that we have at least a week prior to the legislative hearing. the same thing happened in the consumer manufacturing and trade subcommittee in the last couple of days. it just you know i understand maybe you give examples of things that were done in the past by us but i just think that you know mr. upton yourself subcommittee chairs have said they wanted to act in a bipartisan way want bipartisan bills. i appreciate that.

the opportunity to show our appreciation to the fcc for its work so thank you chairman and fellow commissioners for all you've accomplished. this has been an eventful and the commission has received more than its fair share of attention and an unprecedented level of civic engagement. americans called for a strong network neutrality rules and 140 members of congress engaged in the process and president expressed his opinion as well which is into something that we should be and in there is to doubt.

it is the spotlight at the commission stood tall and the entire staff have shown a steadfast education to serving the public interest and we showed everyone who called him in and came into support of neutrality that the fcc and the rest of washington washington know washington know-how to the same. know how to listen. now i've repeatedly said i welcome the majority change of heart and i remain open to looking for bipartisan way is to enshrine the network neutrality protections into law that after what has taken place over the past few days i wonder if bipartisanship may only be in the eye of the beholder if we are able to find a partner in this process we must make sure our efforts do not come at the stance of other commissions. the fcc must remain effective to protect consumers and must continue to promote universal service to all americans and and an issuer that

telecommunications and media markets are competitive and must maintain the vitality of the public safety communications and that's why i look forward to hearing how we can continue to serve an important role of the broadband age and the commissioners. thank you for coming here today and for your public service. i yielded time to you and i wanted to have wanted to yield a minute of my time that i don't have it now but if i could ask unanimous consent -- >> without objection. >> let me second the comment about the need for us to work together. the communications policy has a history of being made on a bipartisan basis and i would hate to see the polarization that defines the policy debate dominating effort on the subcommittee. but there are challenges. we still have 77% living in rural areas and they lack access to the high-speed broadband and as the chair reported if we could have internet access at

30,000 feet on an airplane we should be able to have access across rural america including new mexico. i'm interested in hearing from the commissioner on the innovative potential of unlicensed spectrum and i'm also excited to hear from the utility commission or a colleague of mine to modernize the lifeline program on the broadband era and i want to hear from all commissioners how we can work including strengthening the information technology system that collapses into millions of comments generated last year when a friend of ours filed a comment which crashed its servers. 4 million is a lot that the agency that is charged should be able to handle the traffic and without i want to thank everyone for being here today and i look forward to this conversation. >> we will go now to the chairman of the fcc. thank you for being here and we know you have a tough job.

>> thank you very much mr. chairman and ranking member it is a privilege to be here with all of my colleagues. there's been some reference about the open internet i'm sure we will discuss it more today. the decision we made was a watershed. in your legislation mr. chairman and in our regulation we identify a challenge or problem that needs to be solved. we take different approaches to be sure and no doubt we are going to be discussing those now and in the future. but there is an agreement that the internet is too important to ignore and to not set the rules. we've completed the rules that will be in place that let me move on to a couple of issues

that are important to the committee and one is that there is a national emergency in the emergency services. and congress holds the key to the solution. the vast majority of the calls to 911 as reference to the public safety challenges. the call comes from mobile devices. in the unanimous decision of this entire commission we have established rules to provide location information to where the call is coming from. the carriers are stepping up. but delivering that information is only the front end of the challenge. mr. shimkus about 15 years ago led to legislation making 911 and national number. amazing it had never been mac. the calls now go through it many times it is like a tree falling in the forest and it was a region of the coke recent

example when a lady by the name of anderson called as she was drowning in her car and the signal was received by an antenna that happened to the adjacent at the answering planes that did not have come that decided not to have maps of the area next door. and i've listened to the call. it's heartbreaking. she keeps saying here is where i am and they keep saying i can't find it on the map. i don't know where you are. there are 6500 different ones in the country. they are all staffed by an incredibly dedicated individuals. but there needs to be some kind of a set of standards that only congress can deal with.

but now it's to do something about the back end into this isn't a power grab i don't care how it gets done. the second issue i would like to raise i know that both you and i want a commission that works openly, fairly and efficiently. while the votes always get the attention about 90% of the decisions during my tenure have been unanimous. 2% have been for-1 and there've been 21 out of 253 votes that have been three through code to. we also have during my tenure the best record of any full commission this century for getting decisions that quickly. a 73% of our decisions are released in one business day or less. the measure of that is the last

republican-led commission. it took a week before they could get that number. we also have the lowest number and percentage of actions made on delegated authority of any commission, republican or democrat in the last 15 years. but regardless of this we should be constantly striving for improvement. commissioner o'reilly has raised some really good questions about long-standing processes. he and i were in the same position we walked in the door at the same time and we found the processes in place that had been typical for both republican and democratic administrations. he raised some good questions and to address these i'm going to be asking each commissioner to commissioner to appoint one staff person to work on the task

force to be headed by diane who ran the process reform task force, and i'm asking diane -- i've already asked her -- to begin the agencies of you with procedures are for those agencies and that can be a baseline which again we can measure our procedures and move forward to address what i think are some of the legitimate issues to commissioner has raised. >> thank you mr. chairman. we will now move to mr. clyburn of the federal communications commission did subdivide to have you back here come the former chairwoman we are delighted to have you back here. >> ranking member, distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to share my perspectives with you this morning. in my written testimony for the record i discussed the commission's work and several

policy areas. this morning i will focus on spectrum of options and inmates calling services reform. in march of 2014, we unanimously adopted a licensing service rules to option 65 megahertz of spectrum in the band. this was not only important for wireless carriers seeking to meet skyrocketing consumer demand on their network but it the network but it was critical for the promotion of more competitive options. my colleagues and i agreed on a plan with smaller license blocks and geographic license areas. we also agreed on the need for interoperability between the 80 u.s. one and three band. such rules encourage participation by smaller carriers, promote competition in local markets and ensure the auction allocates spectrum to the highest and best use. most experts predicted an intense bidding in this option but no one forecasted that the

total amount of winning bids would be a record-setting $44.89 billion. the success was due in large part to a painstaking effort to pare the spectrum band that involved a broadcast and wireless industries federal agencies and members of this committee and for that i think you. we should follow a similar approach in the voluntary incentive option. robust participation by small and large wireless carriers in the forward option would encourage broadcast television stations to take part in the reverse option. a unanimously adopted a notice of proposed rulemaking seeks to strike a proper balance between licensed and unlicensed service. we also initiated a proceeding to inform the competitive competitive bidding rules and the option. we proposed comprehensive

reforms so small businesses can compete more effectively and thought comment on how to detour the just and richmond. an example of how the markets do not always work in the regulatory backstop is sometimes necessary. while the petition requests for relief from the egregious rates remain pending for nearly a decade, the rates and fees continue to increase. calls made by deaf and hard of hearing inmates have taught it to dollars and 26 cents per minute. add to that in the endless array of the fees $3.90 to initiate the call. there is even a fee charged for their own money.

