commission this century for getting decisions out quickly. 73% of our decisions are released in one business day or less. the measure of that is the last republican-led commission. take a week before they get hit 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. ..

and move forward to address what i think are some of the legitimate issues that commissioner rally has raised. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it is a delight to have you back your thank you chairman, ranking member distinguished members of the community for thank you for the opportunity to share my perspectives with you this morning and my written

testimony for the record i discussed the commission's work. i will focus on spectrum options. in in march 2014 we unanimously adopted a licensing and service rule to option 65 megahertz of spectrum. this was not only important for wireless carriers seeking to be skyrocketing consumer demand but it was critical for the promotion of more competitive options. my colleagues and i agreed on a plan for smaller license blocks and geographic licensed areas. we also agreed on the need for interoperability between the aws one in aws three. the securities participation, promotes competition and ensures the

auction allocate spectrum to the highest and best use. most experts predicted intense bidding but no one forecasts and that forecasted that the total gross amount of winning bids would be a record-setting $44.89 billion. the success of this was due in large part to obtain taking effort to compare the aws three spectrum been they involve the broadcast and wireless industries federal agencies, and members of this committee. we should follow a similar collaborative approach. robust participation by small and large wireless carriers in the former option will encourage broadcast television stations to take part in there 1st option. a unanimously adopted notice of proposed rulemaking seeks to strike a proper balance. we also initiated a proceeding to reform our

competitive bidding. we propose comprehensive we propose comprehensive service while businesses can compete more effectively and sought comment on how to determine just. an example of how the markets do not always work in a regulatory backstop is sometimes necessary. well petition requested relief some egregious inmate calling rates remain pending as to the fcc for nearly a decade. calls made by death are hearing inmates have top $2.26 is permitted. add to that an endless array of his $3.95 to initiate a call for a fee to set up an account, another fee to

close the account. another fee to close the account. there is zero features to users to get a refund from their own money. these fees are imposing devastating societal impacts. 2.7 million parent to her children with at least one parent incarcerated the most likely to do poorly in school and suffer severe economic and personal hardships exacerbated by a reasonable rate regime. studies consistently show that meaningful contact beyond prison walls can make a real difference in maintaining community ties providing rehabilitation successful reintegration and reducing recidivism. ultimately the downstream costs of these inequalities are born personal. we have we have had caps on interstate inmate calling rates since february of last year. despite dire predictions of losing phone service and

insecurity we have witnessed nothing of the sort. what we have seen is increased call volume ranging from 70 percent to as high as 300 percent and letters expressing how this really has impacted lives. i would forward to working with the to finally bring this issue over the finish line. mr. chairman ranking member and i i appreciate the opportunity to appear before you and look forward to any questions you may have. >> i think you have order. were going were going to go down to commissioner rose morsel. delighted to have you back. >> good morning.

>> i don't think that microphone stayed on. >> unguarded now. >> there you go. >> good morning chairman ranking member distinguished members of the community. today communication technologies account for one 6th of the economy where they are changing at a breathtaking pace. how fast? well, consider this when letter to the telephone 75 years for at least 50 million users. to reach the same number of users it to television 13 years in the area for. more recently to release the same number of users it took angry birds 35 days. we know the future is coming out as faster than ever. we also know that the future involves the end our internet it, is the the. it was built on a foundation of openness to his will (and the policies matter a while i support network neutrality

as you have undoubtedly heard 4 million americans make known their thoughts and opinions. they opinions. they lit up a phone line cadre mailboxes in general one comment system. that might be messy whatever our disagreements i hope we can agree that democracy in action and something we can all support with an eye to the future of want to talk about sue other things, the need for more wi-fi have the need to bridge the home were's. few of us go anywhere the mobile devices in our palms pockets kemal purses because every day in countless ways our lives are dependent on wireless connectivity. while the demand for airwaves goes the ball of

conversations are about increasing the supply of licensed airwaves available for auction. this is good but we also need to get a give unlicensed services and wi-fi is proper to. wi-fi is how we get online in public and at home. wi-fi is also how our wireless carriers manage the network. today nearly and a half of all wireless data connections are at some.offloaded onto unlicensed spectrum. wi-fi is also how we foster innovation because the low barriers to entry make them perfect sandboxes for experimentation. wi-fi is up to the company. the economic impact is estimated at more than 140 billion. by any measure up. you need to make a licensed service a priority.

we are doing just that with the upcoming work on the 3.5 ghz band but it is going to take more than this to keep the men. that is why think the time is right to explore greater unlicensed use in the course of five years. it going forward are going to have to be on guard more wi-fi the 1st. second. second, i want to talk about another issue that matters the homework. today roughly seven in ten teachers assign homework the requires broadband access. fcc data suggests that as many as one and three in three households lack access to broadband at any speed. think about those numbers. where they where they overlap is what i call the homework.

