classification would take a lot of energy and in very real way is what effect the chairman's agenda and that is the point that people have to make. on the legal issues as the seat with classification i agree with what everyone said the process of the open dhaka at. it always puzzles me a little bit because it is in the context of net neutrality framed and the words used to adopt the nondiscrimination rules and reclassify so that we can act and for me that is the way we look at the statutes on its head. it is not the reverse. the congress set up definitions and said to the fcc to figure out how to get the definitions to fit, and then we will tell you in the other law what obligations apply to the different rules and the different services. and the fcc's job is to make the

best call and to say this ase information service or this is a telecommunications service and then say okay under the congress rules here is what applies to it. and there is something to me that says well, we didn't get to you the thing that we want by giving our best shot and applying the statute in the first time. so in order to get into the regulatory authority that we want to be in, we are going to change our mind. it seems to be the exact kind of outcome oriented decision making that the components of the net neutrality would get aggravated about and very angry about as if it were pursued in the pursuit of some of their ends. so i'm very reluctant to promote or to account the regime in which the fcc to fit into the scheme. let's see the fcc were to do this and i have to agree with mark that we like it to need it

least one last comment. the issues in the order let's say the best case is the last third or fourth quarter. i don't think that this would be a good case. that would lead to a lot as well. not only on the reclassification is soft but on all of the things that the fcc would need to do to make that work. so in 2010, when the proposed this part of his proposal was to use what is called the fcc for parents' authority to eliminate and cross out a lot of the requirements the lead otherwise apply to the telecommunications service. all of those -- i don't know if all of those that many of those would be challenged and people would think that the obligations would still apply and i think that leads to another year or two of litigation and in all three or four years of certainty but that is not a great portion. >> talking on that prospect of the future litigation or the future proceedings. i would like to change gears and ask where the decision leaves

the environment in the marketplace and policymakers and the regulatory certainty is a really important goal. how do they lead the certainty and all of the potential litigation and how might we see different broadband providers and edge providers of on-line services response. >> like the decisions to cannot otherwise my sense is the best portion now is to seek out things fallout and should think about essentially about the chairman approach of and adjudicating cases that come up just like the common law and all other kinds of products. it is in a relatively good place

where there is a cop on the beach and multiple copps on the beat. we mentioned the ftc earlier and it clearly has authority to do a lot of things. matt disagrees that this regime can protect against the kind of thing that the average person would really worry about with respect to that neutrality. i don't know if i buy the pss or an allergy and whether i think there would be outside on the fcc authority under this section. i think they can guard against that and there is a lot that work so the market has done a pretty good job to react much to this decision either on the side or the edge provider side and we should wait and see how things go before jumping into another three or five-year fight. much of it would be good for my pocketbook and my daughter's college fund. a constant litigation is not the way to govern the most important industries in the country.

>> one way to avoid that would be to stop pursuing the rule that is understandable but i don't know i don't have any college fund potential from this spigot i will try to be briefed this time. as i said earlier this does not create a lot of certainty for people because it does not tell them with the fcc can or cannot. it basically says you can prevent some things from happening but we aren't going to tell you in advance what they are because the important part, not just the tail end. you can't have a rule the way that you try to do it this time on the nondiscrimination. certainly they do not jump all over the place and i think there is a little bit of a spike for some and not for others. who's on the internet now and who are some of the companies that might think about the

decision. we have that kind of a status quo and the chairman noted the broadband providers promise not to do bad things, but i don't think that it's dirty comforting for the long term prospects of the companies again experimenting with new ways to monetize the network and take that money out of the pockets of consumers and pockets of the innovators on the network. >> i thought one of the really profound parts of the d.c. circuit opinion is the upheld the fcc's rationale, one of the rationales for developing the regulation, which was that not that the rules or regulations were needed because of the market power of any of the stakeholders. in fact, some of the actors at the edge of the internet from

the market power perspective are pretty deep layers. rather, it incurred its rationale for the rules in determining the access monopoly or the gatekeeper role so whether there is a thousand or millions of flowers of booming at the edge, ultimately every one of the edge providers has to deal with one provider, verizon. so with regard to everybody at the edge of the network, they are dealing with a monopoly for every one of their customers just trying to reach them. and i think that was a profound part of the d.c. circuit decision. i don't think it was necessarily one was obvious that the d.c. circuit with a uphold and the fcc continues on that. i think it does lead then want to think about how to enforce that and how to guard against

that. and, you know, there are obviously of their ways that the verizon and others have said let's have this regulated by the ftc and we will agree to some rules and service and those can be the enforcement but for the fcc universe i think they have to do something without rationale so whether that is to have a no blocking regime or to do some sort of a title to, that does beg the result in some way to have an enforceable rules. we have an interesting experiment going on right now. they've largely adopted the rule that mark and matter are suggesting that they have the traditional rules governing telephone networks. and we see it here how we are behind europe and they've got these rankings but the 200

kilobyte standard which is by most people's standards crawling. you can't do anything on that. if you go to europe, they have a different discourse you look and they are invested in the networks that's one half per capital it is in the u.s. and there are 35 megabit coverage that is half of what it is in the u.s. and the coverage is one-quarter of what is in the u.s. lead and in fact what they are saying is not just in the infrastructure but where is the google and facebook and they are concerned not just on the infrastructure side but on the other side. and so, the data point i don't mean to suggest -- i'm doing a study on this right now because everybody wants to know what's going on, but my point is that there is a reason in other parts of the world where they are trying to regime where they put back on the telephone regime where they are not happy with the outcome and opens up the really interesting discussion that we should probably have

about policy going forward. >> i would just add on that point, you know, google and facebook, when we had first cable and classified as something the they were all the information service on the telephone offerings were still subject to the kind of carrier rules and then we have the internet principles in place for a couple of years. all of it is to say that they have grown up where we do not need permission from the broadband provider to innovate. so, i think that yes there may be questions to ask about why don't we have as big a presence in the economy from europe or other places. i wouldn't say that we have such a big presence because the internet would come out of the control of the broadband provider to say the opposite we have innovation without pressure and because of a series that is changing and yet ultimately, somewhat consistent protections for innovation on line in the

u.s. internet access ecosystem. .. my mare communications medium. it's the regulator. is this decision and other decisions helping move us toward a more coherent picture what the fcc's proper role is? is it an area where

congressional action is necessary? >> well, one aspect speaking of the congress clarified a couple of things. couple things. some people wanted this to shift from the fcc to the ftc. interestingly, that would have very few implications in the senate because the senate commerce science and transportation committee has jurisdiction over both. on the house side, it would have shifted jurisdiction of which committee was responsible from the energy and commerce committee to the judiciary committee which would have been a big change in terms of how to process would have happened here. as of now, that didn't happen. it remains within the jurisdiction of energy and commerce which the leadership on the house has indicated we need to start rethinking the laws and moving forward. so if i had to guess, there's two possible outcomes. one is the traditional narrative, what you hear outside the beltway right now which is we have split government where the different houses of congress are controlled by different parties, and it's an election

year, so, therefore, after about june everything's just a campaign. and this is a very difficult time to get something done, and it's very unlikely to proceed in which case the statements that take place in congress and other places will be more or less about, not about getting things done, but about positioning, images for different voting constituencies. i actually brought a class to washington, d.c. last week, and we met with both the majority and minority staff of the house and senate commerce committees. and what was striking to me was they all said that this is an area where there is broad bipartisan consensus, the kinds of dissension that characterizes other parts of the government over more controversial policies are far less important and, in fact, there's much more room for agreement here. and my challenge and my invitation and my prayer to congress and all of you here is to prove those statements right and prove the skeptics wrong. the leadership has opened up a broad-based discourse about what

the future may hold. i think a lot of people agree that right now applying rules that were written in 1934 to a new technology that didn't exist is probably a bad idea. how those would apply will be an accident because no one had them in mind, and the rules we had draw a distinction between cable and telephone-based services where most consumers at this point don't care, they just want the internet. i think there's a real opportunity here, and i think there's some reason for hope that they can take a few positive steps down the line towards promoting meaningful reform which i think everyone in the industry thinks probably eventually is going to happen and, frankly, needs to happen because the internet didn't exist in 1934. >> christopher, i was just curious, the folks that your students were talking to, were they speaking specifically about net neutrality or broadly about communication law issues? >> i think broadly. obviously, individual issues will divide any committee. but, in fact, what you see is there's much more room -- if