they are the concern of all. there are 2.7 million deal with one parent incarcerated and they are the ones that are likely to do poor in poorly in school again to suffer severe economic and personal hardships all exacerbated by the unreasonable regime. studies consistently show that meaningful contact beyond the presumed walls can make a difference in maintaining the community ties, promoting rehabilitation of the successful reintegration into society and reduce the recidivism. ultimately the downstream cost are borne by us all. we have had attacks on the calling rates since february of last year and despite the predictions of losing phone service and insecurity we've witnessed nothing of the sort. what we have seen is increased

call volume ranging from 70% to as high as 300% and letters expressing how this has impacted lives. i look forward to working with the chair and end of my colleagues to finally bring this issue over the finish line. my reference to the struggling this country to do this morning by recording all rates while taking into account robust security protections. mr. chairman and others i appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today and i look forward to any questions you may have. >> i think you have a winner. we are going to go to the commissioner. we are delighted to have you back before the subcommittee and look forward to your comments. thank you for being here. >> good morning chairman -- >> i don't think that microphone stayed on. >> good morning chairman, chair and ranking member and distinguished members of the committee.

today communications technologies account for one sixth of the economy and they are changing at a breathtaking pace. how fast? consider this. it took the telephone 75 years before it reached 50 million users. to reach the same number of users it took television 13 years into the internet for years. more recently it took angry birds 35 days. we know the future is coming at us faster than ever before. we also know the future involves the internet. and our internet economy is the envy of the world. it was built on a foundation of openness. that is why open internet policies matter and that is why i support network neutrality. as you have undoubtedly heard they've made known their ideas

thoughts and internet openness. they've lit up our phone lines clogged or e-mail inboxes and jammed our online comment systems. that might be messy but whatever our disagreements are on the network neutrality i hope we can agree walker see an action is something we can all support. with an eye to the future i want to talk about two other things today the need for more wifi and to bridge the homework gap. few of us go anywhere today without mobile devices in our palms, pockets or purses. that's because every day in countless ways our lives are dependent on wireless connectivity. while the demand for the airwaves growth of both of our policy conversations are about increasing the supply of licensed airwaves available for option. this is good. but we also need to give

unlicensed services and wi-fi its proper due. after all wifi is how we get online in public and at home. it's also how our wireless carriers manage their networks. in fact today nearly one half of all wireless data connections are at some point off the looted on to unlicensed spectrum. wi-fi wifi is also how we foster innovation. that's because the low barriers to entry for the unlicensed airwaves make them perfect sandboxes for experimentation. and wi-fi is a boom to the economy. the economic impact of unlicensed activity has been estimated at more than $140 billion annually. by any measure that's big. so many civic unlicensed unlicensed services a priority in our spectrum policy. and at the fcc we are doing just that with our upcoming work on

the bands in the 600 megahertz band that it's going to take more than this to keep up with demand that's why i think the time is right to explore greater unlicensed use in the upper portion of the five gigahertz band and i think going forward we have to be on guard to find more places for wifi to storage. second, i want to talk about another issue that matters for the future and that is the homework gap. today roughly seven in ten@homework that requires broadband access. but the fcc data suggests that as many as one in three households today lacked access to broadband at any speed. think about those numbers. if you are a student in the household without broadband, just getting homework done is

hard. applying for a scholarship is challenging and while some students may have access to a smartphone, let me submit the phone isn't how would you want to research and type the paper to further the education. this is a loss to our collective capital and all of us because it involves the shared economic future that we need to address. that's why the homework gap is the cruelest part of the digital divide. but it's within our power to bridge it. more wifi can help as well our efforts to upgrade the connectivity through the program. but more work remains. i think they need to take a look at modernizing the program to support the connectivity in the low income households and especially those with school-age children and i think the sooner we act the sooner we bridge the gap and give more students a fair shot at the 21st century

success. >> we appreciate the testimony. those buzzers went off. we have two votes that but we should have time to get through of the commissioner's testimony and then we will probably come back immediately after the vote to resume questioning. welcome, commissioner thank you for being here and go ahead with your testimony. >> chairman, ranking member thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify here today. it's been an honor to work with the members on a wide variety of issues from eking available spectrum for broadband to improving the nation's system. i last testified in front of the subcommittee more than a year ago. at the hearing december 122013 things have changed dramatically in the fcc. i wish i could say the changes on balance have been for the better. unfortunately that hasn't been the case. the foremost example is the

decision last month to apply title ii to the internet. the internet is not broken. the fcc didn't need to fix it but it but the party line vote overturned a 20 year bipartisan consensus in favor of a free and open internet. with a title to decision the fcc voted to give itself the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the internet works. the decision will hurt consumers by increasing their broadband bills and reducing competition. and of the order wasn't the result of transparent rule making process. the fcc has already lost in court twice and its latest order has flaws that are guaranteed to my ear the agency litigation for a long time. turning to the designated entity program the fcc must take immediate action to end its abuse. what was once a well-intentioned program designed to help small

businesses as become a plaything for giants. the option is a shocking case in point. dish which has annual revenues of $14 billion market cap of over 34000000000.85% equity stake in two companies now claiming a $3.3 billion in taxpayer subsidies that makes a mockery of the small business program. the $3.3 billion at stake is real money that can be used to underwrite 580,000 programs, fun funded school lunches for 6 million children and the hiring of over 130,000 veterans per decade. the abuse had an enormous impact on small and disadvantaged businesses from nebraska to vermont. 89 to spectrum if united spectrum licenses they would have used to provide consumers a competitive wireless alternative the fcc should adopt a further

notice of proposed rulemaking so that we can close these loopholes before the next auction. turning next to process. the fcc is at its best with the bipartisan collaborative manner. during my service with the chairwoman e. 9% of the votes on the meeting items were the agency vote on the most high-profile significant matters affecting the country were unanimous. since november 2013, however 50% of the votes at the meetings have been unanimous. this level of discord is unprecedented. indeed there've been 40% more partyline votes at the fcc in the last 17 months been under the entire then under the entire chairmanship of chairman martin, jankowski and clyburn. i'm also concerned about long-standing procedures and norms that are being abused to freeze out commissioners. for example it's customary for

the bureau is planning to issues and to get orders on the delegated authority to provide the items to the commissioners 40 hours prior to the release. back then if the commissioner asked for the order to be brought up for the vote that request from the single commissioner would be honored. the leadership has refused on the items that have made such a request. given this trend as well as others i commend the subcommittee for focusing on the issue of the fcc process reforms and i welcome the chairman's announcement this morning. finally, i would like to conclude by discussing an issue where it should be easy to reach consensus. when you dial 911 and you should be able to reach emergency personnel wherever you are. but unfortunately, many properties that use multi-line telephone systems require the caller is to press nine or some other code before dialing. and this problem has led to

tragedy. unfortunately the systems of many federal buildings are not configured to allow direct 911 dialing. recognizing this problem congress directed the general service administration to issue the report on the capability of the telephone systems in all federal buildings by november 18 to 2012. i recently wrote to inquire about the status of that report and i was disturbed to learn through the press report just a couple of days ago the network completed it. the headquarters is one such federal building where the dialing doesn't work. but as the ranking member recently observed when it comes to emergency calling the fcc can be the example above only for the rest of arrest of the federal government for 20 entire country. ranking members of the subcommittee thank you once

