on. i have to be candid and say that the kind of leadership that you and mr. guthrie are showing in keeping the spotlight and keeping the pressure on is essential to paying attention. >> well, we intend to keep the spotlight on, so thank you. congress has the fcc balancing many prior priorities for licensed mobile broadband including opportunities. if done right the fcc can assure that incentive options beach front spectrum needed to fill while protecting over-the-air broadcast. i know a lot of concerns have been raised and the fcc is scheduled to make key decisions at your meeting. what is the fcc doing to make

sure stakeholders can feel confident in the incentive auction? >> you know the challenge of the incentive auction is like a very complex cross word puzzle except there's no picture in the box. what we have been trying to do is to make sure that all of the party that is are interested, that they can walk away with -- a sol -- solution. it may not be what they have come in and asked for. but you need to make sure, for instance that you have answer answer for wireless mics, all of these have to balance out and i believe that the item that we're

bringing forward contains that kind of balance. wouldic like -- would i like to tweak it here and there, i would like to. the spectrum team has done an excellent job in -- in all of this. >> completed in a way that preserves the goal that congress intended? >> yes ma'am. ok. i'm a long time advocate for modernization, broad abandoned is a necessity. parents helping kids with homework and i applaud the fcc to bring lifeline into the the 21st century. chairman, what are the next steps for lifeline reform?

>> i hope that we will have a rule making to follow up as soon as comments are closed and we can swift through them and move forward. i think that -- let me address an issue that commissioner pai was dealing with a moment ago. broadband is the information passway of the 21est century to. deny access to that is deny access to the 21st century. we need to have policies that everyone in america has access to that essential pathway. >> i agree with you and i yield back. >> time expired and yields back. >> again, thank you for being here. commissioner pai, my question is

with you. consumers are offered an array of video choices. as a result it seems that more online entertainment like netflix and other providers have transformed the marketplace. with that said, commissioner, what is your assessment of the video marketplace and can you remember a time when consumers had so much choice in that market? >> thank yous for the question. i can't think of a question when consumers have ever had it better. i can tell you that now when i can power on my laptop wherever i want it's a benefit. that's part of the reasons why i came out a couple of weeks, i don't think that the fcc needs to regulate over-the-top video.

this is not a marketplace that's filled. it's -- >> should the government be picking out winners and losers, slow that innovation and limit that choice? >> absolutely not. the worst thing to do is to regulate or pick out particular business models. that will distort the marketplace and you never know what consumers would prefer. >> thank you. if i may you're kind of familiar within your days in

ohio. they have large communities of hospitals. issues regarding devices. it's been decided that channel 37 will be used in part of incentive, however rules protect wireless medical nts systems allow for the safe use of the wide spaces, devices that have not been agreed upon. let me ask you do you agree that because devices can cause interference in hospital is important that all parties to work to reach consensus agreement on the issue before the commission considers this in august meeting?

i agree that there's a technological challenge that we have to make sure that we deal with and i believe that we have an approach to that. it's to say that if 380 meters from such a site is a -- is a no-go zone. tripling of where we were before in response to what the whs folks have said. busies-busies >> that is the coordination database that must be used for unlicensed purposes. if there is a problem in ohio in a particular area, that information gets fed into the database and then that becomes a no-fly zone.

what we've put in place is hard rock at a flexibility that is going to deliver the kind of security that i think both you and we are looking for. >> do you think they have enough time to get that information to the commission before the august meeting? here we are 27 to the of july, or 28th. we're right at that point. >> they just submitted additional information from the field tests and it was based on that we altered what our proposal is. this is not an issue that hasn't being dealt with. this is something that has been going on for multiple years. tests were really helpful in that regard. that's why we try to harmonize

and do something, in fact, there's an -- this is the whole reality of sharing that we want to create a structure that says you can deal and this committee told us in statute to do that, and that was a wise decision on your part and we're following flu on -- through on that. >> i want to submit to the record a statement from the american association. >> without objection. >> thank you. >> gentleman from vermont. just kidding. [laughs] >> mr. doyle. >> that would have really gone bad. [laughs] >> if the goal was to get his attention, i'm sure you've

succeeded. >> commissioner pai listening to your opening statement where you were lamenting how you have all these wonderful ideas no response. i just want you to know we on the democratic side are feeling your pain. it's called being a minority. >> just for a second, we've been informed by the folks that do the streaming f you could pull the microphone closer, they're not able to hear you quite as well. >> we feel your pain, i just want you to know. i have questions for you. i know like you're a strong advocate and been advocate in moving stalled issues forward. first, i'm concerned of the window for moving forward on

special access reform is nar -- narrowing. additionally i heard that the fcc still hasn't made the data available to the stakeholders. with the comments looming when will the stakeholders be able to access the data in order to make comments for the proceeding? >> thank you mr. doyle. i don't know the specific date. we will announce a specific date. i can't free form it here. obviously there have been multiple challenges with special access that start with collection of data and we were finally able to begin collecting that data in so far as we will make sure that that data is on the record and on the record in a timely manner. and i share your interest in

wanting to make sure we have opportunity to address question. but it needs to be facts based. >> are we talking -- is it going to be in my lifetime? >> sir, i hope it is while i am chairman and that that is a shorter period than your lifetime. >> let me ask you another thing. like a lot of people on this committee and ranking member, i also have concerns ant -- about the trigger. we have all been working hard to enhance competition for wireless broadband and consumers benefit from lower prices. what is the commission doing to address the concerns that many of us have about the reserve trigger particularly in regard to the trigger coming into play so late in the auction?

>> well, the issue -- i want to be sure which trigger you're talking about, are you trigger the -- the -- go ahead. >> no. >> so the reserve. the question then becomes, are you going to cut back on the amount of bidding bidding that goes on for reform specstrum and we have taken the position that you should not. that first of all the reserve has been created. that in itself is huge that people disagree with. the question becomes, do you want the auction to function through the whole process or do

you want for a quicker trigger while the other peck -- spectrum auction keeps going. what that is doing is reducing participation in the auction. it probably reduces prices people will pay because that means that here in the reserve you stop while bidding keeps going on up here in the unreserved, and i think an auction is something that proceeds to a conclusion, not an auction that gets terminated to favor one party or another. and so the establishment of the reserve is a huge point. i think now what we should not be doing is picking winners and losers inside that reserve. >> thank you mr. chairman. i yield back.