there's broader agreement, there's more room for compromise and discussion and working things out. and i remain hopeful. >> i guess the reason i ask is that it's long been said that this issue has been less partisan, and the fcc, within the fcc and with respect to congress the issues tend to cross party lines more, the '96 act certainly was not sort of broken down by party piece of legislation. but net neutrality really seems sometimes like a bomb in that room. and i wonder about its effect on broader cooperation on these sets of issues. i'm not a hill expert, and i won't purport to say what the hill will do, but i just wonder how the injection of this issue back into the political field will affect the prospects for a rewrite. >> well, you know, looking at it from a normative perspective, i think there is broad consensus that isp should not block a content or significantly degrade content, there should be a minimal level of service that

edge providers have the right to access consumers, and consumers have a right to access those edge providers. my sense is that there's broad consensus about that. i would further say that i think there's fairly broad consensus that there should not be arbitrary discrimination against similarly-situated entities at the edge. so if you have two entities at the edge that are providing the same sort of video service with the same sort of characteristics, isp shouldn't say, okay, we're going to charge one x and another y. and the difficulty the fcc will have and policymakers will have is the court actually went out of its way to say since we're striking down the common carriage rules, verizon has the authority and should have the ability to charge similarly-situated entities completely different prices. now, that is true that as a matter of law they're able to do that now, but i think there's a more normative perspective from policymakers that that probably shouldn't be the case. >> i speak to that? so i want to speak to blocking for a second, and markham talked

about charging one x provider one and another y. if you're allowed to charge for service, that is blocking. the fcc said that in 2010. that is true. if you say you can come on my network if you pay me x, that is blocking. can isps really block? i really don't know, frankly, i know of very few, i can think of few cases in which is ps would want to block. i'm thinking about child pornography and things like that. ipss don't generally want to block. as i said, they get revenues have customers wanting to use their services. they recognize that in a nation of 900 some odd -- 300 some odd million people, customers are going to want to look at different things. the transparency rule remains in effect. so if isp a blocks news to fox news or msnbc, that's going in its policy, and it's going to be

well known, and i think we can be fairly sure that senator franken or representative eshoo are going to be hauling them up quickly and say, what are you doing? so i guess i have a lot of doubt about the incentive and the defacto ability to block and really charge and charge a x amount and b y amount. what net neutrality is about in these cases is not perniciously degrading content. what it might be about so today google has this new contact lens that can monitor glucose levers and use a wireless -- levels and use a wireless transmitter to send it to your doctor. that kind of thing, maybe we want prioritized access for those packets flowing across the web, maybe we want to have rooms full of people monitoring in realtime what my pacemaker is saying so that they know maybe before i even to that there's an issue going on hypothetically. those kind of -- that's the kind of issues, those are the kinds of services that the ipss i

talk with want -- isps want to provide. they're not going to degrade service indirectly by using up all the network resources. we're not talking about the network we had when this debate started around 2005, we're talking about a network as someone said earlier where vast majority of americans' access to 10, 20, 30, 50, 100 megabytes per second service. it's a completely different web, and i don't think there's any real risk that prioritizing some of these services is going to relegate anyone to de facto blocking. so when people talk about net neutrality, it's very common to go right into the evil machinations we can imagine. there's no ability to do that, there's no intent to do that. what i think it's really about for the providers is the ability to get the services that customers want to them more quickly. >> let me pick up on one quick thing russ said. ask a question about it, and then i am going to turn to the audience for questions, so if folks in the audience have questions, be thinking about that, and i'll give you an

opportunity for that in just a sec. russ, you mentioned the transparency portion of the rule, and i'm interested if other panelists have thought about the one portion that were not struck down, how useful they are and how much of a check they potentially provide on behavior. >> i mean, yeah, they have to tell you if their blocking -- they're blocking you. it doesn't give me a lot of comfort. here's how we're messing with this service, and i don't want to get into this debate, but we can talk about how many choices people really have in their broadband provider, five, sure, maybe if we count the wireless ones, and there are differences between what you can do with wireless and wire line. you know, it's something. to me, it doesn't offer a lot of comfort to say i will now know how they are trying to keep me from going certain places or if not, at least take a few more nickels out of my pocket for getting to them. the managed service, as an example of what russ was talking about with the contact lenses, i just want to stop and say if, indeed, we do have more capacity, i don't know why we

would have to prioritize something like that because it would probably be a low level data usage. the fcc and the rules were struck down on this too, did make allowances for other services so everything you transmit today as data doesn't have to go over, quote, the internet. you can have a separate channel for things like that, and that's something the fcc rules have already allowed even though it wasn't necessarily crystal clear how those kinds of things would work going forward. >> i actually think the transparency rules are potentially or very important. there is a british isp called plusnet. it has the highest customer satisfaction ratings this all of britain. and what they do is they prioritize service but clearly disclose what they're doing, and they appeal to a certain kind of customer. they say this is about -- they can't say exactly, but most friday nights, this time of day you get this speed, and they work it out, and you can't predict exactly what the traffic is going to be, but they give you a pretty good idea. and i ill tell you who they

cater to, they give it to online gamers, they give that the highest priority. they're appealing to a small set of the overall world. that, to me, is one of the great questions we face. here is a standardized product at one price. everyone gets it, you can't change off it, you can't enhance, you can't degrade it even if people need different things. and the nice example contrasts in the modern world for me is we should see a proficiency of business models like the amazon kindle. normally if you have a reader, a tablet, the you download apps, content, you're paying the minutes, the badged width -- bandwidth, the limitations apply. amazon has said, you know what? we want to pay that freight. we want to make it easier for you to receive that content. they changed it a number of times and business models change, but i guess my reaction is they should be allowed to try that. maybe that's creating new value for consumers, and they can negotiate a different deal, and

you get a different kind of product that way. and that is a form of discriminatory service because one person gets service that doesn't count against your minutes, and some don't. in my world, the internet's gone so many different directions, i would encourage that kind of experimentation, not discourage it. >> so i think transparency does have an ability to be helpful in that there is a sort of name and shame component to things that if there's bad behavior, that it has a corrective ability with corporations. i think where it may not go far enough, it probably doesn't go far enough is creating enough certainty for innovators to know what the rules of the road are when they're planning where to put resources and innovation. so i think -- and i think the fcc throughout every administration has recognized that, right? there need to be some baseline rules, and i think the isps recognize there have to be some baseline. how those are enforced is where the debate is.

there should be enough certainty so the people at the edge can rely on more than just name and shame when they're thinking about how to allocate their resources in their r&d budgets. >> can i ask a quick question? plusnet in the u.k., is that a facilities-based provider, or are they sort of an over the top isp? >> they are that silts based -- facilities based. actually, they were acquired by british telecom. as of now, they've kept them as a completely separate entity. they're trying to learn from them and trying to preserve that culture, because they're worried if they fold them into the larger company, it'll just disappear. >> so in all those cases i just want to say it's not that amazon shouldn't be allowed to pay the freight, my concern is when amazon is paying for your connection and you're also paying for your connection because if you stay under your data cap, you don't get a big refund check at the end of the month. that's the kind of, again, experimentation is maybe should be allowable in some cases, but in our current system, i think,

doesn't actually save people money. >> all right. i'd like to give members of the audience an opportunity to ask questions. are there folks who have questions? and i think -- is there a microphone over there? tim, do we have a mic? yep. [inaudible] yeah. i think i see a question over here. john? yes? >> um, so the -- am i on? okay. the ruling tells us that this nondiscrimination and nonblocking rules look too much like common carrier without being called common carrier. it also tells us, for example, that the roaming regulations are not common carrier. do we know more about where in the middle, what is the edge of common carrier, or do we have to wait to find out?