if you're a student in our sole without broadband broadband just getting homework done is hard. applying for scholarship is challenging and while some students may have access to a smart phone, i submit to you in a phone is not how you want to research and type of paper apply for jobs, or further your education. this is a loss to our collective human capital and to all of us because it involves a shared economic future that we need to address. that's why is the coolest part of our new digital divide, but it is within our power to bridge. more wi-fi can help you as will as well our recent efforts to upgrade wi-fi connectivity and libraries. more work remains. the fcc is to take a hard look at modernizing programs to support connectivity in low income households and especially those with school his children. and the sooner and the

sooner they react viscerally bridge this gap and give more students a a fair shot at 21st century success. thank you. >> thank you. we appreciate your testimony we have to votes, we should have time to get through the other commissioners testimony. i we will come back immediately after. welcome. thank you for being here. >> chairman, ranking member, members of the subcommittee for thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify as. it has been an honor for making available more spectrum for mobile broadband to improving the nation's 911 system. last testified. have asked testified in front of the subcommittee more than a year ago. since that hearing things have changed dramatically.

i wish i could say that these changes on balance of that a bit for the better but fortunately that has not been the case. the foremost the foremost example is the fcc decision to apply title ii. the the internet is not broken. the fcc did not need to fix it. our party line vote overturned a 20 year bipartisan consensus in favor of a free and open internet. with the title to decision the fcc voted to give its of the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the networks. the decision wire consumers. the title ii order was not the result of a transparent roaming process. the fcc has already lost in court twice and its later -- there are glaring legal flaws. turning to the designated entity program the fcc must

take immediate action to end its abuse. what was once a well-intentioned program has become a playpen for corporate giants. the giants. the recent aws three auction is a shocking case in. dish with annual revenues of 14 billion in a market over 34 billion holds an 85% equity stake into companies now claiming $3.3 billion in taxpayer subsidies. that that makes a mockery of the small business program. it is real money. it could be used on the right of the 580,000 pell grants for school lunches for over 6 million schoolchildren for incentivize the hiring of 138,000 veterans for decades the abuse had an enormous impact on small and disadvantaged businesses from nebraska to vermont

denying them licenses they would have used to provide consumers a competitive wireless alternative. the fcc should adopt a further notice of proposed rulemaking so that "these loopholes before next auction. turning next to process. the fcc is at its best when asked a bipartisan collaborative manner. during my during my service 89 percent of votes on fcc meeting items we. since november 2013 only 50 percent of votes have been this. this level of discord is unprecedented. indeed, there have been 40 percent more partyline votes in the last 17 months that there were under the entire chairmanships of martin cox, jenna caskey, and clyburn combined. i am concerned that the

commission's long-standing procedures and norms of being abused. for example it has been customary for bureaus planning to issue significant orders to provide those items to commissioners 48 hours prior to the scheduled release. back then if the commissioner asked for the order to be brought up that request we will be hard. recently the leadership has refused to let the commission vote on items were to commissioners have made such a request. given this trend as well as others i commend the subcommittee focusing on the issue of fcc process reform. finally i would like to conclude by discussing an issue where it should be easy to reach consensus. when you dial 911 you should be able to reach emergency personnel wherever you are. unfortunately many

properties that use multi line telephone systems require callers to press line or some other access code. this problem is not a a tragedy. unfortunately the phone systems of many federal buildings are configured to allow direct 911 dialing. recognizing this problem congress directed the gen. service administration to issue a report on the my mom what capabilities and telephone systems and all federal buildings by november 182012. i recently wrote to inquire about the status of the report and was disturbed to philanthropist report that she is a never completed. the headquarters is one such federal building were direct 911 dialing does not work. as as the ranking member recently observed: it comes to emergency: the fcc would be the example only for the rest of the federal government put the entire country. i commend her an

accomplishment for their leading position. chairman ranking member of the leaders subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify. >> thank you, commissioner. we now turn to commissioner o'reilly. we're delighted to hear. >> thank you. i have always held the energy and commerce committee in the highest regard. i applaud the subcommittee for focusing on this issue and i recommit myself to being available for. my time i have heard the many intellectual and policy challenges presented by the innovative endeavor challenging communication sector.

it is my goal to maintain friendships we disagree is to get opportunities to work together. i voted with the chairman on approximately 90 percent of all items. unfortunately this percentage drop significantly to 62 percent. while the policies i have not been able to support is the insertion of the commission. commission. they pursued and ends justify the means approach the subject broadband providers without a shred a shred of evidence that is necessary. even worse, the old repository the staff to review current and future internet practices under vague standards such as just and reasonable unreasonable interference or disadvantage and reasonable network management a a recipe for uncertainty for our nation's broadband providers. nonetheless i continue to suggest creative ideas to

reflect the current marketplace. i have written extensively on the need to reform numerous outdated and an appropriate commission procedures made publicly available on the commissions website. this is not tied to a net neutrality although provides a great example. their concerns are misguided scarce and highly prized information presented in the cloak of procedural law, grounded in the resistance to change and concern.