>> recognize gentleman from illinois. >> welcome. you both agree that to facilitate it's going to take -- >> commissioner pai. >> yes, sir. can you restate those quickly. i caught a couple of them. >> with respect to my rule on broadband plan it would be a twofold plan. we would target service rules to allow carriers to get universal service support for the costs that they incurred. that extends to service. secondly creating a path where carriers could get option and could get a similar connect

america fund. ofobviously the so model isn't perfect. if they find it to be preferrable they should be given a window to do that. >> thank you chairman wheeler these are all kind of rural questions. it's really appealing to a third of the state of illinois. i know to some of my family-owned companies and i think we talked about this in the last couple of hearings. carriers called the least cost routers, they seem to be a problem. can you tell me -- you know these companies they get blamed. the calls get dropped and calls

all sorts of problems. >> thank you congressmen. it's a failure on the part of the major carriers to please their sub contractors if you will. there used to be a game that got played where they would give a false ring. pretend the call was being completed when it really wasn't. secondly is that we've been enforcing this within the last weeks, we fine verizon and require them to do improvement to stop this because in 26 rural areas they weren't paying attention to this which is the heart of the problem. they need to be paying attention

to. and thirdly is that we have a data survey out there right now to try and identify exactly what the extent and other causes might be so that we can take additional action if awarded. but, yes sir we understand that the call completion is a serious issue and we want to be all over it. >> that's good because we are going to the august break and i know they'll have -- [laughs] >> they're going to come during the break and they're going to ask, and so i'm glad i got to ask the question. last question, commissioner pai when it comes to ability to upgrade technology, do all providers face a level plain field when it comes to making upgrades and provide customers with newest technology? >> i don't think they do.

on the other hand, another seg ment rules that maintain networks of yesterday and obviously every dollar that has to spend by definition a dollar they can't spend that would love them to compete with others. we would want to have more broadband competition. every single provider has a incentive. >> great. thank you for your work. i'm glad we talked prior. i look forward getting together with ranking member to -- there's always work to be done in this field. >> are you yielding? >> yeah. >> we are going to work together on that. how does the commission come up with the amount of what a fine

is going to be? >> the -- >> these are considerable sums. do you have a set of rules around that? >> for some kinds of issues there is a schedule. for others is a again totality of the circumstances where you make a judgment call. >> and you are the one that make the call? >> yes ma'am. time has expired. go to the gentleman of vermont. >> i thank you for joining us today. chairman wheeler the universal service, i know you've been implementing reserves, i'm asking you to tell me what the

-- what's the status of that. >> thank you congress. because commissioner pai and i share the belief that he's been talking about here in so far as the narrow band and broadband and that needs to be fixed. i go a little further than commissioner pai does. i have developed what i now started calling the walden rule. >> please. >> i read the other day that you said mr. chairman quote that u.s. should spend more money than they have. you need to review what rur -- our rules are. >> the fact that we are spending

money just because we always have doesn't make a lot of sense. the fact that we have no guidelines for operating expenses -- we just had a machine in hawaii go to jail for tax fraud. he is a provider of recipient of universal service and ended up that he was charging his family's education expenses, universal service and people were having to pay for it. we ought to have some standards for what is -- i was just asked the other day to approve a waiver for universal service trial to a company that could

not produce audited statements. that's wrong. this is not my mind. this is the people's mind. we need to get it out. commissioners and i are working together on a bipartisan package of reforms for how we're going to deal with making sure that rate of return carriers have what mr. pai i think has called a two-track solution. that is we have a model that deals with the broadband realities and the standards for the old -- >> and we're moving down that path. >> commissioner pai, thank you. thank you mr. chairman. >> you said when it comes to broadband, rural services should be there and high quality. that's exactly why i i proposed this plan.

we give them the exact same opportunity they would have whether they're in montpellier or new york city. i think it would be better to embrace, which is to have a targeted solution to stand-alone broadband problem. there are abuses that need to be corrected and i stand and able to work with them and other commissioners to change that. we can't let it be the enemy of the good. >> lifeline, my view is that it it is a really important program. there's fraud and abuse. one of the important things that happens around here when there's fraud and abuse sometimes we attack the carrier systems of the program rather reform it. anything we can do to limit fraud and aluís -- abuse

obviously we want to do that. >> it's for both of you. >> we are going to have a rule-making lifeline depending on the comments that we receive and it begins with overhaul. i mean, there's two problems with lifeline, one it was designed wrong and two it was overseen wrong. it was -- other than that everything is fine. but it was designed wrong. for instance, and i must say this was put in place by previous administration which we've inherited. it is ridiculous it's ridiculous that you not require those people who are receiving the funds to keep records. and on the administration side

it is ridiculous that you not have a database for duplicates thanked you not put structures in place to be able -- so what we've done since we came in 25% reduction on lifeline. 25 million people are no longer on it and a $100 million in penalties, but -- so we've done what we can to for a minute the oversight. what this rule making is going to do is to continue that and fix the underlying problems. >> my time is up. >> i want to address the eligibility. >> the chairman's vision to having a responsibly program my problem is we need to adopt

basic reforms. broadband adoption, which is the critical issue we want people who are offline to get online. 40 million households are eligible for the program. lets make sure we have fiscal responsibility in place and lets make sure we target the help to people that need it. that's an important conversation to have. >> where are you on that in. >> the database we have in place and operational and it's working quite well. in so far as eligibility of the base is our ability to get access to data held by state agencies and we're in the process of working our way through that. >> that's something we need to get that done obviously.