>> the court did give some guidance. it pointed to selco which is the case that sort of gets the same question, and the court noted that in the selco case the isps were allowed to engage in commercially reasonable, that was the standard, something that was commercially reasonable differentiation. and the court noted that in the nondiscrimination, in the open internet rules, they really used the common carriage language of unreasonable discrimination. and so, you know, theoretically there is something -- and it noted that there's a gray area and, indeed, the fcc noted it gives discretion to how it defines that. so somewhere that's not unreasonable discrimination, it's close or to commercially reasonable. i think the court would say to the fcc if you can move toward that, we'll give you discretion on whether you call that common carriage or not. >> so trying to put it even more simply, if the company has to do the, carry the service, if they have to do the deal, it's common carriage.

if they have discretion to negotiate terms, possibly refuse, if they have room to maneuver, then you can potentially get out of common carriage. but if you have to take it, it's illegal under this ruling. >> any other questions in the audience? see one over here. >> [inaudible] great conversation, thanks for coming today. i was thinking about how sew sopa died in congress a year ago, now a little more. do you believe that isps may change their policies towards copyright violating takedowns? >> interesting question for somebody like comcast, nbc universal who has movie properties as well as an isp access network. so could they? i think, sure. and most importantly, the 706 route leaves open the possibility of an argument to the fcc. pirated content on the internet

is slowing our, is decreasing the studio's willingness to put it out there. people don't get good content so, therefore, they don't adopt broadband. i mean, it's the kind of thing that verizon in the case called a triple cushion shot. admittedly, it's a long chain of arguments, but you could go to the fcc and say you've got to block piracy more strongly because people won't deploy broadband, and that's the kind of thing i started out by saying, the sort of mischief we wouldn't want to see out of a 706 regime along with a lot of people who fought against sopa and pipa. >> so i can't speak to what isps will or won't do, but as a legal matter, the decision, i don't think, changes their ability. so the open internet rules adopted in 2010 contained express exceptions for either unlawful content or the unlawful transmission of lawful content, the later category, i think, meaning transfers that were in violation of copyright and other intellectual property

requirements. so that was already a cardiovascularout from the rules -- carveout from the rules, and i think whatever they can do today they probably could have done a week ago. >> yeah. i think the law didn't protect copyright infringement material, but now there is this avenue for saying the law should do more to stop piracy as hollywood would say. >> this is where i think i disagree with russ this that one could see because esps rely -- isps rely on local franchises and local rights of way that in certain communities, they'll be inspired to cater to their communities to block certain types of content that is not considered to be acceptable content. and i think the order was very careful even when it described blocking unlawful content or blocking the transmission of the unlawful transmission of lawful cob tent. there's -- content. there's very few categories of content that one would put in that category. i wouldn't put copyright in that

category because an isp doesn't know whether the transmission of a copyrighted work is unlawful or not. they don't know whether there's a license. child pornography is really the only sort of thing that comes to mind as something that's cheerily unlawful on its face. -- clearly unlawful on its face. so one could see that in certain communities there are things that are not acceptable being blocked or degraded, and verizon, in fact, in their docket thosed that they might want to provide -- noted that they might want to provide a service that would go to a family-friendly isp service for a community and say this is just going to go go to family-friendly sites. and that might be okay. the question is, if you are in a community that doesn't have a lot of isp competition and you want to go to something other than a family-friendly site, do you have are recourse under the rules? the answer is, no. >> to me, it has more to do with business which is isps gain nothing directly to their bottom line by blocking the carriage of

illegal content, and they piss off their customers. and there is a misalignment of interests. it's interesting, there's actually some studies. france has done a law which is a three strikes law. that is, the content provider finds an infringing person, they get a letter saying you really should stop, and the third time they're supposed to cut them off. there's some evidence that it actually has an impact, it actually helps stop a degree of piracy. even if it works, the isps really don't want to be caught in the middle between the content provider and user. what's more interesting is maybe they could enter into a cooperateoff arrangement where -- cooperative arrangement where, look, we're the content provider, maybe they may make a contract. the only thing is does it remove some of the overhanging, blocking rules particularly ambiguity? maybe, but that's not really what these rules have been about. >> i see another question in the

back there. >> hi. so on the copyright point, i think the most important thing is that the fcc has no jurisdiction over copyright. so while everything markham said is right about the regime, the regimes that do apply and the fcc was really careful to dance around what's legal and illegal content. not only does the isp know whether something's infringing or not, but the fcc doesn't know either. it's not their jurisdiction. but i just wanted to agree with russ on the point that if the fcc were to reclassify internet access, telecom portion of internet access as, in fact, telecommunications for the purpose of imposing a particular rule, that would kind of be

suspect. but there's another possibility, and that would be -- and i'd be interested to see what the other panelists think finish possibility that the fcc might just want to clarify their authority over internet access for a whole range of things be it e-911 or, you know, whatever in the new ip transition. scenario. >> so the question is, is that something the fcc may be attracted to? >> yeah. i think that's right. exactly. the fcc wouldn't have to readopt net neutrality rules, but we think they need to clarify authority because it would actually, i would say, help, chris would probably say hurt, but it was clarify their role in the ip transition, and it's not resulted based. i would stand with justice scalia there and say they should read the law correctly and do it not because there's a result at the end, but because the law is, in fact, technology-neutral. it's not from 1934 only, it's also from 1996. you know, we had the internet and people pretty smart crafting

technology and laws we think are still good enough today to account for changes in transmission mets but not really a change in the underlying use and function. to network which is to send my information to you and yours back to me. >> well, if i -- i take the question as sort of adopting, endorsing the idea i suggested which is make this part of a broader discourse of rethinking the internet broadly. and what's fascinating to me is we see an alignment of the need to do that coming out of both the chairman's office at the fcc and out of the house leadership. it is becoming time. we've twisted the old rules and stretched them as far as we have. we went through this with cable. cable came in the '50s, we hemmed and hawed and finally said we need to create rules made for cable. and i think we're seeing the exact same thing happen hoar. we've lived under the old regime, we've stretched it, twisted it, mutilated it, and it may just be time. the chairman sees time, it's time to sit down and think about

not from the previous world, but ground-up, square one, clean slate rewrite what should we do with the internet. >> i totally think that this is a time that the fcc's going to have to take to think about what its section 706 authority means and how it changes, as you say, its approach to a whole range of issues. and just to give you one example, another case that we haven't discussed today but is a big case pending in the tenth circuit having to do with intercarrier compensation. section 250 -- i'll speak to the usf piece of it, section 2354 of the act tells the fcc how to set out a subsidy system to make sure all americans have access to communications service. historically, that wastelephone service. in 2011 the fcc shifted that program to aiming at broadband services. that issue and the fcc's authority to do that in specific ways many which it has done can it has been pending before the tenth circuit which her argument

a couple months ago, lots of open questions. yesterday -- sorry, tuesday's decision may really change the dynamics in that case because suddenly it's not as much a case about what section 254 says about the fcc's authority and how how it must structure its program. and actually just before this panel started, the fcc's counsel sent a letter to the tenth circuit saying, hey, just want to point out this new case that gives us all this authority in this area. that should influence your decision. i don't think usf is alone. i think there's a whole range of issues where we now have a new authority, and we have to see how it will be used. i don't want to say it's unlimited, and i suspect i'll be writing comments to the fcc explaining why it can't do what it wants to do. i think there's a risk we're going to transgress what's known as the doctrine in law which says congress just can't give an agency free rein without providing standards.