again for inviting me to testify. i look forward to questions and staff in the days to come. >> the fifth session or end the chairman. ranking member and members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to deliver testimony today. i've always held that the committee and the highest regard given by past involvement as a congressional staffer with oversight hearings and responsibilities that you have to face every day on reauthorizing the fcc and improving its process and recommit myself to being available with any resource i can in the future. in my time in the commission might enjoy the many intellectual challenges presented by the innovative challenging communication sector. it is my goal to maintain friendships even when we disagree and to seek opportunities where we can work together. to provide a brief snapshot i voted with the chairman of

approximately 90% of all items. unfortunately it drops specifically to 62% for the higher profile open meeting items. one of the policies i've not been able to support as the insertion of the commission into every aspect of the internet. as you may have heard the commission pursuant to the means of the approached subject broadband providers to the new title regime without a shred of evidence that is even necessary solely to check the boxes on the partisan agenda. even worse the staff to review current and future internet practices on the standards such as just and reasonable or disadvantaged or reasonableness work management. there are creative ideas to the regulatory environment to protect the marketplace on the need to reform the outdated

inappropriate procedures for instant as it is advocated that any document to be considered an open meeting should be made publicly available on the commission's website at the same time that it's circulated to the commissioners agree three weeks in advance. this isn't tied to the net neutrality i am although it provides an example. under the current process i need with numerous parties prior to an open meeting but i am telling for example having read the documents the document the concerns are misguided and addressed. this is a huge waste of time for everyone involved and allows some parties and unfair advantages in the hunt for the scarce information. the stated objection to this approach presented under the cloak of procedural law about the resource management. in addition the commission has a questionable adoption process that deserves a significant intention.

ultimately the full house and the last congress would address a number of commission practices to keep the public out of the critical end stages of the deliberative process. these proposed changes as well as others would improve the fund shall it from chalabi and improve the consumer access to information and in addition i would turn to the subcommittee's attention to the other practices and i believe that they deserve attention. the notification mentioned testimony by outside witnesses at the meeting and the delegating that authority to the staff to make critical decisions and the regulatory flexibility act and reduction act compliance assessed the penalties. i've also been outspoken on the need to free up the resources for wireless broadband. i look forward to working on so many more in the months ahead and i stand ready to answer any

questions you may have. >> we will recess so that members can go to the floor and vote. please return is probably as possible as we will begin questioning there after. we stand in recess and we have two quick votes. >> thank you very agenda we will now enter the questioning phase from the members of the committee and to begin we want to thank all of you for your testimony today and did the work that we do every day so we do appreciate that. i was amused at some comparisons with respect to the media

ownership proceeding. they wrote a public notice testifying before congress but he didn't give a further notice of proposed rulemaking and that seems to be precisely why the third circuit threw the newspaper ownership rule out. apparently i guess federal judges don't think much of the news release or even congressional testimony when it comes to satisfying the notice and comment requirements they actually think the agency should go through the procedural steps to make sure that all interested parties even those outside of the policy circles get an opportunity to understand the significant shift in the direction it had a reasonable amount of time to comment. i have a couple of questions and perhaps i can direct them to the commissioner. how many of the tentative conclusions found in the npr and were reversed in the final order?

to make virtually all of them. >> was number says the commission planned to assert its authority over the ip addresses? and what paragraph to the public on the notice that the commission intended to redefine the term public switch network. >> there is no such paragraph. that's why he was concerned about. i didn't see that either. there are a number of issues pending at the commission and i know the chairman has had a lot on his plate. i know it's a rapidly changing environment. some of you have heard me talk about my application on the business ten years waiting and we get a lot of input here from the constituencies across the country. has the commission acted on the

modernization order? >> it hasn't yet and it was adopted about a year and a half ago. >> another involves this issue to allow small cable operators to operate at the group for the purchase of content. has that been acted on? >> i voted i want to say three years ago. but it's been ready to vote. >> my understanding is the commission hasn't yet issued its quadrennial review for 2010. that's about five years ago is that correct? >> december of 2007 is the last time the actual rules were adopted. >> it's been eight years in the statutory obligation? >> we need to put it back in the

quarter neil. >> and what about the work on the connect america find? as the commission finished its work on how connect america will work on the supports mobile? >> it's not just do that the work is under way. >> these are some of the things that trouble us to say the least. we've also had an issue come to our attention involving the western amateur interference case and maybe i can direct this to you i understand it's been going on for quite a while and it is quite disturbing. i've been told about some of the audio recordings that there's this awful and repulsive racial epitaph against the female members in its come to that it's come to our attention this has been sitting there for a while where these operators are

jamming and using really awful language. do you know the status of that and can you give an update on that? i think it is called at the western association interference case and there are a couple of these that lead into the discussion and i'm going to run out of time about the closing of the retail offices and we have the managing director we were not really brought up to speed with the advanced notice to close the regional offices is that where the enforcement takes place? >> one is to enforce the public interest by other things resolving interference concerns and public safety and while

still studying the issue on the union representatives and congresswoman clarke expressed concern about the function we want to make sure that however it is organized we protect the public interest. >> we could leave only two offices one in la and one for san francisco which i'm hearing from various entities. >> so there's multiple things going on. first of all, we need to make sure that the reduced budgets are spending their money efficiently. when you have more trucks which is the reality that exists today, you have to ask yourself the question argued distributing resources as they ought to be distributed and when you have one manager for every four people using to your self is this the right kind of

structure? we would like to have the backup for this and i think we have a request pending for that. >> is my understanding is correct, you asked for the consultants report, the final consultants report. >> is that seeing the draft but also back for more detailed information. >> i recognize the recognized the gentle lady from california. >> thank you mr. chairman. welcome again to the entire commission. it's obvious.

i sincerely thank you for your public service and to that commissioner o'reilly this is a graduate of the committee. you were here under the chairman whom i had the pleasure of working with and getting a lot of things done together, so welcome back. commissioner, thank you for your advocacy. you know the mother and father of this are right here at the committee. we found it at that caucus and helped -- we did what's so funny about that. [laughter] i think it's terrific. when no one was paying attention to those issues that it's before the country was attacked, the commissioner thank you for your

clarity and your passion when you speak and commissioner clyburn, just go get them and to the distinguished chairman i don't know how many people realize this but he is a man of history and so i want to pick on the vein of history because i think it's important for us. around here life is incremental. i would like to have you widen the lens of what is before us today in terms of history. the majority tries to define net

neutrality with some very scary things. they call it railroad regulation, billions of taxes that are going to be lucky, no investment is good to be made the market is going to be chilled. in terms of history we have been through the stone age the age of invention, the industrial revolution and the technology age and now the information age. and i think while this is difficult for some to actually see and when you see something you either get it or you miss it we are at the a moment in our nation's history where we are moving to a new age and i would say that those that are on the

