, we been doing this, now it's leveling off in some countries it's going down. but if you really want to gain the momentum of making the beginning of the end of the aids epidemic, you have to turn the

trajectory down. and what the president spoke about today, and what eric and his colleagues at pepfar will be implementing is just that. not wishful thinking, that scientifically verify capability of doing what we are talking about today. and that's the first time we've really been able to do that. this is really a unique breed, not only is it an important goal but has an important scientific backing. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much, dr. fauci. just one i hope amusing story, tony. during the struggle, i would see people who would be pushing more and pushing back against the idea that intervention, people in the of administration who were incredible -- [applause] orders of the movement. but josh will recall and will find out it's impossible to get these drugs out there and science is not with us, and one

day my partner, bobby shriver called and said look, we are in trouble. we are losing some momentum. when the going to do? he said there's only one guy we could talk to the could probably turn this around is tony fauci out there in georgetown. i was in chicago and i'm going home. just go there to him and he will sort it out. [laughter] >> right. so we are right. eventually got through to tony and tony answer the phone and he says hi. tony fauci, what's the problem? we really need to talk him no, no. , i'm happy to talk him anytime. it's about the size, people are disputing it. we really need to talk. well, we need to talk sort of now. you mean physically? i'm home. might kids are doing homework. where are you? i said i'm outside.

[laughter] he made us dinner, came income kids are doing their homework. irish rock star is in your face. [laughter] that guy is a proper hero. [applause] >> we need two hours just to hear all the bono stories. doctor patricia, i want to give the last word. and again, in part because a lot of what we talk about with all due respect a lot of people is theoretical. you are someone who's been on the front lines for some time. your thoughts, your reflections? >> italy to the beginning of the end of aids, and as he said, we have all the signs, whether to implement it or not. what really happens is a lot of times when it comes to the united states and other places,

a lot of research has been done, the evidence is available. then we come in africa, pick these things and we have to implement it. there's sometimes a bit of challenges because you have to choose whether you'd be able to do or not. in fact, the most important thing is that you need people who are chained, who are ready to say that this is topical, this is feasible, this is doable. you go out and to do that, of course he face a few problems but it is very possible. so for people in africa and other places, all the evidence is there. we have all the things that we need. how are we going to work, make sure we have more than 90% of pregnant women taking a medication? i was telling alicia, every month want to do their best for the child of every mother. every mother wants the best for

their children so either health provider and tell mother, this is what, these are drugs, taken. she is like i will do it. so we need that passion to continue to do the things we have to do. we are doing them, but sometimes along the line just like people who have to give money get a little tight. that passion should go on. this is the end. everything is available. we need to continue with the drive, then it is very possible the next two years we will see him especially 2016, children born without hiv. that is very feasible. [applause] >> alicia, bono, i want to thank again for letting me be a part of this event. it's a great honor for me, and one of the most important things i think high impact things that get to do. thank you very much for allowing this event to happen and for educating so me people. we will give you guys a final

round. >> i'm going to jump right in your. you know, obvious he this is such a powerful moment, and we are all united in this desire to create the beginning of the end of aids the as we're watching and seeing all the great advancements and seeing supports only people i think it's important to reiterate that this is our potential this is our opportunity and we must take. this isn't something that is done. this is something that is finished. it's not finished, it's not over. in fact, this is just the beginning so that we can say this is our moment to create the end of aids. so even with all the amazing support from all the people that we saw, this is something that we all, everyone in this room, everyone on this panel, everyone watching at home, you know, we must participate in showing how important this is to us but it's

important to us globally. it's important to us domestically. it's important as a global family. again, reiterate how important that is. we are all living with this, we are all dealing with this. no one is exempt. no one is excluded. so we have to at this moment at a great election period, we have to make sure we're telling our government that this is important to us. we will not stand by and watch each other die. this is our family. we love each other. this is our brothers, our sisters. we love each other enough to make sure that we use our voice and we will get loud, as you said. we have to be loud and we have to be aggressive. so i really wanted to encourage all of us watching to know that this is our opportunity and we can create his legacy but have to do the work, but to continue the work and to make sure we have a loud voice. we are powerful and you have to know that your voice matters. it counts. you matter. and what you do and what you say, the government, it is,

believe me, heard it. so this is something that we have to do. i just wanted to reiterate that an obviously be so grateful and thankful for everybody's expertise. i think we also want to give tremendous love and many other organizations that are here in this audience who have done tremendous work and continue this fight. my final words, for the 30 years that have been in existence. we doesn't want to bring you love. >> absolutely. and again, just thank you for being here. and all the apple stores are going right around the country now. you will see them in starbucks going crazy with this stuff. here in the room, we have, i think some of the coolest companies i think. and unexpected places like balladeer -- belvidere is here. all the companies can come. let me see who i've got here.

we've got represents from apple, nike, gap, starbucks, dell, and belvidere. [applause] who else? she was -- wears a bucket who? bugaboo is the one. they have been terrific. and very poetic choice. this is a private peace. we've heard from the government, but alicia and myself, just particularly now, on of the people who we have learned from and the people, the people have led the way before us and with us. so if the global fund, pepfar, act five, incredible.

a small oil, quilt, amfar. where is amfar in the room? united methodist church. elizabeth glaser pediatric aids foundation. and before we finish, alicia will finish out the roll call. tonight on showtime, a film, this line is who stands beside has made on this very subject that i just saw it last night. upon 9:00 on showtime. it tells a story in the most beautiful piece of filmmaking i've seen in a long time, so check it out and just take it home. >> thank you. would also like to bring up friends of the global fight, international aids trust, resulted. aids fund, the u.s. congress, world vision. come up. [applause] , up, up.