that might be what 706 looks like, but, yes, these are a host of questions we're going to have to all together address in the coming years. >> other questions? i think we have time for one or two more maybe. yep, one here on the aisle. >> i have a business question. you mentioned google and amazon. the edge providers, but they're also part of the internet as backbone providers. so what do they do now? i mean, they can bar gain with isps so that because of their importance they don't have to pay differential prices, also they can try to become isps. but are we looking at perhaps a scenario where you have more consolidation in terms of content and isp activity among big internet players? >> >> i actually think it's the opposite incentive. if you thought that the verizons and the comcasts of the world, people who provide last mile of service to end users were subject to regulation, you might

not want in the previous world to vertically integrate because all of a sudden you're swept into that whole world of potential regulation. one of things about the decision that's potentially the farthest reaching is that it potentially expands the reach to anything that affects the comcasts and the verizons of the world. so it's not just them, but the things that influence what they do. and why do we protect applications and content? because it affects what they do. well, so do broadband, so do backbone providers. so do content and application providers in the raw. and the question is how far are we going to read what we can only think of ancillary authority or necessary and proper authority attached to that? now, we have a wunsch of cases saying -- bunch of cases saying they have no jurisdiction over copyright or devices. is that enough of an effect on infrastructure investment and dedecision in local

telecommunications? competition? does that have enough of an impact to bring up the jurisdiction recognized by 706? and the answer is potentially yes based on how these other cases come out. so in my opinion, does it make them more likely to consolidate, i actually think they were reluctant to consolidate before. now they're potentially regulated whether they consolidate or not. it may. the bigger point to me is a bunch of players who didn't they they had to worry about what the fcc's going to do now have to pay attention to this because they don't know how broad that authority's going to be intercepted to be. interpreted to be. >> it's a little bit of an aphorism at this point, but we're worried about net neutrality not just for amazon and google, but for that next start-up that none of us can identify yet. so i think i agree with much of what chris said if not all of it just now. there's a lot of changes happening here. i think those big internet players can fend for themselves, but they didn't have to when they were just getting off the ground.

>> if the question is whether the decision means that backbone providers or middle mile providers now are subject to regulation under 706 in if the way that they weren't, you know, i'd first say that the broadband internet access clarification didn't apply to them in the first place, right? it applies to the consumer facing broadband internet access. to those '05 orders and before don't apply to those to begin with. so those could have been -- the fcc is free to classify many of those services as common carriage services. so that regulatory hang, i would say, exists anyway. you now have a clarification that 706 potentially applies as well. i'm not sure that 706 as a potential area of regulation does a lot to change that middle mile dynamic or long haul dynamic. >> okay. i think we have time for one more question if it's quick and the answer's quick. anyone have one last quick

question they'd like for the panel? yeah, right here. >> [inaudible] didn't they agree to certain open internet requirements til 2018? and where does that leave a company now like comcast versus the other providers? >> that's right. i mean, they are bound by the rules that were just struck down. so they were willing to take that gamble in getting their merger approved, and i think that speaks to some of loopholes that we saw in the existing rules that were struck down. we were not entirely happy with how strong they were, and i think most wired internet providers -- and wireless -- thought they could live with 'em. at&t came out and supported them in 2010. >> there's one direct analog that happened, i don't know, about ten years ago where two cable companies merged in this accepted what was a national subscribership cap, the number #ubgd do, and hen those rules were struck down by the d.c.

circuit. in that case the fcc chose to step in and waive the conditions saying you did that thinking this was law, this is no longer law, we're not going to hold you to that. that is entirely up to the fcc. because technically, that's not a regulation. and because it was a voluntary condition, it wasn't even agency action, it's not judicially reviewable. it's one of problems of micking these one- making these one-party rules, but technically they're still bound until the fcc tells them they're not. >> i think comcast is saying we'll still abide by them. i don't think they're going to ask for it right now, but they could, for sure. >> all right. this is clearly a debate that's going to continue for some time. in the meantime, please thank our panel for an interesting initial analysis. [applause] on this week's news maker richard cordray is the guest.

behind the scenes as a photographer, you are there to see not hear or not listen and not really repeat anything you hear. it's kind 6 a mutual agreement. because you -- we are lead in to meetings when you're imhiend the scenes that are sensitive. i was obviously -- i was there when president obama was in a rally, and at the same time the hurricane had just come up the east coast and up north. he was on the phone on a secure phone talking to fema director

and trying to organize it he was running the campaign. a unique time to be there and hear him and in a serious conversation about what was going on on the ground there and how he wanted things to, you know, take place organizing that. on the other side people are banging four more years. it's a unique time to be -- any time you are behind the scenes with the president. "new york times" staff photographer. sunday night at 8:00 on c opinion is' q & a. now to indiana for the state. state address from governor. he talked about early precinder

in his speech he talked about the state's recent legalization of marijuana for reck registrational use. he spoke about jobs, education, and health care. [applause] [applause] thank you. thank you and good morning. it's great to be back here together.tate i offer you my sympathies.

fortunately for you all of us we'll have the leadership of the senate president morgan carol, nad sespeaker, senate minority leader, and house minority leader bryan. min another voreteran -- [applause] -- another veteran hat is our greas lieutenant governor garcia. thanks to joe and his wife claire for sharing so much of his time. we are honored to have the vice president of the southern indian tribe. [ applause ] >> and the vice chairman of the

mountain youth trial. welcome to you both. i want to thank you awesome cabinet and senior staff who are with us and along with all of the state employees who have worked so hard. especially this year. thanks to everyone who has been dedicated to the flood efforts, the florida national guard, department of transportation and public safety, and our chief recover officer jerry stead. i want to recognize his team from ihs as well. we are indebted to all of you. and thank tooz the attorney general, and the treasurer and to our secretary of state, the honey badger, jeff. [ applause ]

thank you to the members of the supreme court and to the colorado state board of education. denver mayor michael hancock is here. thank you for your partnership with the state. and i want to express gratitude to helen thorpe for being there today and every day for our son teddy. [ applause ] on behalf of all colorado people i want to thank the broncos for giving us something to cheer about this season. and how could we not congratulate the colorado state rams. after that forth quarter win over washington state scoring 18

points in the last three minutes coming from behind was nothing short of amazing. [ applause ] >> that victory was a reminder that when we are fixed with challenge situations we pull together and get it done like always. colorado has always been a good place to find what you are of. earning your keep, making your own way, looking out for your neighbor, that comes with the territory. and colorado we know that there is going to be times when we will be tested. times when we will take action that shows who we are.

during the spring, our executive director was gunned down.

when we gathered for our last state of the state address, in the wake of the waldo canyon fire and the aurora massacre, many of us thought we would never again experience a year like 2012. that was not the case. every season of 2013 presented another unthinkable test. during the spring, our executive director of the department of corrections, tom clements, was gunned down in his home. throughout the summer, wildfires burned: the black forest, royal gorge, west fork, and red canyon. in the fall, we got the flood-against the backdrop of the politicians in d.c. who couldn't get along well enough to keep the federal government's doors open. in the winter, came the reports of a shooter in arapahoe high school and the heart-wrenching reality that 17-year-old claire davis had been fatally shot. this past year, colorado has been scorched. colorado has been flooded. colorado-once again-endured senseless, inexplicable violence. yet, despite all of it, we did not let that define us. that is not our story. our story-and what we showed the world is: colorado does not shutdown. colorado does not quit. colorado does not break. we know there are folks out there still grieving, still recovering. [ applause ] >> we know there are folks out there still grieving, still recovering. we know there are people out there feeling the impact of the national economy's downturns. and we are doing everything within our power to change that.

but make no mistake-the state of colorado has not only endured, it also has thrived. my fellow coloradans, despite every unforeseen test, despite everything that was thrown at us the state of our state is strong. [ applause ] >> and according to just about every forecast, trend and study, the state of the state of colorado is only growing stronger. while the national economy around us remains sluggish colorado's unemployment rate has not gone up. it has gone down. to the lowest levels since 2008. this is our fourth consecutive year of economic growth. according to a study from the university of colorado's leeds school of business, we can expect robust job growth in virtually every sector of the economy this year.