other side of the issue are back at an older age where you have huge corporations, gatekeepers duopolies. so what i would like you to address with this moment is and place it on the stage of history. >> thank you. you're getting me started on history. >> that we don't have a lot of time. i have a minute and 40 seconds. >> i think we are living through the fourth grade network revolution in history. if you look at those what you will find this every single time it was the end of that

civilization as we know it. people who didn't want to embrace the change of us like this is awful. i have hanging in my office a poster from 1839 that was put out by people who were against the interconnection of railroads and it was all behind women and children are going to be hurt by this. it was paid for by all the people whose business is is with the effective because the railroads would interconnect. yet that interconnection drove the 19th and 20th century. we always hear these imaginary horrible awful things that will result and we also always end up saying as a society you know we need rules. we need to have a node set of rules and a referee on the field who can throw the flag and that

is the process that we have gone through every time there's a new network revolution and we had the privilege of living through that and trying to deal with those realities today. >> that is a magnificent period of time. i have questions for all of you and i'm going to submit them to you and with that i would like to ask unanimous consent that the congressman's questions be submitted for the record. he is a guest of the subcommittee today and demonstrates his great interest at hand and another from many i don't know maybe 50 racial justice and the civil rights organizations who have addressed a letter to the chair man and myself in support of the net neutrality. >> without objection. >> thank you mr. chairman.

>> the next questioner will be the gentle lady from tennessee for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. i will add to my viewpoint is when you look at the economic revolution in society whether it was agricultural or industrial the technology committee information from a successful revelations are about freeing up and not researching and what we are looking at right now is the vantage point of the wall are coming from is ticking away and be strict in, not freeing up. let me come to you for a moment. for the cost and benefit analysis looking at what had been said by the free press "the

new york times" agreed with that and we want to hear from you a little bit. 30 seconds worth way we should have had a cost-benefit analysis and what you think the outlook is. >> it was a child that was done in this instance. we are talking about hypothetical arms and real-world impacts. but in terms of the question on taxes i would switch to the taxes and fees because on the universal feed is what happens when the students could incorporate the chairman has made it very clear the item in and of itself does not include universal service that is something for about a month or two and we are waiting for the joint board meeting this will be in the months ahead. >> you gave an interview this

week that's going to be the attack on broadband and the commission is waiting for the joint board to decide april 7. they say that the deadline might be appropriate so at some point very soon the joint board is going to recommend how to increase the fees and in addition it's not just the usf as the commissioner pointed out, it's also state and local property taxes and localities. the district of columbia poses an 11% tax. they have to be paid by someone. >> i read something he said title ii is a regime further regulation and then we are

looking at another thing that might include a filed complaint under section 208 if they don't think the charges are just and reasonable. so, you have denied that the fcc is going to get into the rate regulation order. it's on the date that the rules are effective but what about the first time that a complaint is filed under section 208 because the party feels that they are not just and reasonable. and isn't it true that they will be engaged in the regulation? >> i hope somebody files that kind of complaint. as you know, there hasn't been a

complete found in the wireless voice space. if somebody files a kind of complaint i don't want a prejudice decision but i will assure you that there will be a process that will look at that and that will develop a record that would make it very clear that the fcc is not in the consumer business. >> don't you think what you just said that there hasn't been a complaint filed proves the point that the internet is not broken this space is not broken and it doesn't need your oversight and guidance? spinnaker i was referring to the wireless voice. >> i have one question for the commissioner. i want to go to the lifeline

program. you advocated restructuring and rebooting that program and you have had several supply-side reforms that eliminated incentives for the waste fraud and abuse and the fcc inspector general as you know has performed a review of the verification process on this and recommended that the fcc may improve the effectiveness that it gives the subscribers and reduce the level of fraud in the program. we have had hearings on this and i want to work with you on it. and is it true under the current system of penalties for the subscriber about having multiple phones is to lose the subsidy for those all but one and then the carrier is prosecuted and i tell you why your answer is important.

you have to reform all this. when we talk about expanding. there's the existing waste fraud and abuse is. we need to do that and the key way to do that is to get the providers out of the certification business. there are no longer greenlight customers. with guidance from my colleagues and while i was the acting chair -- >> i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey one of

the concerning impacts was the loss of communication services a lot of people could call their friends or family. they were out in the state the power lines go and the power lines could on the communication services go down along with electricity so i want to ask the commissioner lessons did you learn about how to prevent these kind of communication failures in the future emergencies. >> thank you for the question. i will not won't forget what i saw with a lot of broken homes and businesses and cars and boulders and piles of sand many blocks from where the ocean is

because wind and water have it delivered there that people were committed to rebuilding when they fielded during the storm. what stuck with me was that many of the areas went out. throughout the ten states that were impacted by the storm about a quarter of the towers went out of the service in new jersey as you mentioned it was about 40% but i would bet the number was significantly higher on the new jersey shore. they started a rulemaking to ask how can we fix this going forward because we know that 40% of all of the households are why your list only and in the middle of a storm at the very least, they should be able to connect and get the help they need. so we issued a rulemaking in 2015 and among the issues that were discussed was the issue of how much backup power is

necessary and how much reporting duty wireless carriers should have been the sites go out of service. i hope that we can actually turn around and deliver a decision on that because we don't know when the next storm is going to hit but i'm pretty sure people are going to try to use communications when it does. >> we were considering updates to end sure that they have access to the communications during disasters. can you commit to updating the rules this year? >> the issue raised is a paramount issue. there are broad issues and that is the whole copper retirement that was forced by sandy and how we make sure that when the power goes down and you are relying on fiber which doesn't carry its own power we have the rulemaking

going on literally just closed last week. all of these issues in turn relate, that first and foremost in the responsibility first and foremost is public safety. >> i want to ask about the designated the rules. obviously small businesses are so important in my state and elsewhere and i just don't think that small businesses can survive in the capital intensive industries like telecommunications without some smart public policy. they allow the large corporations to game the system and i introduced today the small-business access to give small businesses a fair shot at accessing the nation's airwaves. so i will start another is not much time left but i will start if the others wanted to chime in

with you maintain a robust program focused on genuine small businesses? >> i replied yes we will and yes we are. we have had a rulemaking going on and we will issue shortly a public notice making sure that it's broadened out the discussion is broad and the record is built that record is built on the question of the recent auction in some of the legitimate concerns that have been raised about that. but it's frustrating to me you say yes these were bush era rules and they haven't been reviewed since then and it is time to review them and what is upsetting is the way in which the lawyers come in and take advantage of the rules. and i was here when they created

the entities and as you say the world changes dramatically in how it and how it can be structured and how it can play in the big market where before it was a much smaller market. but they figured out how to do it whether it is with broadcast licenses there is no way we keep the rules current and we are going to do that on this issue and make sure the commitment that i will ironclad give you is that we want to make sure we have a new set of rules in place before the spectrum auction that takes place next year. >> the chair recognizes himself for five minutes thanks to the commissioner for being here today. we voted to update the speed of 25 megabits per second.