mr. lance for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. commissioner pai, i want to speak with you about the fcc's recent order regarding t cpa. you stated that the attempt to modernize is likely to leave the american consumer, not the mention to american enterprise, can you elaborate to the committee how you believe the commission may not have gotten this correct and what it should have done to protect the american consumer? >> thank you for the question. i began from the premise that unwanted are a plague. i don't want to get those calls nobody wants to get them. my problem is that it takes us in the opposite direction.

now phone industry can call you. dramatically it expand it had range of devices that are now considered a lot of businesses if they have the number in stock and have the prior owner's number it will get more litigation. last year alone there was something like 1918. my concern is loopholes, at the same time we are not cracking down on the really bad actors which is the unwanted robo

callers. we didn't take more aggressive measures despite the fact that we got 96,000 complaints last year with violation of the industry. and that's unacceptable to me. i am not sure why. businesses that have consume ears consent. everyone from restaurants, los ángeles lakers face class-action lawsuits. >> thank you chairman. >> thank you mr. lance. several things. first of all we want to make sure -- let me just go down

mr. pai's list.there should be those kinds of exceptions. they're not -- .. dad is a decision that is out of

our hands but to your key point of the safe harbor and the carrier solution specifically we addressed that because the carriers were saying to us, we are free to offer walking services that because you might charge of this blocking costs doing just that which would be a violation of our rule so we amended the rules to say no that is not a violation and we have now had a workshop coming up where we are brained the carriers in and affected harder to sit down and say okay exactly have you do it? how you handle a call is different than how you handle it tpm colon how you put those in place? this is something where we have said to the carriers our rules now specifically allow you to block calls where you were a request by consumers, please do. c thank you.

commissioner pai. c if the carrier is willing to trust an agency that is felt to be more than willing to find a company up to $109 for the violation of rules that don't exist i would urge them not to rely on the safe harbor and it doesn't provide much guidance at all. >> you are not encouraging folks not to knock bob calls? are we together on the fact that yes we want them to be blocking calls? >> on that we agree which is why proposed a

to make sure we have programs in place and incentives in place to expand their broadband availability. so many folks around the country. it's a health issue in me talk about the spectrum for example an issue for hospitals making sure i heard someone this morning me can sure they have the broadband available to make

sure they can do what they need to do for their patience. we know it's important for education. they offer ap classes but it doesn't do good in those rural areas of those folks can't access with the university of iowa offers. it's important for farmers to have access to broadband so they can make decisions for planning and the businesses in general and on and on. i was in centreville iowa for one of my 24 town hall meetings on broadband small-town and there were 27 people at that meeting on a weekday afternoon at 2:00 in the afternoon because it is just absolutely critical for them to be able to have this broadband coverage. really my question goes back to i think what was mentioned earlier this year 115 members myself included wrote to you mr. wheeler, chairman wheeler on the portion of the high-cost

program that supports small broadband providers so they can receive support lines although its customers opted to purchase only broadband better than traditional voice service. the rural broadband industry submitted data only broadband plans to the fcc in 2013 but the fcc is not active on this plan. are there issues with their reform plans proposed by the rural rabin industry that prevent the fcc from acting on it is proposed and if you could elaborate on that i would appreciate it. >> thank you congressman. there was something like 114 different carriers in iowa and he represents the poster child of the rural challenge for rate of return carriers. it is outrageous that if you live in rural america you are 30 times more likely not to be able to get broadband is if you live in an urban area.

so there are two components. one is dealing with things through the price cap and be recently, we have recently released what will be a $10 billion over six years to seven carriers to build their facilities and i love seeing the headlines the pop up across the country that we get in our report that so-and-so carrier announces they are going to spend $27 billion to bring broadband to the area as a result of our funds. then we go to the rate of return carriers. the

mr. guthrie for five minutes. c thank you mr. chairman and thank you for being here. my first question to emission or pai is three parts. this all flows together but why do you oppose putting broadcasters and the cap and why cap and why it's important to minimize the number of broadcast stations placed in a 600 megahertz band after the incentive option. do you believe expressible -- preferable to the broadband rather than the downlink lacks you have suggested the commission hold a bank hearing to discuss issues related to the 600 megahertz plan. why do you think such a hearing will be helpful? >> congressman thanks for the question. if i miss one please let me know. one of the things that disparate

industries the wireless industry broadcasters and license advocates agree on is placing broadcasters in the duplex gap would be a terrible idea. wireless companies don't like it because it would impair downlink spectrum which is critical in terms of meeting consumer demand and broadcasters have told us it's not optical because the duplex cap is for wireless microphones -- and license advocates told us as well.

if they have to be put in maheras band to be placed in the uplink. they can minimize the amount of interference the problems they would cause because someone

could put a filter on.

what is not in your testimony is how the commission will address continuing challenges and diversity in the media and telecom industry. we are in the 21st century. we look at our nation and its diversity and i think there is a widespread knowledge meant that what we see in terms of industry is really not reflective of who we are as a country, so i would like to ask chairman wheeler

where's the commission's focus on the completion of the diversity studies and how can this data be used to create a more new ones in tailored policy and reform that advanced equity and inclusion and second to that is what metrics and accountability structures are in place to ensure global populations in their communities will be adequately served through these proposals? >> thank you very much ms. clarke. the media report

as a point that mr. latta was racing previously the importance of how the television business is changing and the opportunity that is reflected by over-the-top providers and there has been the difference up here on whether we ought to do what this committee did for direct broadcast satellite for over-the-top and that is to say that you can't hold content back. you can't have various leverage

points because i think over-the-top programming creates incredible new opportunities for minorities. lastly we have been talking a lot about entity rules and the wireless auction and i feel strongly that what this congress asked us to do was to be creating opportunities for minorities women and rural individuals to participate in wireless and that's what we did in the te rules and the suggestions that have been made by my colleagues on the republican side actually would have limited the ability for a real live da rather than hypothetical to participate.