[applause] ♪ ♪ >> today house speaker john boehner and the house republican leadership hold a news conference on jobs and the congressional agenda. live coverage from the u.s. capitol get started at 9:15 a.m. eastern here on c-span2. and later in the morning and house energy and commerce panel looks at the keystone oil pipeline project and the potential effect it could have on jobs by and become. they never union leaders will testify. that is live at 10 eastern.

the senate commerce committee took up to federal communications commission nominations this week. ajit varadaraj pai and jessica rosenworcel both present work at the fcc. if confirmed they will replace former commissioner narrative at wallpaper who left the fcc in may to join comcast and michael copps, whose term expires at the end of the year. this hearing is an hour and 40 minutes. >> i would ask you to speak first. mr. pai after that. i hope you will both introduce family members and relatives, or anybody that you might like sitting behind you. >> good afternoon, chairmen rockefeller, ranking member hutcheson, advocacy which mirrors of this committee. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as a nominee for commission of a

federal communication commission. for nearly five years i've had the privilege of serving this committee as senior to many occasions council. so i'm accustomed to these halls, this room, the deliberations of this body. but i can assure you that sitting at this to make it a different experience altogether. i like to start by introducing my family. sitting behind me and my terrific husband of 11 years, mark. and until very recently sitting beside him, were our children, caroline francisco h. five and emma, hd. like parents world that, they are our pride and joy. and those who are not here today, i'd like to note my parents, at home in hartford, connecticut. i'd like to think that a commitment to public service runs in my family. my father served in air force before going on to recruit. for three decades even the clinic for hypertension and kidney failure. my mother spent the last two decades helping run a soup

kitchen at hartford come and my grandfather before them served in the united states customs service here in washington. my great grandfather before that serve the public in a different way where he swept the streets of new york. it is a great honor to be nominated by president obama to serve as a commissioner on the federal communications commission. communications technologies are a source of tremendous opportunity. they support our commerce, they connect our communities and enhance our security. they help create good jobs. and by unlocking the full potential of broadband will alter the way we educate, create, entertain, and govern ourselves. this remind us of the great sweep of fcc authority and its impact on what every american weeds, sees and hears. the committee kitchen technology is changing at a brisk pace. laws and regulations struggle to keep up. the challenge is identifying how to identify the best into mutation in a world where change

is a concert. and innovation can invert what we think we know. in approaching this challenge i believe that a little humility helps. at the same time, it's actually essential that the fcc honor the values that are at the core of the communications act. that means the safety of our people is paramount. in communications technology should facilitate our security, promote the safety of life and property. that means universal service, no matter who you are or where you live in this country you should have access to first rate communication service. to prosper in the 21st century, all of our communities, urban world and everything in between need this access. our communication network and access they provide should be the envy of the world. this means competitive markets. are the most effective means of facilitating innovation and ensuring the public reads its benefits. this means a fierce commitment to consumer protection, communication technology and media are growing more complex. it is finally important to get

consumers the information they need to make good choices. we should strive, too, to parents and families navigate the bewildering digital world. these values derived from the law. if confirmed it will inform my efforts going forward. if confirmed, it will be an honor to continue to work with the members of this committee. i pledge to listen to you, the congress, those with business before the fcc, and above all, the american people. if confirmed it will be an honor to work with the talented members of the commission today. chairman genachowski, commission the telco and commissioner clyburn. though i've only recently made his acquaintance if confirmed i believe it'll be a place to work with the individual sitting next to me today, mr. pai. finally, after the fcc is blessed of the staff of on common stupid i know be a place to work with him day in and day out. in closing, chairmen rockefeller and members of the committee, thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today.

i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you, ms. rosenworcel. these are huge nominations, and that fast affect on the future of our country. for better or for worse. i think it's hard to overstate the importance of the federal communications commission and its reach. so i want to very clearly understood. mr. pai, i would welcome the statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. chairman rockefeller, ranking member hutchison, members of the committee, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to appear before you today. i appreciate as well the many courtesies you've extended to me during this process. i've enjoyed my beef with many of you and your staff. if confirmed i continue to continued that i love as was -- i also like to thank senators

roberts and moran for the the very kind introduction. did support has been as gracious as this was on half of the people of kansas has been outstanding. last but certainly not least i would like to thank the president for nominating me. i am deeply humbled by the honor. and if confirmed by the senate, i will do my best to be worthy of the privilege of serving the american public in this capacity. with the committee's indulgence i would like to introduce members of my family who are antagonistic this might take a while, but i stress the word indulgence. supporting me today and all days is by wonderful wife, janine. my son who has absconded for reasons -- you want to make a contribution to the record, unfortunately. alexander who just turned three months old. >> can i ask if those of you who identified at least raise your hands? [laughter] >> thank you. my parents. my mother-in-law and

father-in-law. my brother-in-law, bob van linker. my cousin and his mother. my cousin and her husband. and members of my extended in law family, janet and rod, deborah nicholson who took my son alexander outside the room, and agnes who is probably the most technologically savvy of all of us at 80 something years of age. i also wish to remember on this day my late grandparents. they never could have imagined that their sacrifices and the sacrifice of their children would have culminated in this proceeding, as by a producer pointed out i'm the child of immigrants. my parents came to the united states from india exactly 40 years ago with about $10 in the pockets, a willingness to work very hard, and they believe in

the american dream. they settled in parsons kansas in the late 1970s. just to give you a sense of the geographic scope of the place, and a town about 10,000 people, rising 150 miles south of kansas city. after seven in parsons my parents been serving the committee as doctors at the county hospital. they still work there to this day. i can say that i am glad i grew up in rural kansas. the friends i made in the experiences i had gave me valuable perspective on life, and as i grew older i find that i appreciate that perspective ever more. as a child in rural kansas, i remember it was expensive to make long distance calls using our bulky telephone especially to relatives are brought to our conversations tended to be efficient more that expensive. i recall also we could only choose among three channels on the manual dial of our television. cable television was unable to us at the time but we did eventually have a satellite dish

installed in our backyard. the dish was approximate 10 feet across. and with it we could watch broadcast programming and then wait a minute or two for the satellite dish to reposition itself. the products and services offered by the dedication industry of these from my vantage point were rather limited. suffice it to say, we are not in the kansas of my childhood anymore. today, we see convergence as cable, telephone, satellite and wireless companies compete against each other to provide traditional and novel services. we see an explosion in content and the development of ever new ways and faster ways for people anywhere in the world to access that content. we see personal fumigation devices that are as powerful if not more powerful than computers that once filled up an entire room. i believe that these developers have made our lives better, richer, and in some cases even longer. and for this, the private sector

deserves the lion's share of the cricket after all, private company and a vendors took risk. the rays invested capital, they brought new products and services to the marketplace and the input millions along the way. but i think it's important to recognize the role that the federal committee? and commission, the nation's and your agency has played in this technological revolution. when it prioritizes competition and innovation, the fcc allows the private sector to deliver to the american public rapid, efficient nationwide communication services at reasonable prices. precisely the charge congress gave the agency in the first section of the communications act of 1934. speaking of 1934, a prominent national newspaper of that year profile the very first commissioner to be appointed to the fcc. the title of the article referred to them as and i quote, routers of the air. were unfortunate to be confirmed to the same position i would be far less modest. i would hold no favor for a