[ applause ] >> colorado is ranked among the top five states in the entire country for business, careers and job growth. four of the top ten-and five of the top 20 communities in the country for startups-are here in colorado: boulder, fort collins, denver, colorado springs, and grand junction. we are also one of the very best environments in the country for small business. according to the kauffman foundation, when it comes to creating a small-business climate, this year colorado earned a grade of "a." that's up from a "b+" in 2012. and people like what's happening here. colorado hosted a record number of tourists this year. we gratefully welcomed even more hunters than last year. [ applause ]

>> agriculture-employing 173,000 people-keeps our economy strong, last year contributing $41 billion to the state economy. between 2009 and 2013, colorado agricultural exports increased by almost 80 percent. [ applause ] the fact that the state is strong and growing stronger is no accident. in colorado, we work for our luck. shortly after we took office three years ago we launched a strategy to be a thoughtful and supportive partner with the business community. we reached out and built relationships with people in 14 regions from around the state, and based on what we heard, we designed a colorado blueprint that focused on six core objectives:

build a business friendly environment / increase access to capital / educate and train the workforce of tomorrow / retain, grow, recruit companies / cultivate innovation & technology / create a stronger colorado brand. because we know the economic hard times have been especially hard in some rural communities, this past year we launched the rural economic development grant program, and are in the process of awarding $3 million to our rural communities. one of the recipients is here with us today. keith (ber-dorf) buhrdorf. with $350,000 in grants awarded to tk mining in delta county, keith's company will be able to add 5 to 10 employees, which is almost doubling the workforce of tk mining's delta office. [ applause ]

>> together, we launched the advanced industries accelerator program making seed capital available to start-up companies in aerospace, engineering, advance manufacturing, biosciences, electronics, energy and tech. we created a unified brand logo, which is almost universally loved. two hundred companies have requested to use the brand. 117 of colorado's companies are already using it. we launched coin-the colorado innovation network-which brings together innovative thinkers and entrepreneurs from around the state. we expanded the biennial of the americas, which is rapidly growing into something like a colorado's world's fair. we created the pedal the plains tour to promote all of the beauty and opportunity of some of colorado's most gorgeous rural communities. with labor and business working together, we passed legislation that made the state contracting process more transparent, while

also making it easier for colorado firms and colorado workers to secure state contracts. when there's work to be done in colorado, for colorado, we should look to skilled coloradans first. [ applause ] >> my friends, in 2010, when it came to job growth, this state was ranked 40th in the nation. now-three years later, in that same ranking, colorado is the 4th fastest job growth state in the country. [ applause ]

>> 40th to 4th. since january 2010, we have added 170,000 jobs. in 2010, companies were leaving colorado. today, they are moving here. while we are disappointed whenever a company leaves this state, colorado is gaining employers and jobs. three fortune 500 companies have decided to call colorado home along with 26 additional companies. your budget decisions played a significant role in this success. one of the most recent companies to establish headquarters in colorado is ardent mills. while we were pedaling the plains we got to talking with our friend, darrell hanavan, of the wheat growers. darrell told us that two of the nation's leading flour milling companies-conagra mills and horizon milling-were forming a joint venture, ardent mills. they were six months into a search for a new headquarters and colorado hadn't made the final cut.

undeterred, darrell requested that i call the executives of this new company. in roughly a month, darrell and his team helped us persuade ardent mills to locate their company here in colorado. we pointed out that colorado is a place defined more by its future than its past. which was clearly the case with ardent mills. landing ardent mills is a little like winning the super bowl-or at least the flour bowl-especially for rural communities. it all began with the colorado blueprint relationships we forged across the state. we have bill stoufer, who will be the chief operating officer of ardent mills, is here with us, along with brad berentson, who will be the chief financial officer. thank you. [ applause ] >> bill and brad, you have the support of everyone in this room to help make ardent mills the most innovative and successful milling operation on earth.

the economic infusion and energy of colorado's new companies, along with the hard work of colorado's entire business community, has gone a long way to take colorado past pre-recession job numbers. the unemployment rate in colorado has dropped from 9 percent in 2010 to 6.5 percent, outpacing the national rate. unemployment in both grand junction and greeley has dropped by even more, by more than 30 percent. but let's be clear, the unemployment rate is not low enough, and all of us share a commitment to keep a statewide focus on this issue. more jobs all over colorado is our highest priority. [ applause ] >> as some of you know, i took

what you might call an unconventional path into running for office. i started out here in colorado as a geologist. during a downturn, everyone in our company got laid off. next thing i knew i was making beer and starting a brewpub business. it turned out pretty well. but as every small business person knows, it's not easy out there, especially when bureaucracy gets in the way. i didn't run for public office until i was 50. before that, i'd never run for anything. not even in high school. i ran for public office as a small businessman. i thought government needed to operate with more common sense and less nonsense. so while we have been doing all we can to make it as easy as possible for business to succeed in colorado we also have been streamlining the state government, making it more efficient. three years ago, we started with a budget that was facing staggering shortfalls. balancing the books is not the sexy stuff, but if the budget is wrong, nothing else can be

right. just ask congress. when it comes to this nitty-gritty of governing, you could say we have borrowed the motto: "be prepared." we have funded core priorities while preparing for future needs-and unforeseen events. because, together, we have made hard choices, been disciplined, not spent more than we have-we've put ourselves in the position to save more money for rainy days. and as we've seen, when we get rain, it can be "biblical" and all at once. the single most critical factor in colorado being able to stay open for business throughout hellfires and high waters has been reserves. three years ago, colorado was setting aside only about 2 percent of its general fund money for reserves. that 2 percent gave the state only a seven-day cushion. last year, we more than doubled that rate, to 5 percent

our budget request is to grow the fund this year to 6.5 percent. at the same time we have also shored up our tabor reserves to $48 million and are requesting that they be increased to $78 million. this money in reserve is what has enabled us to respond quickly to the disasters and get assistance to local partners. it's what enabled us to get roads rebuilt and open-ahead of schedule. if you were to have asked anyone in jamestown, estes park or milliken, if they thought we had a snowball's chance of getting those roads open by dec. 1, they would have laughed out loud - some did laugh out loud. it is because of the cooperation of the bipartisan joint budget committee, that we have been able to build this budgetary bedrock. d.c. should be looking at our j.b.c. to see how collaboration gets done. [ applause ]

>> to ensure that we are maximizing state resources and providing as responsive customer service as possible, we have gotten lean. lean, as many of you know, is a type of business audit that scours operations looking for ways to make processes run more efficiently. we have re-evaluated how every state agency does business. and we have initiated more than 100 new lean processes, more than any state in america. colorado's department of transportation recently reported a 19 percent decrease in combined with other improvements their efforts are saving more than $2 million. in 2008, only 33 percent of property assessment appeals were resolved within one year. now, 79 percent are. the division of real estate reduced the average time it takes to complete an investigation of a mortgage loan by 44 percent. these are only a few examples of our leaner customer service,

where we are doing what we can and should be doing: responding quickly and effectively when needed, and then getting out of the way. we're lean, but we're only getting started. one of the places where just about all coloradans frequently become aggravated is the department of motor vehicles. our dmv has made great strides. but they have done so with a computer system that is nearly three decades old. while many of us play around on our iphones while waiting in line at the dmv, the employees are struggling to update the files in ms-dos. our budget aims to change that. this will reduce the average wait time in dmv offices throughout the state from 60 minutes to 15. prauz [ applause ] [ applause[a]

>> through a statewide effort called pits and peeves, we have also reviewed, modified or repealed nearly 11,000 state rules -- many of which were redundant and flat-out dumb. and we launched the responsible acceleration of maintenance and partnerships program-ramp-a more nimble cdot operation that is on its way to freeing up $300 million annually for five years for accelerated construction. this smarter way of doing business is what enabled us to deliver on our promise to complete the eastbound twin tunnels project, the first capacity increase on this stretch of i-70 since it was built in 1961. just about everyone of us has sat in a car on the way to or from the mountains, frustrated, or even worse, stuck in traffic with a kid needing a restroom. this project will reduce travel times significantly during peak sunday hours, and decrease the number of crashes in the area by more than a third. the second twin tunnel project-the westbound lanes-will

be completed by the end of this year. and then there's kathy nesbitt. two years ago, a full third of state workers were approaching retirement, and the state's hiring system was 92 years old and loaded with countless hurdles to hiring the best people. kathy is the executive director of the department of personnel and administration. she and her team successfully created a talent agenda and worked to pass a bipartisan bill to reform the personnel system. supervisors can now focus on finding the best talent. merit-pay is now based not only on an employee's seniority, but also on performance. hiring times, which previously had taken three months, already have been cut in half. just weeks ago kathy was recognized as one of only nine recipients of governing

magazine's public officials of the year award, which is something akin to an oscar for best starring role in cutting red tape. thank you, kathy. [ applause ] >> moving forward, our priorities are clear: we are going to remain focused on jobs, education; and ensuring that we have a state that is as healthy as it is fiscally sound. we are going to continue to improve colorado's customer service and efficiency; and support our military families. fourteen years into the 21st century is well past time to reform our telecommunications laws.