c on the subject and commissioner pai i will have you respond as well. it appeared that we have probably cracked the code of only one part of supporting small businesses being active to enable them to compete in the wireless industry. how can the commission facilitate more secondary market transactions with de's and small businesses especially those owned by minorities with the private sector? >> are you addressing that to tim? so i think we need to make sure that given that jay is a rule is very helpful in that regard and has performed as expected. we have made it clear that when broadcast licensees in for

transfers and they are complying with the rule which says that they can now have control of multiple licenses in the market that we will look favorably upon them selling those assets to minority entrepreneurs and in fact that has been successful. >> thank you chairman. commissioner have run out of

you haven't lost me, i'm still with you. folks back home want to know why, what's the problem with the fcc the forces change. i will give chairman wheeler one minute and mr. pai one minute to respond. >> as you know the ftc act writ large says it does not have jurisdiction over telecommunications carriers, common carriers and so when we said isps were telecommunications carriers a

trigger that which your constituents should know however that we work closely with the ftc. there are jurisdiction and so far as hedge providers and whatever we do which will be forthcoming in the next few months on our privacy proposals, we will do our best to harmonize so that there is a common set of concepts that govern privacy. >> k. great commissioner pai a response. >> unfortunately the fcc's reach ossification as common carrier headed to pull hit on consumers. it deprived the fcc of jurisdiction because of the common carrier exemption. jurisdiction the ftc has explicitly been given congressional operation for. secondly because the fcc -- that issue our authority and the statute is relatively circumscribed. section 222 is narrow arcane

piece of the privacy puzzle if you will so we don't actually have any rules in place and the guidance we have given out has been completely unhelpful. for example in may of this year the enforcement bureau put out guidance for privacy that said enforcement bureau intends broadband provider should employ effective privacy protections in line with the core tenets of basic drivers he protections. what does that mean? i have no idea and consumers have no idea. so i would rather let the experts at the ftc to protect the consumers all these many years handle these issues based on the laws. >> you believe it's important they ftc -- as opposed to the fcc. >> expertise in legal authority. >> the chairman talk about another issue about privacy and hedge providers. chairman wheeler the consumer interest group filed a petition asking you to start groomay can to oppose consumer privacy

protections on hedge providers. when are we going to see a response? do you believe as providers we should have a different detection than isps? >> thank you very much congressman. first of all the commission has for decades been enforcing privacy under the cpn i rules on telekinetic asians carriers so it's not as though we just fell into this. there is a long history of privacy protections regarding telecommunications characters -- carriers. and so parse expending our jurisdiction to the edge providers i have said repeatedly that is not our intention. i don't know when the specific response to that specific petition will be coming out. i will be happy to get you a date. i don't know what the planning processes. >> commissioner pai. >> this is part of the problem. if you believe is the majority

did at the time that the internet is a virtuous cycle and 11 internet providers and edge edge providers interacting it would seem to follow logically if they edge providers acting in the consumer way why shouldn't the fcc have the jurisdiction to extend those same rules to edge providers and more brief look at the internet standard it's not clear to me why the fcc should limit its focus on internet service providers. you could easily see a dominant edge provider engaging in other conduct so that's part of the uncertainty that unfortunately fcc opened up and i hope we don't follow that. >> thank you both and i yield back the balance of my time or it's. >> a chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois mr. rush for five minutes. >> i want to thank you chairman i want to thank you and the ranking member for today's hearing. commissioner pai welcome both of you to today's hearing.

it's so nice to see you once again. mr. chairman i want to bring up one of the most egregious matters under consideration under the ftc and i'm referring to the prison phonecall rates. understand the fcc is poised to make a ruling on in-state phone rates for prison phonecalls. that said mr. chairman, we must stop this immoral practice of under baschet exploitation to the very ones least able to afford this loan rate robbery. additionally mr. chairman once and for all we must do away with

commissioned case bank simply must cap in-state phone rates. as you know mr. chairman prison calls the prison called industry is a multibillion dollar business and if there is any doubt i want to call your attention to a recent "washington post" article entitled quote prisoners pay millions to call loved ones every year. now, this company wants even more. this article references how a company the largest company in the prison phonecall industry

secures rates to its investors about a 4.46 million dollar profit. mr. chairman as you know i have been citing this issue for over a decade. it is now time for the fcc to take action and rain and these predatory practices by capping the rates per minute and eliminating all ancillary fees but more importantly mr. chairman the fcc must also be a step ahead of these predatory companies. right now trying to circumvent the laws by offering video phonecalls at the same predatory rates that they offered for phonecalls, telephone calls.

mr. chairman my question is when will the fcc's rule on this telephonic terrorism? >> thank you very much mr. rush. i agree with you this is a very serious issue and you and i and people across america away huge debt of gratitude to commissioner clyburn who took this issue sitting at the desk of the fcc for 10 years since martha wright filed the first petition and brought it forward. so there was a decision about interstate. but you know what happens is whack-a-mole starts getting played here. we can do it here so we will move it over here next month we have interested that we are doing next month. the point that you make about videophones is another

legitimate point. the reality is what we are talking about is a monopoly that is granted to persons to determine how people communicate and like any monopoly it into being exploitive. the people who are hurt by that exploitation are the very people who rely on it and i can assure you that omission or clyburn keeps their feet to the fire on this and i am fully supportive of her efforts. >> that's good news mr. chairman and i have a poetic about this decision. let me move on. my time is up to its. >> your time has expired. >> we are going to do a second

round of questions so if you are here for that there will be more time. we will now go to the gentleman from florida mr. bilirakis for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and thanks to both of you for showing up today and thank you for your testimony. chairman wheeler in march we discussed public safety responses in a resolved quarterly report to which he thought was a good idea. i know you provide some information. have you posted what you provided the committee on the web site so the public can see what's going on and what you are doing? >> would we? >> have you posted on line? >> i can't answer that specifically. >> can you get that into assistant as possible and if you have and can you that on line as soon as possible? >> that is a good point sir.

