>> you can watch this and other programs online at booktv.org. c-span rated by america's cable company in 1979. brought to you by your television provider as a public service. >> joins -- joining us on the

"the communicators" today is ajit pai. this is the week the decision came down and i want to read your response on this: for the second time in four years the washington, d.c. circuit ruled the fcc exceed their authority in attempting to regulate the internet. it is time for the fcc to take no for an answer. >> that is my statement. thanks for having me back on "the communicators." my statement would be to not repeal the decision and let

congress specify what thank you the authority should be. i think we should incentivize the broadband authority and create cutting-edge application. >> didn't it leave the door open for the fcc? >> i think as i said earlier the better core, even if the fcc has the option of moving forward with internet regulation, would be to let congress take the lead in terms of what, if anything, happens. >> the new chair, tom wheeler, hear is a portion of his statement: we will consider all available option including those for appeal to insure the networks on which the internet depends continue to provide a free and open platform for

innovation and expression. >> i think the chairman put it well in that statement and when he said this is a dynamic and innovative space. from a regulatory perspective he is saying we need it let them flourish. i think i share the same view of restraint. the agency works best when it is allowed to operate. >> how significant is the judge's descent in the case? >> i think he focused on 206 but by and large he agreed that the primary net neutrality rules should be struck down. >> monty is here and he is an

associated editor at communication daily. >> thank you. you said you would like to let the commission play out. if they classified it as a stage two service, would they run into problems? >> there are some that argue there should be a back to the future solution to internet regulation and looking at this broadband industry we should apply for outdated 19th century railroad style. but i think the key is to have a forward think approach that is leaving behind the heavy handed common carrier style economic regulations in the last and recognizes the marketplace for what it is today. one of intermodal competition and telephone and satellite and other companies competing to provide the same service. if we do that, i am sure it will

take care of its problem without the need of regulations from the fcc. >> proponents compare to to electr electricity -- why shouldn't it be treated that way? >> that is going back to the railroad scenario i used. if you look at what the broadband marketplace is doing we are seeing a shift. and there are no longer silos where companies provide cable and video service and wireless companies are providing wireless and they never meet. my telephone company is my video

provider and telephone companies are on market share now when it comes to voice and broadband. the majority of people have a number of different choices. and because of the intra modal competition there is no reason to see any provider as a utility. by and large, looking at the system globally, it is hard to argue this isn't an innovative area where we should deem one company that regulates utility >> could this decision lead to higher cost for consumers >> i don't believe it will. we will allow companies to explore different business models that will serve the community. before the decision was rendered in 2010, you saw a vibrant open

system where they were competing against each other and that went down to the benefit of consumers. i am optimistic given how innovation has a way in the field that is going to be the case. >> how do see it playing out? >> i don't have a crystal ball and i have not talked about my hopes ahead. but we restrain the impulse to go further and reclassify under title two. and focus on the building blocks of the vibrant building blocks. >> host: back to monty from communication daily. >> host: charter went public

today to buy time warner and they turned them down. if they found a way to merge, would that make it through regulatory approval? >> i cannot comment on something that is not approved so i will have to defer. >> what about your general philosophy on that? >> i will evaluate if there are competitive affects and if there are is there a nearly tailored situation they could apply. and that is what i would apply to all transactions >> you said you didn't think a comcast deal would be approved. >> i was saying the president

suggested it would face greater regulatory hurdles. i was not commenting on how i thoughtt it would come out. in

position of being an interested legal observer to see what they do. >> depending on what the court does i can see the agency having involvement in the issue. >> would the fcc be involved for it emcompass aereo? >> as a general matter, my own view, without commenting on the case, is we should reframe applying the title to companies

that are not using innovative business models. if there is something unlawful about what the business model is. but for the classification, i tend to be more hest -- hesitant. >> what is your opinion of having phones on the plane? >> i share the view of not wanting someone chatting away while i am in the air. >> what about texting? >> that is a separate issue. and that is what they are going to figure out: whether any data can be sustained up in the sky. >> i would like to talk about broadcast. the media bureau approved the