i appreciate the ideas a number of commission practices. i believe these supposed changes as well as others the commission and consumer access to information. turn the attention to a host of other practices testimony provided by outside witnesses and the commission of meetings delegating authority to staff to make critical decisions that have been outspoken on many issues for both licensed and

unlicensed. i stand ready to answer any questions. >> thank you. we will recess now so that members can go to the house floor and vote. return as promptly as possible. >> we do appreciate that.

throughout the debate on the internet proceedings was amused that they were comparisons to what former chairman martin did or didn't do with respect to media ownership. he put a public notice testify before congress but did not do a further notice of proposed rulemaking which seems to be precisely why the third circuit to his escape the therapist ownership rule out. federal appellate judges don't think much of our pets they think the agency should go through the procedural steps to make sure all interested parties get a real opportunity to understand significant shift in direction and have a reasonable amount of time the comment. i have a couple questions. how many of the commissions tentative conclusions found

or reversed? >> virtually all of. >> how many of the commissions -- what number paragraph says that the commission plan to assert its authority. >> and what number paragraph put the public on notice. >> there is no such paragraph has a rapidly changing over to our limited resources. you hear me about a little applications waiting 30 30 this to satisfy the requirements. we get a lot of input as the

commission acted on the a.m. modernization? >> another issue that came up a buying purchasing content. stand ready to go. >> the commission is not yet issued his quadrennial review? >> eight years.

>> correct. >> and has the commission finished its work on out connect america will. >> my understanding is it is not yet. we also have an issue come to our attention involving the western amateur radio friendship association interference case. quite disturbed. i've been told about the audio recordings. really awful pulse of racial if that's.

it has come to our attention that this is been sitting they're for a while. these operators are jamming and using really awful awful language can you give us an update? >> 's and i i guess there are a couple of these involving private radio operators which leads into a discussion about the closing of the regional offices. we had the cfo here. we were not really brought up to speed to this motion. you will close his regional offices. isn't that where this enforcement generally takes place?

>> yes. the field office of the enforcement bureau for one of the core functions to protect the public interest while obviously are still studying the issue i i had a chance to meet with union representatives. recently expressed concern we protect the public interest. >> we clearly don't have -- admittedly only two offices. >> there are multiple things going on. we need to make sure that we're spending money efficiently. you have more trucks that you have agents which is the reality that exists today -- >> you got to ask. >> you have to ask yourself

the question why you distributing resources as they are to be distributed? when you have one manager for every four people is this the right a structure? >> the back of this. think we have a request pending. >> it's my understanding is correct, you asked correct, you asked for the consultant's report, the final consultant. you will have i have seen a draft of the structures. >> thank you. i appreciate the indulgence of the committee recognize the way to california. >> i ask you for the same. welcome to the entire commission. it is obvious that we have

different takes on the issues. i sincerely thank you for your public service service & commissioner o'reilly this is a graduate of this committee. you are here under the chairman i have the pleasure of working with them doing a lot of things done together. welcome back. thank you for your advocacy on the 911 issues. the mommy and daddy are here at the committee. the health -- well we did but no one was paying attention to our country was

attacked. commissioner rose morsel, thank you for your clarity and your passion. commissioner go get them. to the distinguished chairman i don't know how many people realize this about the chairman is a bit of history. and so i want to pick up paying of history. playing of history. it is for us. around here life is incremental. it's incremental anyway. but i think what i think what i would like to view toward the lens what is before us today in terms of history the majority has

defined tries to define that neutrality with some very scary things. that is dollars in taxes that will be levied, no investment will be made. in terms of history we have been through the stone age the bronze age, the iron age, the age of the invention, the invention the industrial revolution the technology age and now the information age. i think why this is difficult for some to actually see you see something you either get it message. we are at a moment in our nation's history where we

are moving to a knew age. i would say that those that are on the other side of this issue are back in an older age where you have huge corporations gatekeepers, doo-wop is. that is not what the internet is all about. so what i would like you to as a historian address with this woman is an person on the stage of history. >> thank you. you get give me started on history. >> we don't have very much time. i got a minute 40 seconds. >> i think we're i think we're living through the 4th grade network revolution in history. if you look at those what

you we will find is that every single time it was the end of western civilization as we know it people did not want to embrace the change. i i have hanging in my office ' 1839 that was put out by people against the interconnection of railroads and it was all patterned around women and children are going to be hurt by this it was paid for by all the people whose businesses would be affected because the interconnect. at that interconnection joe the 19th and 20th century. we always here is an imaginary horrible's the awful things are going to result. they also always end up seeing as a society we need.