prejudice against any company, segment of the industry, or technology. instead on each matter might approach would be the same, i would review the record closely. i would stay within the bounds of the commission's authority as set forth by congress, and i would work with the chairman, my fellow commissioners and agency staff to come up with solution carefully calibrated to solve common problems. now, i want to say as well my decision-making process would in corporate and reflect respect for others outside of the agency. for example, i would seek to build a relationship with congress including a minute and staff of this committee. simile i would consult with the private sector, executive branch agencies, state and local governments, consumer groups and others impacted by the commission's agenda. i believe a good commissioner must be a good listener. if i'm fortunate to be confirmed i will do my best to hear what all stakeholders have to say. and discharging my responsibilities, i always would

be mindful of the implicit goal of communication policy, to maximize the benefits of competition, innovation for all the american consumers whether they live in a big or in rural kansas, or to put in a more personal term, to enable my son when he is my age to marvel at how far can indication services have, in his lifetime. chairman rockefeller, ranking member hutchison, members of the committee, thank you once again for giving us this opportunity. i look forward to questions and i request my full statement be made a part of the record. >> and it will be so. thank you very much, mr. pai. you have a very one way of talking to a very inclusive way. we would say you are a good listener. i truly believe that and i also think it's incredibly important. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> fcc is a very, is a very complex organization. and it deals in such cerebral matters and technical matters

that the human relations aspect within the fcc, also reaching out to the public becomes are important because most people don't know what to do. and if they do they're probably afraid. and so, you know, those personal skills are incredibly important. i would like to start questioning with a question to each of you, a question which jessica rosenworcel has certainly done before because i ask as the very first question. senator olympia snowe and i were responsible for starting a program which we are very fond of called the rate. a lot of other people helped it is not a fantastic job in helping with closing the digital divide. i thought at the time that when you passed, that the california would be way out, you know, i never, percentage of classes were covered in fact he was only 15% on the other hand houston

which i they would be low, they went wild and within two days they were 100%. so i mean there was this vast irrigation. west virginia, the numbers were very low but now they're very high as they are across the country. also the e-rate program is keeping the connection card and having the technology to keep it so so he can continue to close the digital divide. so my question is very simple. but profoundly important to me. will you both promised me that you will support the e-rate program? >> yes. [laughter] >> that's one. >> senator, if confirmed i look forward to working with you on the e-rate program and i support the program. >> good. [laughter] >> one of the reasons i say that is that there's a tendency sometimes at the fcc to look at e-rate related money, which is

for the moment fungible, and then to apply that to things which have nothing to do with e-rate. or others will try to make that grab of money. that is something which causes me vast arctic. so i'm going to incorporate that -- vast arctic. that you will keep your eye out for the. the second question would be also an obvious one. and senator hutchison has give me some very good news today, but i was really kind of shocked that we started a couple years ago to draw up a bill to honor the 9/11 commission's last unfulfilled request. and that is that we have a national wireless broadband connectivity so that everybody in the country would hold virtually the same device so that they were instantly in touch with each other. they were not like, you know,

when the military invaded kuwait, the marines, nobody could talk to each other because they had different ways of talking to each other and they couldn't talk to each other. and i was explaining embarrassing. that's been overcome, but it remains very much the case in terms of our first responders in america. and that would be firefighters and policemen, and all kinds of people who do a variety of work, and who has to be connected and have to be able, for example, a firefighter has to be able to not just be able to take a photograph of the building that is going into, but it may be a building penetrating photograph which he can locate an injured person when he goes into the building. a price nature of the problem a person has is then should the right to the emergency room and the local hospital. all these things have to work together. and the congress, there was an

enormous amount of support force, absolutely every imaginable public group, and absently nothing happened. it past this committee by a vote of 21-4. it might've been a higher vote if we had taken a different time, but 21-4, not much passive 21-4. so it was right there, everybody was for it. the vice president was all over it. and nothing happened. so obvious in something like that you don't give up. you continue on. it has the advantage, it made voluntary, getting back of spectrum to the fcc, and nobody believes it's voluntary but it is voluntary that people do not have to do it. but a lot of people want to do it. and, therefore, there'll be a lot of money, many billions of dollars coming back into the fcc. a lot of which he could be for

deploying this system across the country to every part of the country, every part of alaska, every part of everywhere. and also to making sure that the hardware was there. and then in the end it would be money left over for deficit reduction, about $5.6 billion. so it's really hard to argue that this is a bad idea, and it doesn't cost the taxpayer a single dime. so i would ask each of you again if you will be supportive of the committee's efforts with respect to this legislation? >> yes. [laughter] >> yes, mr. chairman. >> i'm happy, and my time is up. senator hutchison. >> thank you, mr. chairman. first, i think that you pretty much answered, mr. pai, in your opening statement, but i wanted on the record and clear, that

you have recently joined a law firm which does have business before the fcc, including one of the sites and potential merger between at&t and t-mobile, which has been abandoned but not necessarily permanently. so my question is, do you have any possible conflicts of interest? would you recuse yourself if there were a conflict between your previous law firm and business that comes before the fcc? i'd like to know exactly how you plan to handle the. >> thank you, senator hutchison for the question that i do not believe that my short period of employment at jenner and block would preclude you from being an efficient commissioner. i was aware starting literally on my first day of the from that i was under consideration for this position.

accordingly during my time at jenner, i've not represent any clients before the fcc. my name has not appeared in a comment or please before that were submitted to the fcc. and the firm inappropriate cases precluded me from discussing or otherwise handling or knowing about particular matters. >> and you would not feel any prejudice in favor of a client of your former from? >> not at all, senator. >> all right. i'd like to ask ms. rosenworcel, as you know, last year the fcc opened a proceeding to consider regulating broadband internet services as a common carrier under title ii. of the communications act to impose net neutrality restrictions. the fcc did at the end and that approach when it was a bipartisan outcry from congress, and to go forward on net neutrality under title i. but chairman genachowski has said that he will keep the title

ii reclassification docket open. do you think that there's any value in keeping this proceeding open when a majority of, well, i was a majority, but bipartisan group in congress has so clearly opposed it? >> i know that now for nearly a decade the fcc has chosen to look at these broadband services and title i services. i recognize the supreme court has upheld that decision, and that the agency has tried to use its ancillary authority to provide consumer protection under title i. the scope of that is under consideration and review in the d.c. circuit right now, and as a commission if confirmed i would clearly abide by any decision that that court took. >> and mr. pai, on that same question to you. >> thank you, senator. obviously this is an issue that closely divided the commission

and closely divided this body. i think nonetheless it has been healthy to have this debate because it is the very position on either side proponents argue that it is important to preserve an open and free and vibrant internet for consumers, and opponents have argued it is important for internet service providers to be able to raise we manage their networks to promote a vibrant expand for everybody. as my colleague has pointed out, this decision is under review in the d.c. circuit and depending on what the court says about the scope of the commission's authority, i as a commission if i were fortunate enough to be confirmed what abide by that decision as well. las..