this session, we ask you to pass legislation that will accomplish this, but at the same time rural and other unserved parts of our state should have the same broadband internet access as urban areas. [ applause ] >> with your help, this year, we will extend the job-creation tax credit from five years to seven, enabling more businesses to maintain employees and hire new ones. economic development demands infrastructure. we will propose the formation of a non-profit enterprise dedicated to fostering public-private partnerships to fund infrastructure projects such as transportation and water. this will not only bolster economic development, it also will lighten the burden on

taxpayers, and harness minds and resources outside of government to address unmet needs and keep colorado competitive. such partnerships offer a path toward financing solutions to existing challenges, such as traffic congestion, in places like fort collins and colorado springs. in the wake of the floods, we proved our ability and commitment to rebuild bridges and roads. we've seen what can happen when we lose that infrastructure. but the single most important investment we can make in infrastructure is in our bridges to tomorrow-our children. we must support effective teachers, students and parents. we must find a way to address key reforms that have made colorado a national model. colorado voters made clear they will not make new investments in education until they are convinced that current resources are being prudently managed. we are going to request that the general assembly fund a plan to

make the budget of every public school transparent. let's put the numbers on the internet and make the web a window. [ applause ] >> under the current statewide public education funding system, a school's funding is based on an enrollment which is counted on a single day, early in the school year. we are going ask the general assembly to pass legislation that will ensure a more accurate assessment, by counting average-daily-membership in our schools. it is nonsense not to have a powerful economic incentive for student retention. while we are choosing to adhere to the prudent budgetary strategy that has been the cornerstone of our policy, this year we are seeking an increase in per-pupil funding of $223, for a total of $400 per pupil in the last two years.

we are also requesting a significant investment in higher education. in recent years, college tuition has been steadily increasing by a rate of double-digits. please join me in supporting our request for an additional $100 million for higher education, which would cap tuition increases at 6 percent and put college within the reach of more families. blauz [ applause[ applause ] >> another priority for colorado families and for us, is supporting the energy industry while protecting the environment. the viability of the sage grouse has bedeviled western states for a decade. as chair of the western governors' association, i believe we can protect the sage grouse while at the same time allowing ranches, farms and other economic activity to

flourish. at our invitation, secretary of the interior sally jewell has agreed to visit colorado and observe mitigation efforts firsthand. colorado's oil and gas industry contributes $29 billion to our economy. critical to the success of the oil and gas industry is that operators recognize their moral and legal obligation to protect our air and water. fortunately, we have been able to bring many in the industry together with the environmental community to work toward solutions. as a result, colorado is now a national leader in developing a strong regulatory environment. we brokered the nation's strongest frack fluid disclosure rule in 2011. we are proposing the nation's first-ever methane capture rule, making colorado the leader in the nation for controlling emissions. we've said before that we're committed to holding the oil companies to the highest

standards to protect coloradans and our air and water. to that end, we are working with legislators, industry and the conservation community to ensure we pass a bill this year that will strengthen penalties for violations of permits and rules. if words were water the state would never run dry. our budget is requesting a second year of funding to help create cleaner water for colorado. this year we will complete the colorado water plan, which will emphasize conservation, address incremental storage, and address drought mitigation. we must create alternative choices to buy-and-dry. no matter where we live, we cannot afford to let our farm and ranch land dry up. [ applause ]

>> part of what has gotten overlooked in the debate about guns is our work on mental health. when you look at the massacres at columbine high school and the aurora movie theater; and the tragedies of platte canyon high school, and most recently at arapahoe high school, guns are only a piece of the puzzle. another clear piece is mental health: trying to identify and assist those who are feeling isolated, bullied, the mentally ill; and trite as this may sound, those who are feeling abandoned and unloved. we allocated more than $34 million to create and bolster programs such as school-based mental health services, behavioral health community centers, and to train and staff round-the-clock mental health

crisis centers. .. right now there are some 80 people with addictions who are getting clean, learning a skill, and turning their life around. people who otherwise would have been on the street. just as we must implement the voters' wishes on marijuana, we are obligated to make sure that children and parents understand brain development and the risks of underage use. we are committed to a securing a safe, regulated and responsible environment. this will be one of the great social experiments of this century, and while not all of us chose it, being first means we all share a responsibility to do it properly. [ applause ] part of being the healthiest state, means we continue to prioritize services for the most vulnerable. we ask for your support for coloradans with developmental disabilities and their

caregivers, including addressing the current wait list, family support services, and transitional services. in that vein, the general assembly, with bipartisan support, created connect for health colorado. while other states have struggled with enrollment and implementation, colorado has outperformed the national exchange and most states. more than 139,000 residents now have health insurance who didn't have it before. [ applause ] >> in addition to being the healthiest state, we have consistently worked to be the most military friendly state. we must continue to honor military veterans. not so long ago i received a

letter from silvia [bonna-con-tee] buoniconti. it was about her son, frank. frank was a chief warrant officer 3rd class united states army. a helicopter pilot. among the many honors frank received was the distinguished flying cross-one of the highest awards an aviator can receive for heroism in combat. frank saved the lives of two special operations teams. he died in a helicopter crash in 2011, while training in washington state. but because he did not die while in a combat zone-according to current state law, silvia and her husband, frank, are not eligible to receive a colorado fallen service member license plate. silvia is not the only gold star mother waiting for this recognition. for families of veterans like frank, this law must change.

silvia is here with her husband, frank, we are deeply grateful for your son's service, and commend you for your commitment to having it recognized. [ applause ] as i wrap up here and we begin this session, i have one more ask of you-of us, really. you don't need a poll to know that regardless of political leanings-the typical american, the average coloradan-doesn't think much of politics or politicians. and who can blame them?

shutdowns. debt ceiling duels. parties locked down, unwilling to compromise. so much negativity. the public sees politicians as operators who put their own self-interest or their party's agenda above the people; and who are obsessed with petty pursuits and ignore the public service part of being a public servant. the widely held perception today is that politicians divide and selfishly scheme in the moment, whereas public servants unite and plan for the greater good. over the course of the last year, everyone in this room has been tested. time and again, you chose to put your communities and your fellow coloradans first. you chose to be public servants, before politicians. we must continue to rebuild better than we were before. but our work is about much more than recovery.

whether we live in a mountain community or in a city; whether we are surrounded by cows or concrete, we all want the same things: the chance to earn a good wage, give our children a decent education; clean air and clean water. vigorous debate is our ally. partisanship is not. skepticism is productive. corrosive cynicism is not. so, as we begin this session, my ask is we ignore the divisive politics. [ applause ]

no one needs to remind us we're going into a political season. and i realize that if such a goal for a session ever seemed ambitious, it's a time like this. but that's precisely why we should set such a goal. tom clements was someone who set such ambitious goals. it's been not quite a year since tom's death. a few months ago, i spoke at a convention of the international association of corrections that was held in colorado springs. i described that when tom was murdered he was in the midst of major overhauls to the department of corrections. he was reforming administrative segregation, which most of us recognize as solitary confinement, and he was about to re-engineer the parole system. tom saw the entrenched problems. but he never gave up. he saw what could and what should be. his philosophies and strategies were never about locking people

up, but rather, everything tom did-really his whole life-was about striving to unlock humanity. it is a tragic, awful irony that an inmate put on parole directly from administrative segregation showed up at his door and killed him. but that is not what defines tom. part of tom's legacy is everything that was discussed at that convention. these were directors of correctional facilities, people who worked in worlds of barbed wire filled with violent criminals. yet the topics of discussion were things like "alternatives for mentally disordered offenders," "giving up crime," and "faith based programming." in other words, it was about unlocking humanity. and it

wasn't a coincidence. the theme of the convention was inspired by tom and was very much in his honor. the other part of tom's legacy is his family, his wife, lisa, and daughters, sarah and rachel, who are with us today. tom's story and life is not defined by what happened to him but by the immense good he achieved and his legacy of love and compassion and reform. his legacy of public service. tom was a public servant. he walked the walk of public service every day.