we need to have a known set of rules, a referee on the field who can carry the flag that is the process that you have gone through since time immemorial every time there's a knew network revolution. we have the edge of living through that trying to deal with those realities. >> i i wish i could question. i have questions for all of you. i we will submit them to you. with you. with that mr. chairman like to ask unanimous consent the questions be submitted for the record. demonstrate is great interest in the issues at hand civil rights organizations who have

addressed a letter to the chairman myself in support of net neutrality. >> without objection. >> thank you. >> the lady yields back. the next back. the next questioner we will be the generally tennessee. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i we will just add i viewpoint call when you look at economic revolution, the arab culture, industrial, technology, information, successful revolutions are about freeing up, not restricting. we are looking at right now is the vantage.that you are coming from is taking away and restricting. mr. o'reilly commissioner o'reilly that they county. new line. calling for the need for the analysis and really looking

at what has been said by ppi, free press professor of what they thought what happened with taxes. the new york times agreed. i i want to here 30 seconds with about why we shouldn't have a should have had a cost-benefit analysis of what you think the outlook is. >> i believe we should do better. this is a perfect case. >> none was that was done. >> this is a woeful job. hypothetical arms and real-world impact on business. in terms of your question on tax palace which is more to taxes. the chairman has made clear that the item and of itself before us does not impose universal service fees. this is something.

something. we will see those fees in the months ahead. >> commissioner, you give an interview this week attacks on broadband and the commission is waiting for a joint board to decide if so how large the taxes going to be. >> thank you for the question. question. the order suggests a joint board will make a recommendation and says that a short deadline might be appropriate. at some time the joint board will recommend whether and how it increased these fees. is not just the usf these state and local these property taxes the district of columbia imposes an 11 percent tax. >> chairman regulation. i read something. he said title ii is

fundamentally regime. we are looking at another think what you said about a person which might include a large company can file a complaint under section 208 208 if they don't think the judge is it just read you have denied that the fcc is going to get into rate regulation through this that neutrality. i understand that the word does not explicitly state that the fcc will be regulating rates from the date the rules are affected. the 1st time that a complaint a complaint is filed with the fcc under section 208 is the party fills the rates are not just and reasonable. isn't it isn't it true that the fcc will be engaged and effective rate regulation? >> thank you.

i hope somebody files that kind of complaint. there has not been a complaint filed for 22 years despite the fact that the same kind of authority exists. if someone files that kind of complaint i want to purchase a decision, a decision, but i assure you that there will be a process that will look at that and that we will developed by would hope, a record that would make it very clear that the fcc is not in the consumer rate regulation business. >> mr. chairman, don't you think what you just said about there has not been a complaint filed for 22 years proves the.that the internet is not broken does not need oversight and guidance? >> i was referring to wireless voice not broadband. >> let me cut you off.

i want to go to the lifeline you have advocated restructuring in rebuilding. you have had several supply-side reforms and eliminated incentives for waste, fraud command waste, fraud command abuse. the fcc inspector general has performed a review of the verification process and recommended that the fcc improve the effectiveness of the warnings that it gives subscribers and reduce the level of fraud. we have had hearings on this i want to work with you on it. is it true that under the current system the penalty for a subscriber defrauding the program is to lose the subsidy for those funds kemal but all but one. and then they carrier is

prosecuted. i'll tell you why your answer is important. you are talking about getting into broadband. and we have to perform all of this before you talk about expanding it. >> i agree. one of the reasons why i said i recognize two things you need to eliminate all incentives and existing waste, fraud, and abuses. we need to do that. the key way to do that is to get those providers out of the certification business. they will no longer green light customers. >> we need to prosecute the user. >> and we have with guidance from my colleagues and while i was acting chair. >> i yield back. >> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from new jersey for funds.

>> i just want the commissioners to know, my district was ravaged by hurricane sandy 2012. one of the most concerning impacts of the storm was a loss of communication services. 40 percent of our cell towers were knocked out. a lot of people basically learned the hard way that communication services go down along with electricity. i wanted to as commissioner rose morsel i no you toward new jersey after sandy. but listen did you learn about how to prevent these kind of communication failures? >> thank you for the question. i did to her the new jersey shore public safety officials following hurricane sandy. i won't want forget when i saw. a lot of broken homes and businesses and piles of