merger between the two companies -- how do you feel about the big transactions being handled at the bureau level? >> i think it is important for the full commission to weigh in if it included facts and law. under the rules, the commission has to weighing. but i think generally it is important for all of the commissioners to be on the record as to the agencies' evaluation of a transaction. i think it gives the decision more legitimacy if the people know all of them have to make their policy views known. but in this particular case, if there is not a novel question involved, as a matter of

principle, i think it is appropriate. >> we reported that the b-low order was a commission vote and now the clear merger is out there -- should that be handled by the bureau or the full commission? >> i don't want to pre-judge a particular case that is pending. but as a general matter, to the extent any transaction involves questions the commission is going to be accountable for and it is bettered handled at the commission level. >> free press attacked the sharing arrangements saying they are a way to get around the fcc. do you think the commission should change those rules? are they going to change soon? >> i personally don't believe joint sales and share sales

agreements per se pose a threat to consumers. to the contrary i think they have significant pro-competitive value especially in smaller markets. out of the la and new york city and looking at wichita in my home state of kansas, a shared service agreement might be the best way for news operations to consolidate the cost and focusing on what they want to cover which the local news. we have seen evidence of share services agreements allowing them to pour money into things like radar for example where were able to save. so my concern is if the fcc tries to attack a problem that doesn't exist we might heard the ability of consumers in smaller

markets to obtain information that is vital to them. >> you are watching the "the communicators" on c-span. our guest is the senior republican from the federal trade condition is ajit pai. and monty taylor is here. commissioner pai, this is the longest we have gone on the "the communicators" without using the word spectrum. what is your current thinking and how do you see the schedule? is the fcc on time when it comes to the spectrum auctions? >> the demand is increasing and it is more critical for the fcc to bring more spectrum in the commercial marketplace. we have not had a major spectrum auction since 2008 but i am happy to say we are taking the first step with 10 megahertz of

option. and we are looking at the auction which television broadcasts would purchase spectrums. and there are host of other options. i don't want to let it go what mentions there is a 5 giga hirtz and they will have up to 500 available for super wi-fi. and i have seen it in person. one giga of data per second is a real possibility. the technical standard exist and devices are being shipped that incorporate radios and transmit and receive those giga hirtz. >> the h-block, not many par

participants in that. >> are we getting more spectrum auction is number one. and are we raising money. we are. and are we bringing the spectrum to the highest value of use. we need more spectrum in the marketplace. and holding the auction where we can receive a significant amount of revenue is a win. >> is the auction taking place in 2015? >> i hope so. i support the date. it is important we take the steps of setting up the broadband plan, testing and re testing the repacking software.

i am hopefully if we take the steps in 2014 we will be in the position to hold the successful auction in 2015. >> broadcasters are looking ahead to repacking with concern the antenna and crews that work on that might not be ready for the work involved in packing and moving things around. how should the fcc address those and make the industry comfortable? >> first and foremost, we need to understand the magnitude of the problem. that was brought to me at the empire state building when i wept up to the 85th floor and saw the actual pipes that were used to transmit. it showed me they have to be physically moved and there is a lot of work going into it.

and the second step is we need more outreach to broadcasters to let them know the con totours o repacking. and that will be making the software available for comment and understanding the technology challenge and what the options are so we can get feedback on the smoothest way to affect the repacking. >> antenna manufacture said the problem is made worse by the freeze on station modification when they say killed their business. do you agree with that and did you support dropping the freeze? >> i had concerned about the freeze when it was adopted. but i would work with my colleagues, especially the new ones who haven't weighed in, and see what the best solution is. >> why do you think rick capland

thought it was necessary to sent out a press release saying this is a voluntary event. is there pressure to do so? >> the statue says this is a voluntary broadcast incentive auction. and i think the fcc should do more outreach to let them know there is a value proposition on the table. it might benefit them but nay chose not to, that is fine to. >> all of the issue, net neutrality and the aereo case, is there pressure for more regulation of wireless from all directions? >> i think in some areas there might be. but the wireless market is more competitive than other.

the fcc's report shows the majority of americans have a choice of four or more wireless providers. and they are competing against each other in terms of price and quality to get the consumer's dollar. i recall the day when a cellphone meant a brick that was impossible to have on your pocket. now we have video transition devices as phone and gps and other receivers. i think we should celebrate the success. and those in the '90s allowed the marketplace to thrive in the way it has. >> how likely is it the fcc will put spectrum limits and limit bidding by big companies like verizon and at a&at&t.