>> i know it's very gratifying to see a member of one's staff receive this kind of recognition. i also know it's very hard to let a talented member of your team go. i think all of us here on the committee are unbelievably familiar with ajit varadaraj pai to work on her passion, her service and a commitment to public interest and especially her encyclopedic knowledge of communications law. and i think she has served us all on this committee with great distinction and we thank you very, very much for that. i'm less familiar with mr. pai's work in any direct way than i know of his reputation in the committee professionals that serve us all in this effort. and of his previous service in the senate which is commendable.

i personally look forward to supporting both of your nominations. senator rockefeller in his comments a moment ago said this is a big nomination. these are big nomination. and i just want to second that. in a very real way, you guys are the protectors of our democracy. you are the protectors of the viability of thought and communication and ideas being able to freely move across and around and in and throughout our entire social fabric. and if it gets to conglomerate arise and to narrow in ownership and incapacity to move, really our freedom is challenge. our democracy is lesser, i think. both of you are widely

recognized for your temperament and for your intellectual capacity. and i think given the nature of the marketplace that you're going to be regulating, overseeing, you're going to need those skills, enormously. big money interests is going to lobby you to gain tactical advantage. public interest groups will push you to adhere to their sense of what is moral. and your every word is going to receive attention in the trade press, and among investors who are trying to read the tea leaves of what the commission is headed and what it means for the market. and i know that both of you understand your ultimate responsibility is to the american people into the broader interest, as you described and answered in the first questions. also know that as staffers you felt some of the pressure before. but i'm confident that as commissioners you will feel it on another new skill.

you have to listen to conscious and do what's most consistent to the law and the public interest. as all of us in this committee know, this is a remarkable, extraordinary time, exciting time in communications, generally in this entire field. we are in the early stages of an exciting social network, location aware mobile device driven communications revolution.

in the media, communications, it's what a healthy democracy needs . and the fervor against the role of government in our society by some on one extreme has reached the point that every time the agency acts to protect consumers in competition incumbent company's push members of congress to attack the commission, chairs, and the members. at the chair where that. so the challenge is the you're going to face at the fcc are pretty significant. want to make sure as you approach that that you counted

with the clarity about the value of up in the works and of how unlaces daedaluses spectrum can accomplish each other and how best to ensure that the market is open to new entrants into innovation. and so i would simply open by asking you to generally, and on this sense of -- this divergence from where we were in the 1996 that. c-span2 to go first? >> as i mentioned in my opening statement technology is changing and it very fast clip, and it is very challenging for led the sledders and dealers alike to keep up. important to approach that test with some humility, but also some of the recognition that there are so core values, many of which she mentioned that there in the communications act fostering public interest,

universal service, privacy, public safety, and that because the things that should animate the deliberations of the commission going forward. >> to you will agree -- you have not answered yet, but i want that to that question because time is turn the tide. do you both agree we need to free up some of our spectrum order for broadbent to be allowed to be competitive, create jobs duenna maintain our economic ability capacity? what a cheap answer -- go ahead and answer the first question and the second. the chicken comeback. >> take you, senator. with riches first question fed funds difficult to improve on my colleague's answer. i would point as well that what other congress tries to do in reform to tax whether it's update the act is something that i would faithfully implement. with respect to the second question i do think it is important to the ploy broadband

to open up the works and really free a important to deploy broadband to the spectrum for competition, innovation , and investment. a think that is the key for not just to help the economy but as you pointed l : a healthy democracy. when the commission and congress focus on renovation consumers benefit in the body of politics benefits. >> and your second question the answer is yes, we do need more spectrum available for the services that we all make use of using a wireless airways. the problem is we have bus the many of our international counterparts. at the same time i think it would be foolhardy free only focused on spectrum and making that available. you're going to have to work hard about improving the efficiency of existing spectrum with technologies that can help us to that. >> as simply as some additional questions be made part of the

record. >> absolutely. >> thank you, sir. >> i think you. i now turn to senator demint. after him it is in order of arrival is to give people -- i don't know if cetera isaacson is coming back. senators. >> will sibila test questions. >> yes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i have to teach encroach year. >> it's too late. >> do you remember when you came in. >> i just came in. >> it's under control.

okay. are we of kiddy go? >> thank you, mr. chairman they do for being here today. that me ask for a minute about mobile broadband. retouching and that just a minute ago. as you know, the broad band competition report does not include mobil broadband when it shows spilled out, which suggests that we have problems in areas that we might not if you count mobile broadbent. a few years ago there was not a lot of capacity in the mobile market for broadband. now we are for jeep. i am sure we will be at five or $0.6, and a suspected some point we will have a stronger -- well, through mobile we will be allowed to get just about anything we need, but do you consider wireless broadband to be part of our broadband system,

and the ticket should be included in the broad band competition. >> reporter: >> i think we are seeing increasing convergence across all sectors, and that think over time it will grow to be a more robust substitute and a near-perfect substitute for traditional service. at the same time what you pointed out as a challenge for the agency. they have a lot of reporting duties, those reports often reflect the frameworks that are a little bit dated. in an era of convergence it is worth trying to identify how to a potential loss of a better reflect technology in the way consumers use the. >> as you know this is a very important point because of to we will look at the statistics, 80 percent build up in rural areas, and suggest some new subsidy. well we have companies already competing for mobile broadband in an area. so the failure to recognize different technologies as viable alternatives and certainly the mall will broadband is of a point now where it is better