sand, many blocks are the ocean is because wind and water delivery of their. a lot of people are committed to rebuilding and i learned a lot about how communication succeeded in the field. what stuck with me was that many of the wireless carriers in the affected areas without. throughout without. throughout the ten states that were impacted by the storm's about a quarter a quarter of the wireless cell towers service. in new jersey was about 40% 40 percent lower than it was significantly higher on the jersey shore. in the in the aftermath were able to start a rulemaking to ask how we can fix this going forward because we know that 40 percent of all households are wireless only command in the middle of the storm at the very least they should be able to connect to get the help they need. the issued a rulemaking

command among the issues discussed was how much back up our was necessary and how much reporting duty are wireless carrier should have i hope we can turn around and deliver decision on that pretty sure people try to use communications. >> i understand the fcc can you commit to updating those rooms this year? >> the issue that the commissioner raised is a paramount issue. there are broader broader issues the whole issue of retirement and how we make sure that when the power goes down and you are relying on fiber which does not carry its own

power that you have the ability to make a 911 call. we have a rulemaking that literally just close last week all of these issues interrelate. first and foremost in our responsibility to his wife wife focused on the 911 location issue, 1st and foremost this public safety. >> i wanted to ask you about the designated entity. small businesses important. just don't think small businesses business can survive in capital-intensive industries by telecommunications without some spot public policy. i am concerned that the current rules still contain bush era loopholes that allow large corporations to game the system. i i introduced the small business access to spectrum act to update the gives all businesses a fair shot. i we will start -- there is

not much time left. would you commit to working to maintain a robust designated to the program? >> you wrote _ this that. i replied yes we will in yes we are. we have federal making going on. we will issue shortly a public notice making sure that it is broadened out in the record is built on the question of recent aws three option and some of the very legitimate concerns that have been raised about that. the thing that is frustrating to me. you cities were bush era rules that have not been reviewed and it is time to review the. what is really upsetting is the way in which slick lawyers come in and take advantage of rules that this

committee, i was in the room is wrong with this committee created designated entities. and as you say the world changes dramatically and how i designated entity can be structured and play and what is a big market whereas before it was a much smaller market. our rules have not kept up the lawyer should have figured it out. want to make sure whether it is in this were slick lawyers playing around with broadcast licenses that there is no way we keep our rules current and 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 early next year. >> thank you. >> the gentleman's time has gentleman's time has expired. the chernow recognizes himself for five minutes. thank thank you to the commissioners for being

here. in january reported to upgrade the speeds. they had previously been set at four megabits per 2nd. i understand the need to update but i'm curious as to the process the commission chose. it seems that an arbitrary number was picked especially considering that recently the commission voted to spend 4.8 billion to megabits is no longer consider broadband. can you walk us through how the agency came to these benchmarks? and if you can follow up on how is still plans to spend over 10 billion.

>> thank you for the question. the problem is that the agency has viewed each of these issues in a vacuum. in december we will are talking about broadband deployment we agreed to spend billions of dollars to establish we will be considered to be broadband at the time. flash flash forward and we learned is not broadband under which standard there is no such thing as mobile broadband. even the fastest connection can't get you 25 megabits per 2nd. it is pretty seen as to what is broadband illustrates the basic. we intellectual consistency. meet intellectual consistency. the facts in this case basically stem from the question what the people use broadband for. by and large is trying to work with patterns of usage.

the goal should not be to artificially pick a number so that it can declare the marketplaces uncompetitive. it it should be to try to tailor with forward thinking what broadband means in the current era. that's why the problem is no be one month is simply based on the press release grasping progress headlines. >> let me follow up. is the threshold but if you look at my district it could ensure the competitive advantage. you receive these benchmarks is.

>> that's a great question. coming from a rural area is something i take personally. the fcc heard fcc heard from a great number of small providers who told us the title to ironically would take us in the opposite direction of getting more competition. a lot of folks who is going to be from one of these smaller providers. title ii regulation will on new line i business model for razor cost and hinder our ability to upload broadband. 24 small broadband providers who said that title ii badly strained limited resources is we have no budget line item. those include very small isps. the notion that mainstream rock band a zero-sum kind of anticompetitive monopoly is absurd.

exactly on.with the sec last year take a careful look at how these rules will affect small businesses. ultimately businesses. ultimately that is where the digital divide we will open up. >> thank you. sign the agency process not just curious the commissioner, commissioner where did you find out that the task force? >> the actual task force," or of last year they asked each other is the way in. sometimes a challenge. as: last year.