>> commissioner pai there has been a lot of attention and concern regarding designated entity office pools. you believe are they now correctly balanced and if not what should be done to to to fix that? >> unfortunately i've don't think they are and that the agency has moved in the opposite direction. my principle for small business program is that it should benefit small businesses but the agency having loosened the restrictions imposed on the bipartisan basis several years ago has now opened the door for large corporations to squeeze out a lot of the small businesses minorities women and others who need access to capital to her by facilities-based service. small carriers tried to compete but they weren't able to because deep-pocketed fortune five hundred companies use shell bidding. i propose commonsense reforms.

they are making in the operate figures. you don't need a taxpayer funding discount. if you are genuine small business with businesses with less than $50 million of revenue you don't need or than $50 million in taxpayer-funded bidding credits to get spectrum and option. you are genuine business you should be able to provide facilities-based service them at the auction is over. unfortunately it fell one vote short and those proposals would have restored public faith and small business programs. >> thank you. chairman wheeler and they open internet order you committed to take steps to prevent increases in attachment rates that might result from reclassifying broadband. what steps have you taken to prevent such increases in what additional attempts are expected to? >> naked congressman. as a proceeding underway to do that if we started in the last six weeks, eight weeks somewhere

like that and it's designed to make sure there is parity between telecommunications service and cable service attachment piece. >> again can you continue to update us on this? >> mr. chairman i yield back. >> now we will go to mr. johnson is next. for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. chairman wheeler in a recent response to questions for the record as to whether you think stakeholders who cannot afford to have regulatory lawyers or lobbyists in washington d.c. should also have the same access that other stakeholders have, you made a point that the commission does not have funding or routine field hearings and similar activities yet your

emissary has been routinely traveling to various events. in fact it seems that both you and she had been wheels up quite frequently in your travels. select a pose the question this way. given that you apparently have a robust travel budget isn't the real issue how you are like to spend the money? >> thank you congressman. i think the people who i keep turning down saying i'm not going to talk would probably disagree and my travel is significantly less than other members of the commission but your point is a well taken point and that is decisions get made. there is a travel budget that each commissioner has and that is for his or her discretion.

>> you have answered my question. it really is up to your discretion on how you spend the money so could you let us know for the record how much the fcc has spent on travel and fy2013, 14 and 15 so far? >> sure. >> okay, great. i would like to see that. commissioner pai i was listening closely to your discussion with my colleague mr. bilirakis regarding the designated entity program and i'm really struggling at that with commissioner or chairman wheeler's decision to element me to the attributable material relationship rule and the facilities requirements and the competitive bidding rules for a couple of reasons and you point those out. you made a compelling case that this sets the stage iv

arbitrage. are we going to prevent that from happening? what actions does the commission need to take to make sure that these rural small carriers are able to get the credits that the designated entity program is designed to give them so they can serve those underserved underserved areas? >> tanks for the question congressman. to be honest we first need to return to the status quo for the most recent decision and adopt commonsense reforms to make sure that large corporations don't game the system again and to be sure the order did save some of these measurements prohibiting a corporations run using multiple bidders in the same auction. i'm talking about genuine reforms of the de program to make sure the people that need the help of the people want to

serve folks in iowa or kansas are able to do that and limiting the amount of bidding people can get in making sure large companies can't own a majority of the de so that people don't end up flipping all the spectrum to the entrenched incumbents, those are the kinds of reforms that don't have a partisan affiliation to them and i was the majority agreed with me. >> i can tell you it's a real concern for me and i'm sure other colleagues to represent rural areas of the country. i have got a high school student who don't have access to broadband internet service and as a result they have to go to either public library nearby or some other location maybe to where they can get a wireless signal or something like that to do their homework, to do research, to do that kind of thing and this is 2015 for crying out loud.

>> if i could just add a quota one of the reasons they requirements so important is because in a lot of cases the larger providers don't see the cases building onto those cooler area where is the smaller rural provider have a strong incentive incentive -- incentive so when those furmack writers are squeezed out because there are no more of facilities-based requirements they can come in and take the spectrum and flip it. >> thank you mr. chairman. i yield back. >> now we go to the shoeman or missouri mr. long for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman thank you for being here today. mr. chairman or chairman wheeler on july 244 days ago your agency announced that granted with approval of the transfer of the authorization from directv to at&t we hear much about your agency's 180 d. -- 180 day shot

clock. your agency's conditional grant of approval took over twice that amount of time as you are well aware of 400 days. i've got some questions that i would like to have answers to. number one what does the point of the shot clock? >> the shot clock is aspirational but it's something we try to manage. the difficulty in this situation was that we were hung up by a court proceeding and a court decision that itself took as long as the shot clock and so that specifically dealt with the kind of information that we could have on the public record and we had to get through that before we could get to the decision. >> on the 100 70th day of the 180 day shot clock you stopped it for three months. >> that was because of the court decision.

the reality here is and there is right now pending before commissioner pai and that's not a setup question. i don't know the answer to it on the protective order. so we have put out an order to outline how you protect confidential information so that we can be in compliance with the court so that this will not happen again and the absence of that was what held up this proceeding. >> omission or pai same question do you have the same position on by the shot clock was stopped on a 170th day? >> the agency inflicted the wound on itself. the court didn't simply out of cool cloth decide to participative proceeding. in the context of the transaction and another

transaction agency tried to get all kinds of confidential permission from programmers without any kind of due process of the programmers sued and i urged him to reach a settlement because this information wasn't necessary and the circuit of appeals agreed to be calling the decision an unexplained and substantial departure from previous policy. even though they were mandated and told the fcc hears the rural you need despite having said the information was critical of the agency didn't rely on it in making the decision. the shot clock needs to be more than aspirational. it needs to be a rural just as there are 24 seconds in the mba there should be 180 days for the fcc. we need to give the public and parties certainty as to how the fcc is going to do it. >> let me move on. i have a question for chairman wheeler. three days prettier grant approval of the transfer

authorizations from directv to at&t the department of justice announced after an extensive investigation that concluded the combination of at&t's land-based video business with directv satellite based video business does not pose a significant risk to competition that although the justice department close its investigation without opposing opposing -- imposing conditions on the transaction your agency announced it was imposing a number of conditions to address potential harms presented by the combination of at&t and direct tv despite the justice department's view that the combination of the video business is to not pose a risk to competition. what significant risks did your agency identified that the justice department that they justice department missed? >> we worked with the justice department and i don't think there was a sliver of light between us.