the speed had four megabits per second while understanding the need to update the broadband speeds and i'm kind of curious on the process they chose and the three megabits it seems to the outside observer that an arbitrary number was picked especially considering they voted to spend 10.8 on the next years of the connect america fund to deploy ten megabits per second. ken you walk us through how the agency came to these benchmarks and also can you follow upon how does it still stand over the ten megabits per second is by definition. we have each of these issues in

a vacuum so when we were talking about deployment we agreed to spend over the course of a decade billions of dollars of of what's with the ten megabits per second and fast-forward and all of a sudden we learned that isn't broadband it is 25 megabits per second under which there is no such thing as mobile broadband because the connection fast forward and it is going to be classified as a title to. so what does the broadband illustrates the point. we need intellectual consistency that is grounded in the fact end and the fact in this case stemmed from the question what do people use broadband for and by and large if you look at the statement on the order there will be some folks that use the

internet for music for less and the goal shouldn't be to artificially pick a number to declare the broadband market is uncompetitive and justify the regulation but it should be to try to tailor with some forward thinking what a broadband billions in the current iraq and that is the problem of the 25 megabits per second standard which i forecast would be jettisoned soon which is based on the press release as opposed to what was in the record. >> if you've been to my district and you've seen it do you foresee the benchmarks in the rural areas? >> coming from a bottle area myself to do something i take

personally. we heard from a great number of small providers in areas who told us that it would take us in the opposite direction of getting more competition. a lot of folks in their local areas if they have an option it's going to be from on of these providers and so we heard for instance in the broadband providers that's the title to regulation would undermine the business model and the network and hinder our ability. we even heard from 24 small broadband providers on february 172 said that it would at least ream the resources because we had no budget line items for counsel. and so by the way those include a very small isp putting one called main street broadband service for customers. the main street broadband exerts some kind of an anticompetitive monopoly like that -- netflix was exactly on point to take a

careful look at how these rules would affect small businesses because ultimately that is where the digital divide is going to open up for those that have a tough time getting the broadband option as it is. >> the chairman mentioned that task force starting the agency process and i'm just curious where did you find out about the task force? >> there was a very interactive process and they asked each office to weigh in. the last quarter of last year. >> commissioner.

>> they issued a report sometime last year that we would have to go back and check. >> if you are referring to this morning -- rights spoke about the testimony. >> i learned about it this morning. >> commissioner. >> i appreciate the kind words from the chairman. >> my time is expired and the chair now recognizes mr. doyle. >> thank you mr. chairman. i i want to take a moment and recognize along with my colleagues a historic step forward the commission has made in its open internet order and the order on the invisible broadband. taken together the actions represent incredible wins for consumers, entrepreneurs and millions of americans who called on the commission to take action. innovators shouldn't need to ask permission or pay for new

products and services and the actions will ensure that this remains true. i want to point out one more thing, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been talking about a title like it is the end of the world. up until 2002 the internet was treated as a title to service and it was a republican chairman and republican commission that acted to reclassify. i see this as then finally setting things straight. chairman last september you testified before the house small business committee and you were asked about next the trilogy proceedings and you stated it is on the table. my republican colleagues are making allegations you only started looking at it as a result of white house interference in november of 2014. were they considering using the authority before president obama joined millions of americans

calling on the fcc to take that course of action? >> yes sir in the small business committee that you cite there was one member who was saying to me don't you dare do title to invite would say we are sick seriously considering and another said we want you to do the title to. >> thank you mr. chairman. let me ask you another question. it makes great strides to protect consumers and innovators but in particular by including the protections for consumer privacy through section 222 in this order i want to get your commitment to commission will move quickly to complete the rulemaking on section 222 and ensure that they have commissions in place for the consumer privacy online and also your commitment to the commission will take seriously this new responsibility on connection. with all of the recent announcements by over-the-top

providers releasing new video services i think it is more important than ever that they do not restrict these new services access to consumers. it also mr. trabant waylaid got you here i would be remiss to think and take the origin of the two engine special access. also the data component is complete and i would encourage you to move forward as quickly as possible to complete the analysis of the data and to take action to address any harm taking place. fixing this situation is a great opportunity to improve competition and economic growth across this country. >> with me see if i can go through. one, two, three. absolutely. it starts next month on the workshop that if the parties together get the parties together and says let's talk specifically about how section 222 it exists next month and then we move after that. a second with regards to interconnection. i couldn't agree more with your

point about how over-the-top services are revolutionizing and are going to be the consumers xavier. it's a bipartisan belief that something has to be done about cable prices and that starts with alternatives and those are delivered over the top. and they are delivered via the internet and that is why it has to be opened so that there are competitive alternatives for people. my hair wasn't gray when i first started asking about that special access. >> we just got permission and we've become the data collection on special access. a special access is an incredibly important issue that is particularly essential to those that are bringing

communication. and my goal was that we are is that we are going to have this whole special access on the table "-end-double-quotes before the end of the year. one last thing they raised $45 billion meeting all of the funding targets including fully funding the next gen 9/11. considering the reality hasn't been fcc been liberated from these fully funded objections and its reconsiderations of its previous decision on the sides of the spectrum and incentive option? >> that is one of the issues that we are going to be addressing again as we put together the final rules for the option. i understand your point that we have now lived up to the committed obligations and this is an issue that we will be dealing with in the next couple of months. >> do you have comments on that

very briefly? the >> one of the things i joke about is that all predictions were wrong. two and a half or three times the amount of money predicted was raised and we've met our obligations and we will continue through the other options including the incentive options to deliver spectrums to the american people. >> i agree with the chairman we will be looking at this in the next few months and it's important we follow the statute and it is also important that we make sure that everybody has opportunities to bid and that's no single player walks away with all of the spectrum. >> i appreciate your indulgence and i would like to include in the record of spectrum coalition in regards to the incentive option. >> without objection. >> the gentle manuals back in the spiders and the chair now recognizes mr. shimkus for five minutes.

>> welcome. it's great to have you here. history does tell us a lot of things. being on the committee but chairman at the time to cluster ground zero because we had the verizon switching station right across the street and what i learned walking through that process is it was only a big company that could get wall street back online after that catastrophic attack and it's true i still have pictures of it. the basement was flooded. they had wires going up to the third floor, individuals can the timing of the copper lines. so as we talk about our great country and competition and large entities, sometimes they are very important in the security of the country.

and also thanks for the kind words. it's a progress to have to stay vigilant on. first we dealt with 911 and then we went to the location and then we went to voice over internet and now we are back in a location because i'm being told by some but there are too many right now and that maybe they should centralize those. >> one of the interesting things in your bill that you had is that you asked the states to voluntarily have the state level coordination of and by and large that has been observed in the breach. the situation i talked about in

georgia there is no state level coordination in georgia. and this is introducing mobile means that the people on the right side and the people on the left side needed to be talking to each other and have similar standards. let me give you one more. in terms of the technologies the other is text to 911 which we have required them to do and which of the 6500 in the country, 200 have implemented it and that means america is deaf and hard of hearing community which thanks to the unanimous action of the commission has but 911 capabilities provided. they can take us and no one hears it. >> of the other thing we then talked about is the testing that you did on the elevation.

i'm excited about the opportunity. >> i know that it is important in the areas. can you give me some comfort my concern with the role that is being presented as one organization and i have this concern about how to infantilize the buildout of the pipes when it looks like you are moving back to the regulation. and that is if you are regulating venue have to have a fee. that's where this comes from so how do you get the fee to help build out and maybe i'm a simplistic view, but then the other question is about the 1025. how do you encourage in this new

venue if the individual consumer decides what they want versus being forced which they will never do. >> it's interesting congressman. everybody cites their mother or their mother-in-law in that example. and the -- there is nothing in here that regulates or establishes terrorists for the consumer services. there is nothing in here that says that a company can have multiple levels of services, so your mother-in-law gets e-mail only ended up person will pay for that and the person next door -- >> just so i can have a contrary debate can i have the commissioner o'reilly address those before i run out of time which i'm about ready to do.