inexplicable, senseless violence. fires. floods. no, that is not our story. our story is about how we came together and have been getting it done. our story is that we have learned that we are at our best, that colorado is at her best, when we are connected to one another, working together. our story is us. that is what it means to be a coloradan.

that is what we have and will continue to show the world. i'm all in. to keep colorado strong and to keep colorado united, all of us in here, and all of our fellow coloradans out there-every one of us needs to be all in, together. thank you, and god bless colorado. >> the governor's address drew mixed reactions with words like less partisan and phenomenal being described for the speech. the governor only briefly touched on gun laws which was a

major issue during the last year's election. >> and now the iowa's state of the state address. this state of the state is courtesy of iowa public television. [ applause ] [applause] justices, judges, leg elected officials, distinguished guests, family, friends and fellow iowans, good morning. i offer a special welcome this morning to new representatives

brian meyer and stan gustafson and new senator julian garrett. i look forward to working with you and all members of the general assembly. i stand here today honored to be serving as your governor, humbled by the opportunity and eager to meet the challenges we face. i am pleased to report on the condition of our state. over the past year, we have come together as families, as communities, as iowans, putting our differences aside to move iowa forward. because of our hard work last legislative session, iowa's economy, educational system and health are moving forward. iowans have proved time and time again, when working with one another rather than against one another, we can overcome any challenge. for example, the international olympic committee last year took action to eliminate wrestling from the olympics. more than 25,000 people joined

us through an online petition to keep olympic wrestling, the entire iowa congressional delegation joined us and more than 30 other governors came together joining me in a letter to the ioc to keep wrestling. and together, we kept wrestling in the olympics and the olympic dreams of iowa wrestlers alive. [ applause ] my friends, iowa faces another challenge where we can come together again and rally around what is best for our state. the epa has proposed reducing the level of biofuels outlined in the renewable fuels standard (rfs).

if this rule is adopted, it would be a devastating setback to the agriculture sector of the iowa economy. the proposed rule comes at a time when our state continues to implement new pioneering policies encouraging growth and innovation in the renewable energy sector. in a partnership with iowa state university, we launched the "fueling our future" program last october, which will bring iowa to the forefront in the use of e30 fuel. this new program is a reflection of the importance of further advancing the renewable fuels industry, and how the rfs is helping to create important iowa jobs. the rfs has led to a cleaner environment, opened the markets for iowa corn and soybeans and reduced our nation's dependence on foreign oil. thousands of americans are coming together to support the rfs. we will be holding a public hearing later this month to give iowans the opportunity to voice their concerns with the epa's

proposal. lt. governor reynolds and i are pleased the entire iowa congressional delegation and secretary of agriculture bill northey have agreed to co-host this important forum. today, i call on the general assembly, as its first order of business, in bipartisan fashion, to pass a resolution in support of maintaining a robust renewable fuels standard. [ applause ] >> whether it is our sense of community that saved wrestling or collaboration in support of agriculture and renewable fuel, iowans come together. it is this sense of community

and collaboration that defines us as iowans. and it should again shape our approach to governing this year. as we've demonstrated before, we should again attack our problems with the same common sense and seriousness as iowans across our state: working hard working together, and working to make things better than we found them. to me, this is the iowa dream. that dream of opportunity and prosperity which can become a reality for every iowan willing to work for it. the seeds of that dream have been planted with our work over the past three years. but now we must cultivate that dream of opportunity - of a great job and a great place to raise a family - so that it can grow and flourish. the simple truth is we iowans are a people of faith, of tenacity who each year plant the seeds of our livelihood with the devout belief that with hard

work and the grace of god we will reap a bountiful harvest. today it is my duty and honor to report to you on the condition of our state. and i am here to tell you, with great pride: the state of iowa is working. [ applause ] with more iowans going to work each and every day, the current unemployment rate stands at 4.4 percent: iowa is working and our citizens are working toward their iowa dream. with personal incomes growing: iowa is working. with schools and students improving their performance and their standing compared to other states around the nation: iowa is working. the federal government has been

paralyzed by partisanship leading to cliffs, ceilings, sequesters and shutdown, iowa leaders have done the opposite; we have come together to work on behalf of iowans. we put aside our political differences, to achieve common sense compromise in cutting taxes, improving education and modernizing health care in our state: all evidence that iowa is working. three years ago, like many other states, iowa faced serious budget challenges. the path to prosperity was grim. yet the charge to us was clear: restore predictability and stability to the state to get our fiscal house in order. [ applause ]

we have passed two biennial budgets that restore predictability to the state budget. these are budgets that hard-working iowa taxpayers can depend on, budgets that work for iowans by prioritizing education, economic development and job training. today, iowa's rainy day and economic emergency funds are full and we are fortunate to have a healthy budget surplus. iowa is working. we have taken a similar common sense approach to health care in our state by working to improve the health of iowans, bringing more doctors to iowa and providing better care for low-income iowans. since announcing the healthiest state initiative, iowa has improved from 19th to 9th in well-being. during this address last year, students from des moines university (dmu) joined us in seeking increased support for a public-private partnership that would encourage more doctors to move to rural iowa.

today, the private sector, rural communities and the state are coming together to ensure more doctors will be coming to underserved communities. these students will benefit from this partnership and our state will benefit from their commitment. as doctors they will work to improve the health of our citizens and as valuable members of rural iowa their work will help bring jobs to our communities. thank you, dmu students, for joining us again this year. the iowa health and wellness plan is now in place. thousands of iowans are now receiving more than just access, they are getting health care designed to get them healthier.

the iowa health and wellness plan is using health risk assessments and physicals to empower iowans to take ownership of their own health. on top of that, more iowans are receiving private insurance than ever before. iowans living longer, healthier lives will improve the health of our state, our economy and our families. we may not have always agreed on the path to these policies, but we can all resoundingly agree on this: our plan was designed by iowans, not out of touch bureaucrats in washington, dc., and it is going to make iowans healthier. iowa is working.

>> three years ago, more than 100,000 iowans were out of work. jobs were hard to come by and investment in our state was inadequate. we refocused our economic development efforts by changing our approach. together, we created the iowa partnership for economic progress. this public-private partnership is reaping dividends for our economy with more investments and more jobs for iowans. in the last three years, iowa has seen 7.5 billion dollars in new capital investment, and i am pleased to report that since taking office, over 130,000 new jobs have been created in this state. [ applause ] blood pressure & -- --

>> perhaps the best example of our state's turnaround and of our policies working for middle-class families is seen in lee county, which had the highest unemployment rate in the state when i took office in 2011. iowans in lee county are getting back to work, thanks in part to the largest on-shore purchase of wind turbines in history and a multi-billion dollar, world-class fertilizer plant bringing much needed jobs and investment to the area. thanks to these projects, unemployment in lee county has dropped by 40 percent, and many southeast iowans are back to work! [ applause ]

to help iowans keep more of their hard-earned money, and to help employers invest and grow in iowa, you passed and i signed into law the largest property tax cut in iowa history! [ applause ] this historic measure will provide more than 4.4 billion dollars in tax relief, slashing taxes for middle class families and encouraging businesses to grow. middle class families are working hard every day to achieve their version of the

iowa dream and providing this much needed tax relief will help them achieve it. improving education in our state is imperative to improving our jobs outlook, our economic outlook and the outlook for the iowa dream itself. together, we have taken steps to help keep our best teachers in classrooms, increase school choice and better equip our students for college and the workforce. we have begun to reform iowa's education system, and we can expect iowa schools to pull away from the middle of the pack and reclaim preeminence in student achievement as measured against the rest of the united states. the demands of both college and the workforce have changed. in the 21st century, the skills needed to succeed and compete globally include science, technology, engineering and math.