than dsl in some cases and is certainly growing in capacity, so we need our commissioners to recognize all existing technologies as well as try to imagine potential technologies. what's three-star subsidizing one technology and eliminating another, i hear you have someone trying to collect investment funds to do some type of build out, it may be a wireless build up only to find a competitor coming in with some government subsidy to compete with them with another technology. so your answer is pretty important here that we push not only as a congress, but as the fcc that the competition reports that we look at her actually accurate. >> it should reflect the way consumers are using their service. >> senator, i also think that to the extent mobile broadband is

seen by consumers as an acceptable substitute don't wireline and other broadband technologies that the fcc would do well to take notes to its elected you both comment on universal service and help the band to greedy think the fcc has the authority to spend the contribution based for universal service to the internet service providers. >> of the the three cases that the commissioner's authority to assess the interstate telecommunications services, but has discretionary authority to assess on telecommunications which could be described as bob dylan. so i think that is the state of the current statute and i would certainly commit to abide. >> you take internet services fall under the telecommunications. >> i think a portion of it could at present this system is subsidized by internet -- i'm

sorry, interstate telecommunications services. the challenge going forward is making sure that the revenue base is strong enough to support the type of universal service reform that the agency just adopted last month. >> you think fcc now has the authority to assess fees to internet service providers to fund the universal service fund. >> it has the authority under the statute to assess telecommunications, not information services. >> okay. can you really divide an internet service provider that provides both? you're talking about assessing fees to part of their services and not to us? >> well as san was simply that the current system is supported by telecommunication services, long-distance services as the common we know the.

the challenge going forward is we have a system that can support universal service. the agency is going to need to look at the systems like the ones that we are proposed under the last a bus station and not necessarily into that of broadband services but connections. >> any thoughts on the subject to back. >> i can scarcely improved upon my college education with the legal context for this question, but i would say the commission having recently released universal service order and indicated that it intends to lick the contribution mechanism next year, i do think the commission should take a very close look at the nature of the statutory authority before assessing fees and the minute you suggest >> and of running of time, but the question about the cable act . it reflects their monopoly status for video services in most areas, which has totally

changed. do you believe the laws and regulations we currently have regarding video services should be reassessed and the statement >> that is a very broad question, but i think as a general matter there is a lot in the communications act, including the cable act, that is old and could be benefited by taking a fresh look. >> okay. in the last comment? >> i agree. just to give you one example, the fcc recently released a notice of proposed rulemaking, and in it to identify a number of factors. coming on ways to clarify exactly where the commission's authority was given that the marketplace has changed when that is something that i would definitely take a look at if i were fortunate to serve. >> the key build. >> think you very much. >> thank you, chairman. i have a statement for the record that i will submit for the record, and i do have a couple of questions. first of all, i would preface

those by saying i think we both had -- we all had a chance to talk about, as you were both nice enough to visit the office. thank you for your service. thank you for your real understanding of these issues in the you have done for the committee. thank you for your service in the senate, even if it did include a substantial amount of time with my chief of staff. you worked for senator brown beck. i am glad you're both willing to be here today and billy to make yourself available for the important jobs. you know, one of the challenges i think the fcc has faced and will continue to face as the congress also faces it is, this is a area that changes so quickly that i believe for a long time that the out that you will actually solve a problem while it is still the problem a pretty slow. the of the you will create a greater problem by trying to

solve a problem that has passed you by are greater than that. i remember when we did the telecommunications act when i was on the commerce committee in the house in the late 90's i guess it was and did came back to that five years later. nothing that we felt was important was still important. ever but all the things we divided upon and all the debates we had it all the friction. none of it mattered in the longer five years later. they also remember the many times invest my staff, what is the definition of neutrality this month because it was a constantly moving target. one of the issues that senator hutchison brought to the floor recently was, let's look at the met neutrality position that the committee has -- that the commission has taken. by few in the view of many others is that if you regulate

too much here you will slow them the development of the services rather than speed about. as you slow them down you will make them more difficult and maybe even more expensive, not less expensive. those are issues that i hope you will think about a lot. mr. demint talked about one other topic. as commissioners, and my belief is you will both become commissioners. the commission has never been able to fully define that any place i have been with the commission underserved in and served. then there is a big difference, and they're is a particular difference when somebody has come in and created a network with their own money and then somebody in the government decides the speed of that network is not quickly enough, so we are going to subsidize somebody to come in and compete. it a think we need to be extra barely careful with that in the

suing you both go on the commission, i suspect one of the first questions i will ask when we meet again is what is the difference in unserved underserved what are you doing about it. i have a much different you know what the congress should do for underserved areas of the country than i do ill-defined underserved areas of the country. for to put questions, one is i was -- until what you to come it on the proposed merger that has been out there for a while between at&t and t-mobile, but i was concerned with the commission's staff, my guest today, released their view of that merger, even though the merger request had been withdrawn. despite question is, does the commission speech to the commission nor does it speak to the staff? and how you view the actions of the commission as a commissioner

temecula bay are may not say anything about the idea that staffers will need to be directed to or just decide on their own that they will announce their view of the shoes that may or may not be before the commission. >> obviously the chairman is the manager of the full agency usually into a petition with other commissioners, and if i were fortunate enough to be on the commission and consulted by a question like this buy recommendation to him as it would be to the staff will be simply to abide by the commission's rules. look at any past president to make sure whenever the commission was proposing to do was consistent with the rules of practice. >> with if there is no commission action pending, should the commission gratuitously put information out to? >> i have not had an opportunity to explore the staff report you are refering to or from within news articles because it does procure survey was leading with a number of the members of the committee, but i will say that i

view the commission's discretion as one that should be exercised very carefully, led to the extent that a staff reporter along those lines in the context of a proceeding that is not currently exist, and aggravates people in the industry and people on the hill, that is something i would take into account. >> i believe my question, but the time i get done, i had to. does the commission acts through its actions or through the staff? >> i would have a very hard time improving upon the answer from my colleague. i think what occurred yesterday was the chairman who directs the agency chose to release the report. i believe it is within his statutory authority to do that, although i will a knowledge it is probably unprecedented. >> my second question is 30 years ago when there was much less media that there is to them there was a doctrine called the fairness doctrine. i would be opposed to seeing