>> how can you say that? >> we have a different test. they have an antitrust test of a face and where the public interest test that we are supposed to measure by the so we have actually two different standards that we measure to and what was happening here was in and 25% of the area of at&t's service area tv was a competitor to at&t for video service and so at eliminating that competition the question became does that create an incentive than to eliminate broadband competition as well? what we required was that at&t expand its broadband coverage which increased competition for

broadband by a significant amount and created an opportunity for those video providers not to have to go through an increasing choke point. >> we have got a red light. my five-minute shot clock has expired so i will be back around. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york mr. collins. >> mr. wheeler the big issue that i've been involved in as pirate radio as you may know back in early june pretty much every new york member of congress as well as new jersey sent you a letter and while the issue may not be a terrible issue in some parts of the country is truly is in new york city as evidenced by not often do you have 27 members of new

york to agree of downstate. we are extraordinarily disappointed that the fcc has clearly said it is not a priority. we have gotten a letter from you just yesterday and i understand budget concerns and i guess what i am the point i want to emphasize is this is an issue even though it's not to you and you were the chairman we really don't appreciate you saying as you put in here the time and expense of pursuing these cases present particular difficulties in the current plan and budget environment with commission staffing at its lowest .30 years. accordingly they must prioritize and work based on resources and the harm to public. matters posing an imminent threat to public safety are directly harming large numbers

of consumers must take precedence over other matters such as pirate radio. i understand what you are saying but what is the size of your budget? >> congressman those particular words which i wrote were not designed to say that this is a low priority but designed to say that the first issue is public safety. pirate radio has to exist inside that and i believe that we have been very aggressive. during my chairmanship we have had 200 pirate radio enforcement. in last year we have had 100 alone. >> how many in new york? >> i don't know the exact number but i would say 80% of those and so what we have done and commissioner o. riley when he was meeting with any dark broadcasters really focused on

that and he helped us focus on that so we formed an interagency working group task force to work with the n.a.b. and the new york right casters on this issue. >> so you had that meeting and a fourth on that came out was basically you need more folks in your local enforcement office. additional fcc enforcement options. >> that was one of the things. >> another hearing we talked about how you've been reducing the local field offices and pulling those folks back to headquarters and some of us would presume to be ready to enforce title ii which we can disagree on as well but it seems a little disingenuous and that the concern is words are words actions are actions and the actions have not convinced me and other members that is a

priority. your letter while it said maybe someday nothing else to do we will see what we might want to find as pirate radio. it's a low priority. >> if that's how you interpret it i apologize because that is not what was meant to the new york office the boston office in the miami office which is where pirate radio tends to exist those three areas this is a whack-a-mole and they keep using whack-a-mole today. one of the things i encouraged in that letter is congress can be helpful because we can shut somebody down and he or she moves to this spot and we are constantly chasing. if congress could also enact they could make it illegal to aid and abet the carrying out of this and i think it's also what

the n.a.b. group has recommended if we can get at those who are aiding and abetting because there is a cobalt that pulls this off. you miss my apartment over here and you move this space over here and then what do you think about this? bares it all pahlavi of the packager. 200 enforcement, task force working on it. we could use some additional authority so he could have some teeth. >> i'm about out of time. maybe this is a rhetorical question but i will ask it. there has been suggested that the fcc has directed field offices to step down and back away from enforcement. any truth in that? >> i have heard that suggestion. i have heard that suggestion and i have not seen that command. it did not come for me. >> could you provide me the language that you might suggest because i can appreciate you

bring me the language that we might put in or other legislation that would assist you on the pirate radio? it's an important issue for us in new york and we don't want to be the last thing on friday afternoon where someone says i have one minute until i go home and let me see what i can do on pirate radio. >> the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from mr. -- minnesota mr. gregory. >> thank you for suffering one with mutually for the last question in thank you to both of you as well. thank you commissioner pai for referencing the letter to 114 of my closest friends and i sent to the chairman and the fcc and to both of you for adjusting it so thoroughly today. i might hone in a little bit on some of the finer points regarding the timeline. in the letter i received mr. chairman from you yesterday

you often referred to a lack of consensus. there seems to be some consensus and you pledged by the end of the year you would solve this but we need more systems from stakeholders. as you both know of course our community presented the plan in 2013 modified over the last couple of years to meet moving targets. may i ask you commissioner pai you have offered i think your quote is simple amendments to existing rules as an outcome and one of the things i've noticed around here and certainly noticed and regulatory bodies they can tend to complicate simple things. my goal is usually the opposite of that. are there issues and the hour let's planned that prevent us from going forward or from utilizing that is the model or other issues that caused us to take so long that you know of? >> thank you for the question and thank you for your kind

words about my proposal which is modeled on your letter. sticking -- stepping back a few thousand feet the problem is this. problem a a stand-alone broadband service in my position has been consistent with your letter and the companion letter in the senate that lets about changes in our rules to make sure rate of return carriers and penalized for offering stand-alone service. that's not to say that other problems are important but for the purposes of this issue let's get that piece done and turned he or she is. the issue with the rate of return carriers in the consensus i appreciate the efforts of my colleagues to find a consensus but nonetheless number one it's not necessary to resolve those issues to adopt a broadband solution and number two if we end up waiting until a consensus happens in most other we won't meet the deadline if we are getting this done by the end of

the year. >> can we meet at the end of your deadline and is there a reason we can't meet that under reattaching too many other things to the simple solution? >> those are the two right questions. i'm trying to do that and it is my goal to do it and i expect to do it. a couple of points here. in order to do that you cannot he wedded to consensus. as you know from your previous term at some point in time you have got to pull up and shoot. if you can't get everybody to agree at some point in time and we will put forward a proposal and that on a timely basis in order to do things by the end of the year because at the root of this is we have got to do better for rural consumers and it's not just one simple fix. it is a broader set of fixes