>> the order opens the door to the regulation and anyone can file a complaint either with the commission or any federal courts across the country and that commission will have to adjudicate whether it is just or reasonable into the surface you might as well do different services but nonetheless it is up to any given commission or courts to decide after the fact whether it is reasonable and that is the essence of the regulation. additionally you pointed out that effect this would have on the planet and we've heard from companies that are responsible for the capital expenditures in the country whether it comes to broadband and companies that represent a very small orchid areas and they've told us that the impact of this great regulation is going to mp them from delivering those services whether it is the high-bandwidth user or your mother-in-law. >> thank you very much. the chair now recognized for

five minutes the gentleman for five minutes. >> thanks to all of you for being here today. great discussion about various issues. i don't want to be too presumptuous about this but i think a lot of us appear have a lot of concerns about the role of broadband in particular. i know that is a big concern for all of you. i have 24 counties and although the committee chairman reminded me that his are a lot larger i mean sure meant walden and someone from north dakota i have 24 counties and have a lot of rural broadband and isps small as you mentioned. but a lot of folks that need broadband for education.

for the farmers so they can plan and do it efficiently the need for efficiently and for economic development there is no question and a lot of others as well. i have one question for you, commissioner. you mentioned that providers. you have two numbers i believe. >> we had at the municipal broadband providers on february 10 and received a letter from 24 small broadband providers that serve less than 1,000 customers. spankings for those numbers. how many small providers are there in the country? you've received some 24 gay with the number is total? i'm not sure the overall number but this is representative. >> as i'm sure you are aware the

authorization bill that we had before us on this committee to make the fund association process. i've been here nine years. my ninth year and things are pretty dysfunctional as we all know when it comes to the appropriations process. in this current environment where the congress seems incapable of the view of passing the bill through the regular order we saw this with the last-minute dhs tidying up the funding which is so important as you know to the appropriations process those risqué would've instability down the road and i know you may not be willing to weigh in on this but my question to you is to use it for attaching this funding to the appropriations process? >> let me see if i can answer that by talking about what we hear from the kind of carriers you were talking about the small carriers and they say we need

certainty. you are asking us to deploy capital and we need to know that the capital from you is going to come behind that and we need to know five seven years of certainty that this money is going to be there. and that's the way the universal service program has been run to provide that kind of certainty. clearly a serious concern is that if all of a sudden that certainty is infected because the appropriations move like this or don't move the ability of these carriers to make the investments that are necessary to provide service in high-cost areas will be significantly impaired. >> not to mention putting a cap on such a fund as well which is something as well. if this is just a huge concern

for so many of us who the broadband issue as i mentioned and i've had concern in the past about how the usf is administered as well. and i'd be happy to hear from many of you here i want to pick sure that it goes where it's supposed to go as well and those folks that can access that and provide that kind of broadband can have access to those funds because you are the ones that are paying into it in the first place and i heard complaints that sometimes the funding doesn't come back from them and they feel they are being disproportionately put upon if you will in terms of contributing to fund and then not getting back in a proportionate way what they've been putting into it. would you care to respond? to make if i can pick up on that, congressman. particularly for the smaller rate of return carriers we are going to be putting into effect this year a revision of the universal service program for

them. we are going to deal with the quadrennial analysis. we are going to come up with a model that says here is what you here's what you can base your business decisions on. and we do need if i can pause for a commercial for the second we do need to those carriers to help us come together because the reason i knew there were 800 is because we hear multiple voices talking about what they need and for the for these in a slightly different position and we have to come together with a common industry could come together and say here is a common approach that would be helpful. i also need to correct the record on some incident where he was talking about making it called for the state about small carriers.

they represent a small carriers and they've said that track records make it clear it can provide a useful framework and does not need to be an impediment to the investment and ongoing operations of broadband networks. and that small wireless carriers in a statement also said a similar thing that they will not object this. and so we have to be careful that we do not call out a handful of people and make great generalizations. >> the gentleman from new jersey for five minutes. >> thank you very much commissioner. would you like to respond to that? spinnaker number number one the folks that submitted the

comments were in terms of the last connectivity between the isp end of the customer they had no idea because they never published the proposal and this would go all the way to the far reaches of the internet connection. >> one of the municipal providers despite the is by the president himself in the week leading up to the vote please don't fall prey to the argument that won't have an effect. third it's important to remember with respect to the effect it has no one has said -- none of the services have been such good to this previously. it's from the small broadband

providers and we can all debate about what is disputable as the providers have thrived with regulation and that's part of the reason why just yesterday we heard from a major broadband provider we've benefited from a centrally government staying out of the internet and i'm worried we are on a path to starting to regulate a lot of things on the internet. that was the executive chairman eric schmidt. >> commissioner, in your dissenting statement you state i see no path for the prioritization of the development of the market. which appears to be big unknown objection to the trans- proposal they then note telecommunications act could be used. a lot of them are resisting the need for title ii and it authorizes them to prohibit on reasonable discrimination in the commission and the courts have

consistently interpreted that to allow them to charge different prices for different services. >> it has been textbook law since it was adopted into this goes back to the 1880s that differential services could be in different prices by the common carriers extending that to word the telecommunications agency cannot abandon the prayer position and i completely agree with the statement on may 20 of last year that there is nothing that abandons the pay prioritization. >> how long is this to be litigated in the courts and i ask that because the the businesses need certainty what the rules on the road will be long term. >> whether you support or oppose the aspect everyone can agree on is this will be litigated for a long time. stick this goes first to the

district court and the court in columbia. >> it depends where it is feingold and then if there are multiple appeals that will have to be chosen. >> is if your opinion this will reach the supreme court of the united states? >> it presents a question that could grant. >> and your view to the length of the litigation? >> i agree it is a debate that we will have in the system. >> commissioner, your views on that please? >> i believe we will see litigation coming yes. >> it is an honor to serve with your father in congress. >> i am 99.99% sure. [laughter] that there will be legal gay exodus is even more pure than ivory soap. [laughter] >> i will go better than my

colleague. >> i do think that we need certainty going forward and i am deeply concerned of doubt regarding that. commissioner in the speech you gave several years ago without further as there can be no classification and i believe you went on to compare it as peanut butter and jelly, salt and pepper batman and robin. would you have supported the request of the kitchen without the forbearance? >> without forbearance, one of the things we did right is recognized that current dynamics of today. this is not your fathers were father's or your mother's title title ii. we are from 27 provisions over 700 rules and regulations, so i am very comfortable in saying this is looking at the current construct and i see you looking at me and my seconds are up.