>> our goal is for it to be success and we will try to maximize the amount of revenue it yields and increase the amount of spectrum for broadband. if we adopt limits on the spectrum holding we will preclude certain carriers or limit the extent to which they participate. that would be a tragedy under any circumstances, but especially in the incentive auction where congress is telling us the supply and demand curve has to cross, but we need to yield additional revenue. $7 billion for first net and other national priorities. with that in mind, i think it would be full hardy to limit the spectrum proceedings when that would affect the auction.

>> did you favor smaller licenses for the smaller carriers? >> one of the proposals is the economic areas or the ea's. i know some of the rural carriers made that proposal. i think it is an idea we should be open to. >> did you support the two-phase proposal? >> that is another one i hope will gain more comment and at the appropriate time i will take an open mind as to how to resolve it. >> the head of the ncta michael powell and dick wiley and read hunter testified on the hill about changing the communications law and whether the '96 law needs updating and if the '34 law needs updating.

would you be game for a big overhaul? >> i think it is obvious it isn't keeping pace. the fcc should calibrate to keep up with the times. i think we have reached the point given the intro modal competition we are seeing, the fcc needs to take action and bring regulations into the 21st century and get rid of the furlou furloughs saying they need to be treated differently. >> couldn't that lead to more regulation of wireless company and pushing broadband in as a common carrier? >> you know my own views as to

what the fcc should do. i would hope congress would recognize wireless innovation is the hallmark of that part of the industry and that is a direct result of the agreement in 1993 to let the thrive without the standards you saw in '92. >> let's talk about the hsh discount. the deadline was this week. you and a bunch of commented saying it should not eliminated without looking at the ownership cap and i have had sources say that will never be eliminated. would you expand? >> i would say getting rid of the discount without altering the cap is bad policy.

the 39% limit was established when the discount was taken into account. i think it is important for us to reexamine the cap to see if it is relevant. >> how should the commission handling the grand fathering rules -- are you familiar with that? >> we should not make the rules before the fcc has taken final action. and that will apply it to any transaction as of the date they adopted the fpm. i think the better course is not to apply it until the final report and has been adopted. >> if the vhs is enacted but the

other isn't -- does that address your concern? >> without a firm record on the question, i would not want to pre-judge what the appropriate course is. >> commissioner, sports blackouts -- will we see more? >> i hope not. it causes aggravation to the consumers and i hope the fcc moves with dispatch in the proceeding you mentioned where we proposed to get rid of the rule. >> does that to have to go through congress or can you do that administratively? >> there is steps the fcc can take administratively and we are in the process of doing that. >> you made a proposal about 911 calls from motels -- why? >> it struck me that this was a gap in our public safety

communication. that it was screaming out for public awareness. i saw the story on twitter actually. someone gave me a notice about the issue on twitter and i read the story and couldn't believe this 9-year-old girl had to watch her mother get stabbed in a texas hotel and dialled 911 and couldn't reach anybody. and her died ultimately as you know. it brought home to me the fact that public safety communications are critical. i wondered how common the problem was. and brought in an expert and he told me a large number of hotels and motels use the telephone system of private branch exchanges that is not programmed to recognize when someone dials 911 they are trying to reach emergency personal. it might not go anywhere or to the front desk. that needs to be changed and it

could be done by simply reprogramming the phone. i had the opportunity to speak to the grandfather of the girl and he told he never expected this to be a national issue, but she is grateful because if one life can be saved by twerking the existing technology, that is a good thing. i support his efforts and i am determined to do whatever i can to raise awareness. >> have you heard back from the hotel chains? >> i have not. but i am hopefully i will. >> and why were you not supportive of commissioner clyburns push to lower the inmate calls? >> i thought the position shouldn't be sitting around the agency for a decade and i put a proposal on the table that would

reduce the cost significantly in 36 states. but in my separate statement, i pointed out the order adopted was on a shaking legal surface. >> we appreciate you coming to us and spending a half on on the "the communicators" with us. monty taylor, thank you as well. >> thank you. >> thank you both. >> c-span created in 1979 and brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> gary young is next and he examines the i have a dream speech delivered on august 28th, 1963. this is about an hour and