that deck and put back in place. as commissioners as the what your view would be on that. >> senator, i share your view, and i believe the chairman does as well. he recently took action to remove that regulation from the books given that it had somehow stayed on the books for some time. >> that do not support returning the fairness doctrine. >> thank you. >> take you very much. now we will have senator to be. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the key to both of you for joining us today. welcome to the committee. congratulations on your nomination. thank you for your willingness to serve. this is a tough job that you're heading toward, and so i commend you for that. i just have one quick question. as we'll go, december a year ago

the commission adopted the open internet order. currently the subject of litigation before the d.c. circuit court of appeals. in the event the commission loses the case, which is a possibility of course, would you each comment on whether or not you would support the idea of reclassifying broadbent as a telecommunications service under title two of the act. >> as i noted earlier, the commission has had a practice during the past decade of treating those services as information services pursuant to total one, the supreme court upheld that approach. i think there has been of paramount of reliance on it, but the ultimate decision will depend upon the findings of the d.c. circuit, and i would certainly agree to abide by that . >> i would have some concerns

about requests vacation to the extent that the imposition of the test of common carrier regulations might dampen economic investment, the willingness to take risks, and that is something that ultimately might harm consumers. and set to that extent that would be hesitant. if it came in the wake of two decisions that the commission lacks authority elsewhere to pursue that route. >> if i can just follow up, i guess i'm trying to understand, if a court decision does not provide guidance on the specific question in this silent on this question of whether title to is an appropriate way to reclassify broadbent of the title to, do you have an opinion of whether that is appropriate? >> these are new areas and the law and we will have to file -- we would just have to follow the decision of the court.

>> thank you. >> could you repeat that, please can also pull that microphone a little bit closer. some of your microphones -- >> sorry. i would just say that these are some new areas and the law, and we would be duty bound were i to serve at the commission to follow that decision of the court. >> thank you. senator. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. thank each of you for bringing york incredibly vast experience that a tender time and agreeing to serve and the capacity that you are being reviewed here for. i would start. broadcasters have to fulfil a

public interest obligation in exchange for using the public airwaves. in your view does a broadcaster need to provide local news coverage of the community is licensed to serve in order to satisfy these public interest obligations? >> broadcasters are trustees of the airways and receive licenses its communities and have a duty to serve the local community and part of that should include things like providing locally relevant programming like news and information. >> do you share that view? >> i do. >> i would ask each of you to respond to this question. in 2007 the fcc held a hearing in new working jersey on welleszes renewal of wwor television. testified about the station's failure to cover new jersey news and events. four years later the station is

still operating under an expired license. there is evidence the service has gotten even more limited. you are confirmed, and they address this to each of you, would you review the record in this case thoroughly? can i count on you to review this for your lads in getting a decision on whether or not this lessons ought to be reviewed, renewed rather. >> senator, you have my commitment to doing so. craigslist. absolutely. >> for each of you again, the jersey is a net the -- contributor. posted $200,000 a year to the universal service fund. as the usf has kept drawing the burden on new jersey and other donor states has kept getting bigger and bigger. as the fcc considers reforming

the usf can i can buy new -- can i count on you to bring fairness and balance to make it jersey contributes $5 for every dollar gets in services. can i ask you each to respond to this? will you insist upon looking at the equity here? >> sorry. >> senator, as i mentioned a response to your earlier question the commission did indeed tea at the contribution side of the universal service fund for consideration next year . if i'm fortunate to be confirmed that would dig into the record very carefully and make sure that the appropriate reforms were taken to the universal service fund of the contribution side. >> i agree with my colleague. the universal service system needs to be a fair one. >> very few bl let's are focused

first and foremost a new jersey. the state alone -- state on television station recently went through a demand a change and is now operating by a company from new york. once again. as steve, are you -- can i get your commitment to watch the new situation closely to make sure that it lives up to the obligations for the people in our state? which is considered. >> yes. >> i will ask you one more question, and that is some have criticized giving additional spectrum capacity to the public safety committee of the basis of the commercial sector may need this spectrum in the future. customer network demand.

what do you see by way of network to rent for new technology? public safety. >> senator, i think is the chairman pointed out, a decade after september 11th it is avoidable we're still wrestling with the question of whether and when public safety personnel arrived at the scene of an accident or tragedy and whether there will be able to communicate. the question of what to resolve that question, of course, is interested to congress in the first instance, the fire were fortunate to be confirmed with respect and faithfully implement their this is appropriately. >> the key for the question. one of the facts and i have heard discussed in this room is that the average 60 year-old has more functionality in their hand-held phone that our police and firefighters to today providing them with better specter which can lead to better

devices that can actually to all of our safety be improved as well as their safety. i would be supported. >> mr. chairman, new jersey lost 700 people. the total is over 3,000 people. larger that day than the lending it d-day, larger that they then pro harbor. and it was the situation was worsened by the fact that there was little or no communication between those who pressed into that building to save other people's lives and paid for it by giving their own. the one thing that we have to do is make sure that we have the upper ability that is required for us to be responsible in no way that is efficient. >> thank you, senator.

>> thanks you very much. congratulations to both of you and your nominations. your both very impressive, and now wanted to report, i visited your children when i had a meeting he apples. there were coloring and they were most shark that you're on tv. and so i don't think we need to tell them that it was not network, just closed. it will make them think. the first question, and your family is so engaged in these questions on the fred they're going to answer the. but to have your back. >> more than welcome to sit in the hot seat. >> very good. my first question of competition as you know, one of the main goals in passing the telecom act of 1996 was to open up the committee kish's market to competition. still the national broadband plan found that of the vast majority of americans have only two between that most to

broadband providers. what role did you think the fcc should play to ensure adequate competition in the communications market? >> i think that increasingly we are going to see more and more intermodal competition, making sure more wireless spectrum is available so that there can be more competition. >> a thing. >> senator i would build upon that answer by saying that to the extent the commission can do so it should make sure the rules of the road don't differentiate between the particular technologies. at 11 times the commission is dealing with regulations that apply toward creation carriers but that it will providers, cable providers but now wireless providers, led to the extent those industries are competing in the same space it's important to have technological the trolley with respect to the commission's rules in order to ensure everyone is competing on a level playing field. >> you mentioned wireless right off the bat, and i have been

very involved in some of the consumer protection issues there, particularly focused on early termination fees. we have seen some changes, but i still hear about it. what role the think the fcc needs to play in the wireless consumer protection area? >> when consumers have grievances it is the duty of the sec to pay attention. continue to monitor the early termination fee inosilicates newer issues like bill shock on which there has been recent progress. >> the incentive options, as you know, working very hard to get our bipartisan bill through for the interoperable public safety broadbent the work. one particular thing i've wanted to bring to your attention, as you know, minnesota is on the canadian border. ..