>> thank you mr. chairman and i will yield back my time. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from california for five minutes. >> thank you commissioners for your work on this. regarding the litigation issue are there any decisions you can make on the net neutrality that wouldn't involve the significant litigation? >> i think you just hit the nail on the head. >> most or all believe it's important to make the big three of the net neutrality. no paid prioritization and blocking but there's other stuff that may be controversial in their recent decisions. anything you might want to bring up that may be of interest? >> there's only four regulations, no blocking him in and no prioritization and transparency. you have to tell the consumers

what you're doing so they have a fair choice. the other thing that we do is to establish general conduct rules that says you will not harm consumers, you will not harm innovators or the functioning of the public service. now it's really interesting because people come in and say i don't know what that means. that is exactly the way the ftc operates into the carriers have been saying let's take things away and give it to the ftc because we like this better than somebody coming in and having a rulemaking so we are not having a rulemaking that says we know best this is the way you are supposed to operate. ..

>> >> our stat sheet that dates back to 1996 with proprietary information under section 222 that is the bulk of the privacy authority where it comes

from with respect to telecommunications services. >> are there enough engineers at the fcc to help you do your job? >> i think we have terrific the engineers but to revamp the agency we should make it a priority to have more it is clear the wireless technology is exploding the demand is multiplying exponentially and if we have more engineers and you'd be in a position to help facilitate getting to the market faster spin after they tend to stay out of the politics or like others human beings? >> that is of metaphysical question i am not sure what to answer that. [laughter] >> you mentioned there should be greater use of the

egg gigahertz band? >> absolutely. the benefit immensely from y five rigo online regularly 60% use it at home. double of the activity takes place in the van that is my 80 crowded also in the five gigahertz for why five many are based on its but only a portion is dedicated to the life i services. -- wi-fi services to see if we can for yep the spectrum as more people have more access to the wi-fi service. >> what is the limitations of the five gigahertz? >> the easy way to discredit the higher you go you get

more capacity but it does not travel as far. 58 gigahertz is good inside households and for those under not tethered to record having that functionality is important. >> the key very much the chair recognizes the man from texas for five minutes. >> welcome to all the commissioners will spackle notice that the commissioners would have to roll out a new rule they have some questions if you have been at the rollout. and other claims that they do not violate the fifth amendment by taking a broad band provider property.

that they do not break the fifth amendment because they enhance the value of the broad band network but these rules enhance the value as the fcc majority claims white to broadband providers large and small oppose the rules? >> part of the reason why is they have invested literally hundreds of billions of not chileans of dollars since the inception of the internet on reliance of the bipartisan consensus the internet remains unfettered from regulation. the same combination that congress agreed access from section 230 and in reliance on the determination lot of providers went to the capital markets and spent

many and build our i consider to be the best internet environment here in the world and we are the envy of the world to another reason why we have concern over regulatory takings there is a question and whether the expectations have been disturbed by the exertion of the title to regulations and that is what we will have to work out to take seriously. >> your thoughts? >> i suspect there will be an argument made in unchallenged of the assumptions made by the commission of the court. >> i have a question. hold on. commissioner talk about transparency behind the scenes your testimony says in the proceedings your edits were rejected by yet

when they came back the commissioner had the same edits. is that true or false? kid you elaborate what happened? >> i put my own proposal on the table two years ago. with the fcc teamed up last year so working with endure for a word here are suggestions to get your vote. i was told no. we don't want your vote. one at said to allow schools and libraries to use the server but that was rejected specifically as the deadline. also one of my colleague suggested then it was agreed to. with the incentive auction i made 12 different ideas and was told though on 11 maybe on the 12th one was extended lead comment deadline to put those on the

table i was told it was the red line that would delay the incentive options now it has done this twice these are just some of the proposals that have been rejected. >> is that a practice? >> not historically with a first year-and-a-half although i may have disagreed with some parts of the order but there was a spirit of collaboration and consensus to get by yen from all commissioners it makes a product stand the test of time and gives us legitimacy and more insulation from litigation risk. >> some are out there that have said that is so sensitive to the american life that it is outdated and must be changed. this is the change.

today for the elected officials to be our voice as opposed to five and elected commissioners a logo home today to talk about good and bad you will be okay. and we are in control as opposed to use. >> precisely why when they rendered their decision last year i said we should go to congress for guidance you have updated over the years you were the elected officials that should decide how the internet economy should proceed. with the laws that constrain our authority we should turn to the experts that is congress. the constitution and. >> benson in deals back recognizing the gentlelady from california. >> of a flight to yield my time. >> in that time to the gentlelady from new york.

>> i would like to yield a few seconds to the ranking member. >> to commission -- commissioner pai if you went to the litany of your ideas and you did not get your way will come to the minority. [laughter] >> let me ask a few questions of our distinguished commissioners. first chairman, i am concerned about the will bilingual broadcasting alerts and the urgency around this issue. in addition to the 911 upgrades what is done to assure the of the growing ethnic and language diversity of the nation?

>> i am glad to ask the question literally yesterday and was meeting with the republics safety and security body fat is the advisory group june talk with them about the importance of updating set eas of the recommendations they put out to make sure those updates are communicated to all parties. we do have a system that has not been updated since the cold war and we have to fix that to represent not only the technology the increased diversity. >> i hope you make that a priority with the challenges we're facing 21st century challenges of climate change, flooding, and terrorist attacks it is becoming more and more of a pressing need. the next question i have passed to do with section

257 report congress requires the fcc to report the market entry barriers every three years but it was due december 31st 2012 and it is still forthcoming. can you give us an idea how the sec will prioritize this to insure more diversity and inclusion in telecom industry? >> this has been an item of contention. my colleague commissioner clyburn when she was acting chair was moving this process forward. five think it is fair to say iran into difficulties inside the commission amongst the commissioners. she did a nonverbal job that i am attempting to pick up

poland and move forward on because these kinds of issues are important not only to the free - - the future building al telecommunications but economic opportunities for the country. >> very well. i appreciate that. two years ago i sent a letter to the then chairman asking of the activated -- be examined i also understand you are interested in the issue but what progress has been made to make sure my constituents have every tool at their disposal to receive life-saving information if there is a terrorist attack? >> the chips are a great idea and they bring some technological challenge and

we need the bigger antenna to get the signal and also they can drain battery power but increasingly there showing up and consumers have the ability to purchase them and some focus on them. the broader question is whether or not the commission should be forcing wireless carriers to activate these chips or if they should leave that to consumer choice. broadcasters around the country i know are running commercials saying right that congress person to make them do it. i think it is being resolved in the marketplace and that we ought to monitor that to watch what happens. >> darr appreciate that. have a few more questions.