>> commissioner's. >> i believe they issued a report sometime last year. >> commissioner. >> we spoke about in his earlier testimony. >> the number and about this morning when he announced it >> i appreciate the kind words. i just don't do this morning >> my time has expired. >> thank you mr. chairman. i want to take a moment and recognize the historic step forward the commission has made. you know taken together these actions represent incredible wins for consumers, entrepreneurs and millions of americans.

innovators should not need to ask permission or pay gatekeepers to the.new products and services. the services. the fcc actions will insurers from it's true. i want to.out one more thing my colleagues have been talking about title ii like if it's the end of the world. up until 2000 to the internet was treated as a title ii service. it was a republican fcc chairman and the republican commission that acted to reclassify the internet as an information service. chairman lasts up to you testified before the house small business committee. you were asked about that neutrality proceedings and stated title ii was on the table. my republican colleagues are making the allegation the only started looking at title ii as a result of white house interference.

was the fcc considering using a title ii authority for president obama's joined millions of americans? >> yes, sir. in the small business committee you cite there was one member was saying to me don't you dare do title ii. i was saying, we are seriously considering it. one member was saying can't wait to do it. i i was saying, yes, we are considering it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the open engine and order make great strides to protect consumers and innovators but in particular through section 222 i want to get your commitment that the commission will move quickly to complete the rulemaking on section 222 and ensure that the commission has rules in place to protect consumer privacy online.

i would also like your commitment that the commission will take seriously is the responsibility and interconnection. with all with all of the recent announcements by over-the-top providers i think is more important than ever that gatekeepers do not restrict these new services access to consumers and also while i've got you here i would be remiss if i didn't take the opportunity to mission special -- mentioned special access. the data the data collection component is complete and i encourage you to move forward to complete an analysis of the day to take action to address any harms taking place. fixing the situation is a a great opportunity to improve competition and economic growth across the country. >> let me see if i can go through. on privacy absolutely. it starts next month. let's talk specifically about how section 222 exists. 222 exists. next month and then we move

after that. secondly: regard to interconnection, i could not agree more with your.about how over-the-top services are revolutionizing and are going to be the consumers save your. i said before this committee and other committees. it is a bipartisan believe that something has to be done about cable prices. that starts that starts with alternatives. those alternatives are delivered over the top. those alternatives are delivered via the internet. and that is why the internet has to be open so that there are competitive alternatives for people. >> special access. >> my hair was not great when i 1st started asking the commission about this

actually we are in the process. we have just gotten permission and begin the data collection and special access. special access is an incredibly important issue that is particularly essential to those who are bringing competition to communication. my goal is that we will have this whole special access issue on the table and dealt with before the end of the year. >> thank you. one last thing. $45 in revenue meeting all the funding targets including fully funding 1st met and nexgen 911. considering this new reality is as of the the fcc been liberated from these fully funded objections and its reconsideration of its previous decision? >> that is one of the issues that we will be addressing again as we put together the finals. i understand your.that we have now lived up to our committed obligations and

this is an issue will be dealing with. >> commissioner, do you have comments? >> one of the things that i joke about operations will. two and a half to three times the amount of money predicted was raised. you were right to say that we met our obligations and will continue through other options. >> we will be looking at the summit next few months. it is important we follow the statute and it is important to make sure that everyone has opportunities to bid and that no committee of single player walks away with all the spectrum. >> i appreciate your indulgence and would just like to include this letter from the public spectrum coalition.

>> without objection. >> thank you. >> the gentleman yields back. the gentleman's time has expired. the chernow recognizes the chernow recognizes the gentleman from illinois for five minutes. >> thank you welcome. it is great to have you here. i want to be careful. history does tell us a lot of things. chairman often took us to ground zero because we have the fluorescence with two station because the street. why is it was really only a a big company i think it wall street back online after that catastrophic attack. and it was true. the basement was flooded wires coming up to the 3rd floor, individuals hand tying the copper lines. as we talk about our great country in competition and

large entities sometimes they are very important in the security of the country. and i want to also -- thank you for the kind words on 911. it is a team effort. it is a process that you have to stay vigilant on. first we don't 911 over so. it really location within voice over internet. now we're back in location because of being told by some that there is really too many and that they there may be should centralize those. any costs? >> one of the interesting things was you asked states to voluntarily have the state level coordination. by elijah that has been observed.

the situation a document georgia the business state level coordination is. introducing mobile means that the people on the right side of the people on the left side they to be able to be talking to each other and have similar standards. you take down some of the issues in terms of technology. the other is text; one which we require carriers to do and which of the 6500 the country 200 have implemented it. that means that america is definitely hearing community which states to the unanimous action of this commission has text to 911 capabilities provided by carriers they can text the way. >> the other thing of the

testing that you did on the elevation. >> yes. my congressional district. it's important. give me some comfort. my concern is one litigation to have this concern about how you incentivize the ball out of the pipes and it it looks like you're moving back to reregulation. if you are reregulation that you have to have the. how you get a fee to help build out. and then the other question to 25.

how you encourage in this giving you the individual consumer decides back my mother-in-law's everyone says their mother or mother-in-law. there is nothing in here that regulates or establishes tariffs for consumer services. there is nothing in here that says the company can have multiple services. you mother-in-law gets e-mail only. >> and will pay. >> i we will pay. >> just. >> just so i can have a contrary debate can i have commissioner priority mr. o'reilly address those.