because i am in agreement on the narrowband broadband issue but it's not enough and we also have a responsibility to those people who are paying for this every month in their phone bills to make sure that the money is spent responsibly. i hope we have consensus. i'm working for consensus but if we can't have consensus we need to have progress. >> there are other issues that i wish there would have been more consensus on. shifting with my remaining time spending time talking about the auction. i was about to call it the voluntary option. the word voluntary as i was often referred to because it isn't in fact voluntary opting in and opting out in the $1.75 billion that congress put in for the repacking fund is

probably not going to be enough considering we are looking at 1100 tv stations. is there a plan to deal with that shortfall but i can assure my bro rod casts users they won't have to bear all the costs maybe commissioner pai first. >> we should treat the relocation plan is a budget and structure the auction in such a way to minimize the possibility that we would exceed it and putting the onus on the broadcaster to pay up. the other issue i have heard from a group of broadcasters is 36 months is not as long as it might seem. the commission should be mindful of that as well but i share your

concern i want to make sure broadcasters are not held harmless through necessary expenditures. >> omission or pai has identified the key structures which is we want to manage things within that budget. we can't change that number and we have to come up with a program that will make it work. >> thank you both for its. >> if hang around mr. cramer we might do a second round. we will now go to the gentleman from new mexico mr. lujon for five minutes. >> thank you, it's an honor to be here with both of you chairman wheeler and chairman pai thank you for joining us as well. appreciate -- i'm a her rural guy and chairman wolpan represents rural district. many parts of the country that need broadband access and

affordability. you have heard me say this many times chairman wheeler we can have connectivity at 30000 feet when we are flying across united states in an an airplane there's no reason we can't have connectivity when we are on the ground traveling all across america not only rural communities tribal communities and states like mine in new mexico. with that being said in new mexico 77% living in rural communities lack access to advanced broadband. chairman wheeler you pursued and progressive agenda modernizing the lifeline program and establishing the connect america act. not just build output making it more affordable so people are able to take advantage once there's there is a build of? >> thank you congressman. i hope that we can do significantly better than the

speeds that are delivered in the air and that is what we are doing. i have been in new mexico multiple times in tribal areas and other remote areas in mexico to personally visit and talk to the individuals involved. i remember a situation where there was a fiber going down the side of the road, a fiber on an indian reservation and 100 yards away was a high school and up here was the library. it couldn't get a connection from the fiber to the high school because it was cost prohibitive and the earache program wasn't paying for that. now we pay for that and that's in large part because of these kinds of specific examples that we have seen. we need to make sure this is the case. we also need to make sure that

low income individuals who are unfortunately disproportionately represented in tribal areas have access to broadband support to connect them and that is why we are not only overhauling but changing the orientation of the lifeline program to go to broadband. c chairman wheeler i want to cement other questions into the record to flush these areas out but as we do this i appreciate the conversation we have had today and the focus and seeing how we can grow the rural family and how we can warrant attention. the other place i wanted complement you and get your perspective is on modernizing the fcc. you have embarked on expanding electronic filing distributions

decreasing back locks and improving responsiveness to consumers. can you both tell me what you are doing to provide greater information to consumers including improving transparency and accountability standardizing forms digitizing the process including documents? >> boy am i glad you asked that question. >> and you both support that effort? >> yes. my first trip to our consumer operations in gettysburg i saw in the corner a humongous machine that the staff proudly announced to me to take 17 different forms and put them into one embolo. ..

>> we are talking about using wide spaces and crateeating additional applications for unlicensed. in those areas where the gap is not sufficient and that is a handful of areas i doubt will be any areas that are the typical lptv rural area.

will you commit to them having priority over unlicensed? >> i think the mandate from this committee is there is no priority given to lptv and the committee also said however we need to be encouraging unlicensed. i don't think it comes down to that kind of solution mr. chair chairman. >> my recollection of the statue is unlicensed was never set aside as a priority. we had a lot of discussion about the very fact that you don't go clear all of this and give it away to in effect major

operators. chief commissioner pai? >> part of the reason i suggest we adopt a sound solution on where to put broadcasters. in the uplink we avoid this but in the duplex gap we have to find a home. >> we discussed this really good point that commissioner pai raised. there is serious concern. let's remember what we are talking about here. how do we minimize the aggregate impact across the country? and that means in a handful of markets it is a percentage that can be using single digits. he is proposing you put it in the uplink and the interference in the uplink. that knocks out an entire base. and the impact is much broader. >> i think you disagreement with commissioner pai but i will have

to move along. my concern is consumers are concerned the transmitters are going dark and if is because you created a band of unlicensed that is a problem. i realize they don't have the rights. i knew i could be pushed out when where was in this spot. but you have flexibility to manage. i want to switch gears to go to tpc issue. the issue of auto dialer came up and in your order you adopted a broad violation and i acknowledge the capacity must be more than a theoretical.

is my i-phone one? >> no, sir. >> there were three apps that would turn my phone into an auto dialer. >> the issue we were trying to deal with in his order was not the hardware but the infinite because since congress acted in 1991 the technology has changed. what congress' instructions were to us is no contact from auto dialers without permission. >> if i push somebody's name chairman wheeler, i don't ever dial your number i just push and it dials. is that an auto dialer? >> no, sir. >> if i is a database of names -- if i have a database of names, let's say voters, and i

is a device that calls until someone answers and then i can take the call. is that an auto dialing? >> yes, sir. >> if i have a company that calls the thousands of people in the district are they prohibited from doing that? >> unless the consumer has asked to get this. the statute is very explicit. >> so those are now prohibited and you are saying they always have been? >> yes, sir. >> wow. that is interesting and that would be news to a lot of people. commissioner pai? >> part of the reason it is undisputable an i-phone is a smart dialer is if you look at the statue it says to randomly dial a number. and capacity means the smart