>> i am chair along with senator burr of the the 91 august and also obviously an issue and always a challenge for all of us here and we know that there's a number of issues with e-911. raising opportunities as well,

but also challenges. one-third of all americans just have wireless devices. wireless calls present different challenges in determining the location of a citizen. i've heard all kinds of crazy stories about people stuck when their snowmobiles breakdown so we won't go into that. i understand the fcc is working to close the accuracy gap between mobile and landline 911 calls. do you believe in location acted as an important priority as we look at implementing e-911? >> senator, i do believe it is an important priority. if confirmed i look for the word with you and the other members to assure that goal is met. >> very good. >> yes, senator. >> just two other things i wanted to mention. then we have many people waiting to ask questions. senator warner and i are later this week we reducing our big one bill. we look forward to working with this if you're taking up for federal highway projects you try to put the cable in.

area b2 states that have short highway construction time periods, like alaska and others. and so i hope you'll look at that. it was incorporated in the national broadband plan. the second thing is the importance of universal service reform. i will ask you that made in writing, but we front out of time. that is clearly the way to go as we move forward with broadband. so thank you very much to both of you. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you, senator, very much. senator begich. >> thank you, mr. chairman. a couple quick questions. first obvious thank you both for visiting my office. thank you for your willingness to serve. once you've gone to the balmy minnesota, i'd expect you would come to alaska where it was 42 below in fairbanks last week. [laughter] >> he always has to one up. >> that wasn't even above the arctic circle.

but i do want to invite, you have been there, i don't think you have -- you have been come but i would like to invite you both back as commissioners. is that something you'd be willing to do? we don't care what time of year. you get credit if you come in january. >> yes. if it's 42 below, i'm hard. >> i will do everything within my power to clear my calendar in july and august. [laughter] >> good, honesty goes a long ways. let me thank you again for being here. let me ask you kind of a philosophical question on universal service fund. when i heard your answer to senator lautenberg, and be frank and you've heard me say this, when i hear the word fair system, usually that means, to be very frankly with you, alaska gets kind of left out because there's no other state like it in the sense of its vastness. 80% of our committees are not

connected by roads. our highways are in the air, literally. and broadband and wireless is a critical component to our long-term economic health, our ability to educate and focus on rural communities, as well as deliver health care and medicine. so let me come if you could either one, whoever wants to start, giving your sense and let me preface it by saying i understand -- let me ask it this way. how do you see the resources of the universal service fund being used and what are those priorities? understanding there's revenue issues, but the idea of universal means something more to benefit the whole system. so with that premise, give me your thoughts on how you would prioritize your utilization of the universal service fund's. whoever wants. >> the fun as you know it is not infinite and so i think what i said very before what i was

smart. what we have now is dated to tell us where broadband is and where broadband is an. i think it's incumbent upon the agency cues that dated to be smart about where those funds flow. and general communities where there is no service today, that should be our first goal to try to address those problems, alaska included. >> i would associate myself with those remarks but i would also add that having gone to alaska as we discussed in our meeting, i think i would take a personal appreciation of the uniqueness that the problem has in alaska. having gone up there, it's hard to imagine when you look at a map, i saw a little smidgen of the state. selected personal appreciation of how important it is. for the fund to take account, unique circumstances in which your state citizens find themselves. >> that latter statement, which you agreed there is a little bit of uniqueness of what alaska has

to deal with? >> absolutely. as we spoke in your office a few days ago, i have spent time in alaska committees that are not on the road system, on gravel runways that count as the airports are unfamiliar with its uniqueness, yes. >> very good. let me ask you, again in regards to come as we build out one of the challenges i mentioned to both of you in our state because which you such a variety of systems in order to create communication networks, in this process of reform to universal service fund, you also have these smaller companies, these co-ops, these companies that invested, built out, you know, hardwire. and now they're trying to transition to wireless but the transition period may not be as long as maybe, or as short as the fcc would like to maybe transition. how do we deal, they have put this cap on investment and to build out, to meet communication need that didn't exist that now

is important to us, recognizing their shifting towards more broadband wireless systems. how do we address that knowing that your fcc and you're not over here, but the end of the day all these resources funneled through the federal government some form of another? who wants to take that on? >> well, let me give to answer. different arms of the government should be talking to each other about this, that will create -- >> do you think the fcc does enough of that now? >> i think they could do more. the second point i would make is that there should be no flash cuts. we should recognize that many of those companies had an honest reliance on a government commitment and we should find a way that they can slowly navigate whatever new framework the commission adopts. >> sender, i also think that reliance interest and consideration of important value of those carriers provide to alaska come something the fcc should take in account when and if it goes to reform the fund.

>> thank you very much. i appreciate the time but i will probably submit more for the record just to follow. thank you. i look forward to seeing you in alaska and maybe july or august, or maybe january. >> thank you, senator begich. the two nominees should understand that history has been made here today. this is the very first time that senator begich has ever referred to alaska as being may be more needful of attention than other states. all of which are very small and far away. so he has overcome his shyness today, and it's quite remarkable. should be very proud. senator snowe. >> thank you, and i want to welcome both of you. you certainly represent such impressive array of talent and expertise and experience, and look forward to have you on the commission. secondly, appreciate your unequivocal, undisputed will

support for e-rate. one of the first issues i wanted to raise regarding comprehensive spectrum inventory. i happen to think that in order to have him a true analysis of what exists in the spectrum, who is using it, by whom, how much is available, that we should have an inventory of the spectrum. and that's legislation that senator kerry and i have introduced over the last several years which we think is absolutely essential. there's no really any way to discern exactly what is available. what is your response to that, ms. rosenworcel and mr. pai in terms of what you think would be necessary to establish a complete analysis of what exists for spectrum? secondly, in chairman genachowski in his response to a letter that i submitted concerning this issue indicated that they conducted a baseline