>> a couple different issues. the order order opens the door to ex post regulation. that will have to adjudicate the fact the fact that while on the surface; for differential presence. is ultimately up to any given commissioner court to decide after the fact. that is the essence of reregulation. he he pointed out the effect is without unemployment. for companies for companies that are responsible for the largest capital expenditures the impact of this kind of rate regulation another title ii regulations is going to impede them from delivering some of those

advanced services to anybody >> i we will just yield back. thank you very much. >> thank you. the gentleman yields back. >> thank you, mr. chair. thanks to all of you for being here. they discussions of various issues. i think a lot of us here have concern. i no that is a big concern for all of you the chairman reminded me that is district is larger than mine. but the a lot different than my district. a lot of rural broadband carriers a lot of folks in the world broadband for educational opportunities so

for farmers they can plan and do it efficiently. for economic development municipal and small providers. providers. repeat those numbers. >> forty-three municipal broadband providers in 24 small broadband providers each of which serves less than 10,000 providers. twenty-four. >> i all alone. >> the overall number is very representative. >> about 800. >> thank you very much.

chairman and this committee that has been offered by the majority like the universal service fund. been here for nine years. pretty dysfunctional as well is in this current environment where congress releasing the two a-uppercase-letter. the last the dhs. so important for larry's a lot of instabilities. you may not be willing to weigh in this do you support attaching this. >> let me see if i can answer that i thought about what talking about what we're the kind of curious

your time. they say we need certainty. the refuse to deploy. we need to know that the capitol from you is going to come by. we we need to note that this body will be there. that is the that is the way the universal service program run, to provide that kind of certainty. clearly a serious concern is that if all of a sudden that certainty is impacted because the appropriations like this are doing crs order the ability of these world carriers to making this was the necessary something is

was. i want to make sure that the us fund actually goes towards. those folks who can access that and provide that kind of broadband can have access sometimes the funding doesn't come back. it back. i feel as though they are being disproportionately. in a proportionate way with them putting into for the return carriers putting into

effect this year a revision of the universal service program. we're going to deal with the hated quadrennial regressive analysis you are going to come up with the model this is here is what you can base your business decisions on. and we do need a software a self-interested commercial. reducing those carriers to help us come together. the reason i knew there was a 800 is because we hear multiple voices talking about what they need. everyone sits in a slightly different position. we have to come together with a common. if the industry could come together and say here is a a common approach that would be helpful. the need to correct the record on something is about

statement about small carriers. the national -- the ntc a that represents the small carriers has said so the track records of our legs makes clear title ii can provide a useful framework and does not need to be an impediment to investment in ongoing operation of broadband networks. small, rural networks. small, rural wireless carriers in a statement also said a similar thing that they will not object to this. we have to be careful that we don't all out handful of people and make great generalizations. >> the chair now recognizes for five minutes the gentleman from new jersey. >> thank you very much. would you like to respond. >> thank you for the opportunity.

it is significant to remember that the folks who submitted the comments on the last mile connectivity. they had no idea this would go all the way to the far reaches of the internet. mr. chairman, please. secondly, among the broadband providers for folks who by definition represent the public interest in communities. one was visible the present. they themselves so please don't fall prey to what they call the title ii argument. thirdly it is important to that with respect to the effective affected title ii will have on investment opportunity no one has said -- none of these services have been suggested title ii previously.

he can make the argument that connectivity was. it was. it's critical to remember that regulation does have an effect. the debate about the numbers. what is indisputable is that these matters have thrived which is part of the reason why just yesterday we had a major problem provider we have benefited from essentially government staying out of the internet. now i'll path to regulate enough a lot of things. google's executive chairman. >> thank you. commissioner in your dissenting statement the state i see no legal path for the fcc to prohibit paid prioritization of the development of the two-sided market which appears to be the objection to the chairman's puzzle. frankly acknowledges section 706 could not be used. well the nt i am resist outright connecticut title

ii. title ii only authorizes the fcc to prohibit unjust or unreasonable. they are consistently interpreted that provision to allow carriers to charge different prices for different services. >> is the title ii was adopted going back to the 1880s the services could be assessed in different prices extending to the telecommunications agent. you cannot been paid prioritization. is nothing that bans communication. litigated in the courts. i asked that because businesses need certainty as to what the rules of the road will be long-term. >> the supporter's the

unfortunate aspect everyone can agree on. >> to the district court. it will depend on whether abuse can be. be. it will have to be chosen by lottery. >> is in your opinion this recent supreme court? >> i think it will. >> commissioner o'reilly. >> three plus you debate. >> your views. >> 99.99 percent sure that there will be -- >> that ivory soap's.