through the stem advisory council led by lt. governor kim reynolds and vermeer ceo, mary andringa, about 60,000 additional students are expected to have access to innovative stem-focused opportunities this school year. today, students across iowa are learning to build robots and solve complex math problems, preparing them for the jobs of tomorrow. in the gallery are students from des moines east high school and greenwood elementary school. please join me in welcoming them to their capitol. [ applause ]

>> we have worked together and invested in students, teachers and schools. we have worked together and invested in the health and well-being of our state. we have worked together and invested in middle-class families, main street businesses and our communities. i am proud of what we have been able to accomplish working together. the results of our work will have a positive impact in the lives of many iowans. however, there is still much more work to be done. together, let's make this another successful and productive session.

and providing rural health care. and last year the budget that you passed and i signed provided the universities with the necessary resources to freeze tuion or last year we provided financial support in increase cio a tuition rate for private colleges and the

support for hayek achievers of the teaching profession with role health care and the share the budget that you passed and i signed allow the regions from universities to free their budgets and over 30 years at [applause] this year i submit a budget to once again freeze tuition and the regents institutions [applause] we need to reinforce with our students that if they borrow, they need to borrow only enough to pay the bills. the university of northern iowa is requiring all students receiving loans to participate

in financial literacy programs, and it is working. last year's student debt at the university of northern iowa decreased by 8%. today i am calling on members of twaleg last year's student dead decrease paper said that does a university brother and i was. by calling on the legislature to reduce cost their families. what if more students could earn while they learn? a -- apprenticeships snell allowed just that opportunity by providing focused and streamline training. one of the positive outgrowth of our historic capitol investments made throughout the state is an increased demand for jobs. apprenticeship programs allow us to quickly and effectively train workers to meet this demand. the budget i proposed to you today triples support for apprenticeships programs. these programs to aid in our middle-class, businesses, and the economy. today we can further build the

pipeline of skilled workers. together we can ensure our workers have the skills they need to fill the jobs of the what. [applause] [applause] [applause] but we must do more if i was going to remain in national and global competitor. that means we need to be connected. interacting differently with businesses, with their government command with each other. to it -- through technology we can connect our dreams to reality. technology will approve educational instruction and make your resources available for students. can connect businesses and new customers and markets. can connect you with the job of

your dreams. technology connects the entrepreneur without a dime to the billion dollar idea in her dreams. we have had great success in the tech sector. now home to data centers with household names like cool, microsoft, and facebook, driving tech startups communities in the cedar rapids i was city and elsewhere all with entrepreneurs looking to create the next interest our web filings. cedar falls is become the gigabytes city, and three other iowa communities have distinguished themselves as connected communities. yet we can do better. in in september i announced our initiative to connect every i went with the goal of making i was the most connected state in the midwest. i charged the stem advisory councils broadband committee with developing recommendations for our consideration.

today at proposed to connect every island with incentives to discourage excess, adoption, and use a broadband technology by business and individuals. my plan includes programs that will train workers for 21st century career is in information and communications technology. my plan also calls for moving the icn two. zero repurchasing the iowa communications network so that it can partner with the private sector to provide connectivity in underserved areas of our state. together we can use broadband technology to grow the i would dream throughout our state, especially in rural areas. as our connection speeds increase, so does the pace of economic progress, so does the ability to grow jobs, and so does the ability to turn the island dream into a reality. [applause]

[applause] to keep the iowa drama live we must keep iowa and especially rural ilo vibrant and working. as i visits communities of throughout our stay during my annual 99 counted toward this vibrancy is seen, felt, and heard. from the in german experienced at watermelon day in stanhope, the bell tower festival in jefferson, and the swamp fox festival in marion to early-morning farmers' markets and their rhetoric clubs at noon , day-to-day life reflects our shared i/o of values. yet to some of the schools and public buildings which used to be a source of pride are now empty shells dotting the

landscapes of our communities. once filled with the hustle and bustle of schoolchildren and their teachers, these are more than just abandoned buildings. there are part of our childhood. they are part of us. instead of letting these treasures stand there empty, let's turn them into economic centers of our communities and once again make them part of our daily lives. we will submit legislation to provide tax incentives to repurchase abandon schools and public buildings. let's turn what used to be our centers of education in the centers of commerce. let's three purpose of the crumbling structures with renewed investment and reinforce the foundation with new jobs. [applause] [applause]

as we read purpose our schools of yesterday it is also a refocus on our students of today sadly, for some children in iowa , the bully they face every day makes every day feel more like a nightmare. they consider whether they can continue to take the abuse from the bully. they don't know where to turn. even if they turn to school officials, our laws have tied there hands. imagine being that child. imagine being unable to escape as the bully relentlessly pursues them on line in a form accessible 24 / seven. imagine how bleak it must be. imagine how lonely it must feel. we can let our children know that there not alone.

i call on both houses and both parties to support the bully- free iowa act of 2014. we can take action to empower our students and their parents. we can untie the hands of schools to allow them to better address cyber bullying. as we take action to protect our children from police, let us also commit to honoring and better serving the men and women that protect our liberties and our rights every day. the centerpiece of my agenda is home-based iowa. it is a bipartisan jobs plan focusing on recruiting service members to iowa and matching them with goods, high-paying careers. here today in the gallery we are joined by members of the iowa national guard and veterans' organizations. please join me in thanking them

for their service. [applause] [applause] [applause]

>> good note to shed his blood for this country is good enough to be given a square deal afterwards. november i announced the always tie away initiative to record veterans to iowa because i believe iowa can offer our nation's veterans something greater than a square deal. we can offer them a better opportunity to live the i would dream. we can give them the best life america has offered. joining me in this endeavor are two men who have served their country, two men who share my uncompromising passion for honoring veterans. please join me in recognizing cochairs of home-based iowa thank you both for your continued service.

[applause] [applause] we want our veterans to know that in iowa if you dream you can achieve it. in iowa, you can find a home that you can afford. and i know you can find a good paying job. and i you can send your kids to a good school, and they can play in a safe neighborhood, and an i/o we honor our veterans, not only with words in ceremony, but with action. today i call on the legislature to pass the home base i'll act. join me in telling veterans that

we will no longer tax their military pensions. [applause] [applause] let's increase support for the military homeowner's assistance program that provides up $5,000 in downpayment or closing costs assistance. let's give veterans credit for their military training and experience as they pursue occupational licensure in our state, and let's make a viola the destination for veterans to continue their education. already the university lia's been named the six best university for veterans by u.s.

news and world report, the we can do better. i will be asking the state board of education to join the region's institutions by passing rules giving veterans, their spouses, and dependents automatic in-state tuition at our community colleges -- at our colleges. will also be convening stakeholders -- [applause] [applause] i will also begin meeting stakeholders from their regions community colleges and private colleges to develop consistent policies to provide veterans academic credit for their military training and experience . our veterans have risked their lives defending our freedom, to show our gratitude let's make iowa the leader in respect, support, and up virginity for veterans. up back-to-back.

[applause] [applause] ladies and gentlemen, i what is working. our state is open for new ideas, open for honest dialogue, and open for more business. i'll is working. our efforts are making a difference in the lives of everyday families as they pursue there eye with dreams. our schools are getting better communities are coming together, and government is working. but that success tells me that we have an even greater opportunity, and of the city to build upon our state and our people so that we are competitive now and in the future. with those significant accomplishments past, the opportunity to do even more is at hand.

iowa is working. the i would dream i here to be realized, but i believe we can and must dream even bigger. as we look to the future, our path is not dictated. we have opportunities not seen in other states and other parts of the world. we need to breed true to our constituents in their cells, and we must dream big. we must dream of denial that is competitive with any other place in the world, and i will wear it is easier to build a business, to build your ideas, to support a family. we must dream of an i/o world-class education is not a dream but a reality. the simple rule that every child should be ready to compete in the 21st century marketplace. we must dream of denial of the continually as the question how can government to better serve people