inventory. but as i understand it, it really essentially didn't examine the breadth of what existed and whether or not they had followed up with licensees in terms of how do you think spectrum, who is using spectrum and to what degree they were using it. so what you think that a baseline inventory is sufficient to accomplish the goal of comprehensive spectrum inventoried? >> as you know, spectrum is a scarce but a valuable resource and i think it's incumbent upon the federal government to constantly reassess how it is allocated, how it is designed and how it is used. so i agree wholeheartedly with your desire to see a robust spectrum inventoried. i recognize the fcc has done some work on its spectrum dashboard. i think that over time the goal should be to make that a much more robust inventory. >> but don't you think that we should have an analysis done now

at the forefront of this process? >> yes, although i don't think that we will have the luxury of time to make this all sequential. i think our international counterparts have more spectrum in the pipeline than we do. i think the demand for the wireless airways is tremendous so we will have to operate on multiple fronts all at the same time. >> mr. pai? >> senator, as much as i hate piggybacking shamelessly on my collie, i find hard to improve upon it. i would say simply the general matter, it is difficult for the commission or frankly any other agency to make these the spectrum more efficient and to allocate it more effectively. if we don't know who is using it and so that's certainly a concern that i would take were unfortunate to serve on the commission. >> with respect to how you improve upon the technological innovations and the reasoning opportunities, and one of issues of course is incentive for

auctions but i think there's a disproportionate reliance on incentive option to provide, you know, a stand that the as cc things that will yield up to 24% and 500 megahertz. on the other and that's a very small amount of what's going to be required by 2020 in terms of the demand and the explosive growth in wireless broadband. so how best to develop these technological innovations? you know, what should be done in order to establish, you know, a better approach than otherwise just relying on incentive opti option. >> thank you for the question. i know you've done a lot of work on this, and i would say that we have a real demand for spectrum, but we would be foolish if all we did was rely on things like instead of options and the auction aspect of the grant to start devoting our intelligence

and our resources towards developing better technologies that use spectrum more efficiently and also studying the network so we can be more efficient with the networks we do have today. >> what timeframe should that happen? >> it should happen immediately. >> can it happen immediately? >> if confirmed i can to that i would certainly make it a point to try to do my best to do some. >> thank you spent if i were confirmed i would urge the commission to do ever good to great every the trofimov that incentivizes that development as quickly as possible. >> i think it is critical because otherwise, in terms of instant of auctions. i mean there is a drive because it has revenue. on the other hand, i think it's clearly important to do everything we can to maximize the availability of spectrum. and as you say, you know, we can

only reallocate or redistribute. we can't manufacture so we've got to figure out the best way to enhance our opportunity to know what is available at how best to utilize it. one other issue, a couple of issues at the mic, mr. chairman. one is on the question of the management of the spectrum in terms of who has the ultimate decision-making authority. the government accountability office, gao has issued several reports over the last decade suggesting that one of the real difficulties is that you two different authorities that oversees the spectrum policy between the government and nongovernment use. and that ultimately that can have less confusion to do with the best to have one ultimate decision-maker or authority over the spectrum. do you agree or disagree? >> i think that's a fair point.

i think that historically they have not coordinated as much as they could, and i spectrum grows more and more by what i think more essentially correlate the court made more closely togeth together. >> mr. pai? >> senator, i agree they should be courtney mark los as what. the question of how, if at all, to emerge by the respected agency authority of course lies within the province of congress. that someday i would look to this committee for guidance on. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator snowe. senator wicker. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i had a brief statement for the record. >> we will put it in the record. >> i want to commend these nominees, and observe that by this point in the hearing you're probably feeling pretty good about your chances as far as confirmation. [laughter] let me just say, my brief statement mentions that i am from a state that has quite a bit of rural area to it, and a

great concern of mine is that our nation's rural areas have the same access to the economic benefits of broadband as those in the more populated areas. in that regard, ms. rosenworcel, with regard to the fcc's recent usf order, dealing with competitive wireless, a number of us feel that wireless was unfairly and illogically targeted in this order. what do you say to that? and what impact you think the fcc's order will have on broadband competition, particularly in rural areas such as alaska and west virginia and mississippi? >> i think the fcc's recent order is an attempt to aggregate the data we have about where service is and is not.

and i think that it is an effort to try to take scarce resources and the universal service fund and tracked into places where service is not today. i think the agency will need to continually evaluate how those funds are spent to make sure that we actually do reach underserved areas in mississippi, alaska, west virginia, and any other state across the country. >> mr. pai? >> i would add kansas to that tally having grown up in rural kansas i am sensitive to the importance of preserving universal service to all areas of the country, especially to rural areas. i readily confess that although the order skin seven at 15 pages i've not had the option to dig into all the particulars but i do know that the commission is going to be actively considering these issues in the next you pick if confirmed i certainly would take your concerns to heart. as the commission moves forward. >> i would appreciate that, and i do hope so. let me move device

interoperability. which remains a top priority. as we continue to transition to a broadband world, device interoperability becomes more and more important. are you familiar, ms. rosenworcel, with the correspondents that senator rockefeller, senator begich and i sent to the agency stressing the importance of interoperability as a requirement to support public safety, as well as fostering innovation? >> yes, senator. >> and what do you think the fcc can do to implement these principles? in specifically, how do you think interoperability can be achieved within the 700 megahertz?

i know you are familiar with this. >> it is a big, complex question. i would say it's also a very important question because interoperability is so essential to communications. small rural carriers that have spectrum in the 700 megahertz band may find that their customers are unable to actually use their devices when they leave home and need to roam on other networks. that's a real problem. so i think something needs to be done to address this. while also recognizing that the a real technological challenges and costs of those he was addressing it. i do know the industry standard setting bodies are looking into this issue, and i think the fcc should follow up on their work. >> you don't have any question, do you, that the technological challenges can be addressed and overcome? >> i'm an optimist, but they can be worked on. >> and mr. pai, i'll let you

take a stab at that issue. >> thank you, senator, for the question that i agree that it's an important balance to be struck. i think interoperability is a topic that has consumed a lot of this committee's attention, and for good reason. it's critical for consumers but it's critical for public safety personnel and other constituencies. and with respect to particular question, 700 megahertz, that's an issue that's the commission is going to have to grapple with. and i would take the concerns of some of the smaller carriers refer to into account as the commission figures out what to do about that issue. >> thank you. i appreciate that, and they do hope so. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much senator wicker. and now senator thune. >> thank you, mr. chairman. again i want to congratulate our nominees on being with us today. your nominations to the fcc to both to mr. pai and ms. rosenworcel, thank you for being here. we will look forward to working with you. there are lots of issues that