>> i go better than my colleague. the big guys problems. >> i do think we need certainty going forward. he said without forbearance there can be no reclassification. i believe he went on to the -- compared to be a better enjoy. would would you have supported reclassification under title ii without forbearance? >> without forbearance, one of the things that i think we did write was recognize the current dynamics of the day. this is this is not your father's or your mother's title ii. we 427 provisions over 700 rules and regulations. i am comfortable in saying

this is looking at a current construct. >> thank you. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. the gentleman yields back. >> i think the commissioners for your hard work. regarding the litigation issue, is there a decision decision you can make whatsoever on net neutrality that would not involve significant litigation. >> you aegis of the nail on the head. >> i believe most or all stakeholders believe that it is important to make the big three of net neutrality following compay prioritization blocking. there's other stuff that may be controversial in your recent decisions. anything you want to bring up that might be of interest? >> there only for.

you have to tell the consumers were you doing. the other thing is to establish you will not harm consumers innovators the functioning of the internet. people come in and say i don't know what that means. that is exactly the way the ftc operates in the way that the carriers have been saying let's take things away. we like this case-by-case analysis better. we are not having a ball making us as we no best of this is the way your supposed to operate. we are saying that there needs to be a judgment capability this is is there are?

and then is to be the ability of farm is found to do something about it. but never to prejudge and always to be in a situation where you are weighing all the interests. >> is the fcc have the power to regulate broadband providers, consumer privacy practices that are unregulated the phone services. >> no. >> of value. >> privacy is an issue all americans and purpose statute which dates back to 1996 involving customer buying network information. that is where that is where the bulk of our privacy

authority comes from with respect to telecommunication services. >> are there enough engineers at the fcc to help you do your job? >> i think we have terrific engineers. in revamping the agency you think we should make it a priority to have more. wireless technologies are exploding. the demand demand for equipment authorization process is also multiplying exponentially. if we had more engineers are believe we would be in a a position to help facilitate more innovation. >> to engineers tend to stay out of the politics of the commission? >> that is a kind of metaphysical question. >> all right. you mentioned that there

should be greater use of the portion of the five-day event's. could you explain. >> absolutely. the benefit immensely from wi-fi. above 50% of the season to go online regularly and 60 percent of us the bulk of wi-fi actually takes place in the 2.4 gigahertz band. we also have spectrum in the five gigahertz band that we use for wi-fi. many of us home wi-fi systems are based on it. only a portion is dedicated to unlicensed wi-fi services we we have other uses and i think we start studying them and find out if we can free up more spectrum for more people to have more access to unlicensed wi-fi service. >> well, the physical limitations? >> the easy way to describe it is the higher you go the

more capacity but it doesn't travel as far. five gigahertz inside buildings inside households. they're they're not tethered to a court for having that functionality is important. >> thank you very much. the gentle lady yields back. >> i think the chair. folks folks back home builders that commissioner plan rally will out of the knew rules. we we have some questions they want answered. they no there are claims about these rules that they do not violate the fifth amendment.

the rules do not affect break the fifth amendment because they actually enhance the value of broadband networks by protecting the nation. in these rules enhanced the value of these networks as the fcc majority claims why do broadband providers large and small opposing the rules? >> congressman, thank you for the question. part of the reason why established broadband providers oppose these rules committee have invested literally hundreds of billions of trillions of dollars since the inception of the internet in reliance on the bipartisan consensus is that the internet would remain unfettered. that same combination agreed that access to the internet

would be an information service. in reliance on that determination one of these providers went to the capitol markets and took a lot of risk to build out what i considered to be the best and environmental. our internet is the envy of the world. under the leading case of pension benefits there is a a question about whether reliance expectations have been disturbed by the exertion of these title ii regulations something the court will have to work out and take seriously. >> if the taking. >> i would suspect that there will be an argument made and challenged on the first amendment and assumptions made by the commission are likely to be put to testing court. >> commissioner: a 2nd. transparency, how the committee works behind the scenes. your edits rejected.

and yet they came back. is that true? >> thank you for the question. my question. my own proposal on the table two years ago. when the peoples of us teed up last year i don't need to go with my proposal. working within your framework parent number of suggestions that would get your vote. i was told no. one of the one of the suggestions did not go to the core of the item doesn't seem ideologically troublesome that was rejected explicitly. when my colleagues my colleagues on the other side suggested it was agreed to. twelve different ask, was told no to 11 and maybe on the 12th. extending the comment deadline.

very complex people's report on the table. i was told no. lo and behold the bureau has extended those deadlines twice. some of the ideological proposals i may never been rejected