and i think the commissioners for your hard work and diligence. >> your time has expired. the gentleman from illinois is recognized civic thank you for serving your country and spending all afternoon with us. commissioner pai when you were asked about your suggestions to the commission you were ignored and others made the same suggestion that was mind-boggling to be honest. the joke was made earlier welcome to the minority but i hope the commission does not become like congress because the intention was not to be overly partisan that is our job. that is what happens to look for compromise i hope the commission does not fall heavily with that but with the dissent on the open

internet order you talk about the procedures of the rulemaking specifically how much it changed and stated that standard of all interested parties should have anticipated the final rule not that they could have but could you explain what was originally explained compared to what was adopted? to make thank you about the kind words to reach consensus. the problem is substantial the ftc had a very different proposal from the one adults and that the adopted it was based on section 706 that never mentioned redefining the switch network gore the extent of forbearance or were they were born from or a host of other things. but once the sec brought up

this plan and voted one of the things in there is there is no record sufficient to support them there is no evidence in the record to support a finding for forbearance that is part of the reason the sec recast that forbearance analysis from the previous presidents in order to find forbearance and there will be potential legal problems with the. >> earlier you said the commission made it clear it will not regulate on broadband. day you agree that prohibition is consistent with your views? >> i said repeatedly we're not trying to regulate rates and again if congress wants

to do something that is their authority. >> you are not interested but what about the next commissioner? do you believe under title ii they have the authority? i respect that you don't want to me you have created something that will be passed down through generations of commissioners >> from my earlier response if this comes before us walleye and there i hope without prejudging the issue we can make it difficult for that to happen. >> you can understand our concern when you say you have no intention that is great buchanan distend the concern of congress if you implement a rule to sarah have no intention but will not for the next commissioner. >> we would pattern this

after section 332 of local voice after 22 years the exact same authority has rested at the commission and it has never been used spinning so the legislation has had no standing the sec may not regulate the rates charged from broadband internet service that is consistent? >> that is what we're trying to accomplish. >> we heard the decision to apply a title ii will have no impact on investment because voice as part of title ii we essene substantial investment do you agree? >> i do not. first it is critical to remember the recent reregulation did not occur because from its inception determined that competition was not sufficient there was not a need for regulation.

here by contrast it explicitly finds it is not competitive source opens the door to the rate regulation that was not contemplated for mobile voice. one of the reasons we have seen such a huge investment in 2007 was the inflection of the smart phone with the mobile data traffic generated as a result now carriers have to spend to keep up with infrastructure to deliver that data traffic has never been classified in the server that is what is driven by the investments not the title ii application >> i yield back still regularly turned to the gentlelady from california. >> thank you for being here. the question is one of the keys to innovation is spectrum a plan that

considers licensed and unlicensed spectrum and there you have a lot in this space but can you share briefly some of your ideas to generate revenue? and the way to incentivize federal agencies. >> the fuel for the wireless revolution is spectrum to have a moderate spectrum economy we will need a more consistent spectrum pipeline. as you know, if we need more air waves for commercial mobile use when not commodore the federal authorities and we beg and overtime there will give us some scraps and congress will direct the federal

authorities to clear out and relocate the new asked the sec to auction it is slow and clunky and did not reliable process and is not the pipeline that a modern economy needs that is why it is important to redevelop the system is structured incentive for federal spectrum authority so when we try to secure more airwaves for commercial use they see benefits and not just lost that could be anything from changes of the budget for benefits through the appropriations process or the ability to see what sequestration could have taken away but this pipeline would make the markets more effective. >> thank you for those comments. i have a question for you. i remain concerned about the

stingrays surveillance devices used by local law enforcement agencies. without which there seems to be no federal oversight. with that surveillance capabilities in you has access? but it is unclear to me how does not collect data on innocent americans and chairman with similar technology might we know the status of the task force and why haven't we seen anything come out of bed? and what you're doing for real concerns over the last oversight. >> the task force did

looking into the situation we found that our jurisdiction and authority is to certify a the electronic component of such devices for interference questions. and if the application was made in conjunction of law-enforcement then we would approve it. for technology. not who buys it, we would approve it and from the point:, the usage it was not technological question whether or not a piece of hardware interfered with other devices.

>> see you say it is out of your jurisdiction we have to go to other agencies? i am concerned about the device is over the internet for the general public so this follows up with law-enforcement federal the? >> on the broad issue it is a follow-up i think we have enforcement jurisdiction with the unauthorized use of a device if it was sold illegally. >> i want to bring up another issue. the millenials are opting to buy the tv channels in the content they want and we're seeing the market react with hbo and apple trading agreements and cbs with on line descriptions.

and no doubt it is a complex issue to pay for the bandwidth we should look for ways to power the consumer to pay for programming they want to watch. i think this is something the subcommittee should more in a bipartisan manner and i yield back the balance of my time. >> now we recognize the gentleman from florida. >> i appreciated also to the commission for their patience today and for their testimony. chairman, there was the enforcement action in the tampa bay area involving mr. humphrey it seems in his powerful leg as she could gm calls to 911 he was doing

this over two years when the local cell phone company reported interference for field agents that agents tracked him down as i was a significant threat to the folks in the tampa bay area is minder standing your plan to close the office in my area as for herb for chairman from the said commission said committee if you are closing offices how many do you plan to close? >> 16. >> 16. the jobs are they moved to the washington d.c. area? >> no. spinnaker you closing the field offices to support the new work under the net of neutrality order?

>> know we're doing it to increase productivity. it cost to three times with a centralized operation would cost. we have too many people doing too few things in a specific area we could get greater productivity if we follow the kind of model the faa has been doing with a strike force so we leave in place necessary equipment and would bring people in and out of the miami office to deal with the situations that you are talking about in that is a more cost-efficient way to accomplish the goals that you talk about. >> according to the budget request the agency will preserve the integrity of the public safety communications infrastructure by taking

action on 99% of complaints of interference communication within one day. the committing to ensure that this is mitt or has been that historically according to the performance report? will this metric be met. >> we can do this without a dimension of quality. >> can you provide the committee quarterly reports detailing the success to meet that metric including a list of actions taken through the remainder of your chairmanship? >> good idea. >> what you want me to tell the deputies and other first responders in the tampa bay area who may be endangered? it is an important issue by the delayed response inevitable to lose the

enforcement thereof field office. i know florida is a big state and others are having questions with the 16 nationwide. >> the reality that we face is we have a flat or diminishing budget with unfunded mandates imposed by the congress and we have to say how can we increase since -- efficiency? i know what other folks who are representing various that will lose offices to hear their complaints but i have a fixed amount of dollars to work with so the question is have you become efficient? that is what we're trying to do thank you.

>> commissioner howard we have any credibility to other countries like china or iran if we take large steps in that direction without overreaching? imitative is extreme trouble with the passage of the item with neutrality in a sense of wrong message internationally when i went both to spade recently and south korea they're interested in in gauging with issues of the broadband there would like to get as much involvement as they can obviously they have greater government control so it is of bifurcated message that we should not do it here or