phone has intrinsically to do that. the majority said you can to things to make the smart phone an auto dialer even if it isn't intrins intrinsically and that is why over device other than the rotary phone, is subject to this liability as an auto dialer and that is not good for consumers or or providers or anything other than trial lawyers. >> there is the issue with the health care exchange and if insurance companies can follow up and notify you it is time to come in and have test done. i have been told that might be prohibited now. are you aware of that? >> that is the first i have heard of it but it doesn't surprise me because we have seen a number of industries are uncertain about the rules. >> i understand we were

responding to a series of petitions. we didn't issue a rule. people petitioned us. if somebody wants to petition us on the kinds of things you talk about we can deal with that. when the health care issue won we had an exemption. and 40% of americans no longer have a land line. you spoke out staying pollsters could go the way of blacksmiths. >> they have been right. >> i guess my point is that industry in terms of trying to do a random sample is put out of business. how do you do a random sample on a poll if you can cannot sit down

and randomly dial? >> you cannot get to the wireless numbers because you don't know them. that went by the board. the issue here is if you come to us and says the statue says which it does it is the only folks to be called are those who want to be called and i am supposed to be a strict con structure of the statute. >> the court disappears with the statute. >> and you are constantly encouraging me to do this. >> we are trying to figure out the impact of the ruling as it relates. i have gone way beyond my time. i will refer to my colleague from california, ms. eshoo. >> thank you. it is an important discussion and i think we need to talk about this more.

it is what went into the statute was like holding a mirror up to the country in '91. that is a long time ago. that is many many moons ago when you think of generations of how many generations of technology changes have taken place. whether someone wants to be a strict constructionist we have to stay with the times. in my view meeting with people relative to a town hall meeting has been overwhelmingly emp braced, not just accepted but embraced by

we will see it tracks along with how congress can handle the mia. it may be something for us to discuss. the fy appropriation bill has $315 million reflecting a cut of $25 million below the fy '15 enacted level and $73 million below the request. they also have placed in writers that are relative to anita haidarynet neutrality and all of that. is there anything from the majority here asked to lean in with the appropriators? we are constantly putting on the fcc and in oversight all of these issues coming up.

i don't happen who is going to do the work and follow-up with every member's request about what they want. you wanted to close offices and members said no we need them open. there are so many things relying on the dollars and i am not talking about having a load of extra dough. what i would like to know is have you had conversations with the appropriators on the majority side? have you had conversations with the majority side to see what can be worked out with the budget? i don't know if these writers, the president is not going to sign something like that and superintendent end of the day, i think the appropriation process is so messed up around here because we don't have regular order, speaking of transparency and process and all of that we are

going to end up with a ominous bill and i think that is what is going to happen. compare and contrast the present budget because this doesn't really allow for that much more. and address for us any conversations or how you are following up with the approp -- appropriators did. >> thank you. we have had conversation with everybody who will listen and several who won't. i mean that only in the funny remark. we talked to this lady and their committee and i was honored the chairman came to the appropriation committee come i think is the first time a chairman came. >> second time i was there last

year. >> i missed you then. >> i was right behind you. >> that is not the point. i want to know about the money. we have have to live with the number the congress gives us. it is that simple. >> have you in response to what the appropriators have done and i don't know mr. chairman were you there to support the appropriators in cutting the budget or against? >> i was there to listen to the appropriators. >> you didn't testify? >> no i was there to listen to what they had to say. >> i would like to ask you to do two things. what you will be able do with a budget that is reduced by $25 million. >> yes, ma'am. >> and the top line of things you have to do.

i mean we have to move forward with the auction and the voluntary auction and the top line items. and if we have an bill and what that does. i look forward to reviewing that. i would really like to see that. we are walking into something, i think, the members of this subcommittee have oversight responsibility are going to have to understand we have to curb our appetite for giving the fcc assignments if they don't have the dollars to carery them out. something has to go. >> i will tell you another interesting thing. we are currently at the lowest number of full-time employees in unemployed unemployedin

modern history. >> now go to the gentlemen from missouri, mr. long. >> i was impressed getting to follow the chairman. i thought they really do like me similar to sally fields. i looked around and no one else was here. commissioner pai i have a question for you. it has been reported the chief of the enforcement bureau acknowledge many cases fall into the legal gray area where companies may not realize they are doing anything wrong. i know you raised concerns about this. can you raise your concerns and what can be done to address them. >> i think, unfortunately, many of the fcc high profile enforcement initiatives betrayed the due process law and that is going back to magna carter being signed 800 years ago. part of the reason i have been so outspoken is if private

actors to individuals don't know the rules of conduct they have no reason to know their conduct is violating what the fcc thinks should be the rule. with respect to certain notes of apparent liability the agency issue issued it is request for headlines first and we will figure out the law later. but we should look at the facts, the law, and if there is a gap in the law change it to make sure people are following proper conduct. >> chairman wheeler and commissioner pai, to the two of you, i am curious about the broadcasters relocation fund and how those monies are going to be spent. it is currently $1.7 billion and that fund was setup to pay for all of the relocation cost for the broadcasters required to

maybe to a new channel. has the fcc determined how many stations it is able to repack with that $1.75 billion fund? >> thank you congressman. it is a moving target depending upon had characteristics of who participates in the auction. you have to move an antenna, you have to build a taller antenna. >> can you give me a ballpark number? >> i can get back to you. i don't have one off the top of my head. what we tried to do is develop a set of rules that can live inside that. let me get you the number we used. >> okay. i would appreciate it. and commissioner pai, same question to you. >> i have heard estimates it will cost north of $3 billion to relocate all broadcasters. if that is correct and we have

$1.75 billion the broadcasters will be out of pocket for the extra one and a quarter billion. i hope to avoid that and working with chairman and colleagues to make sure it doesn't happen. >> do we have estimate on the $1.7 billion how many that would? >> no unfortunately, i don't. as the chairman pointed out quite eloquently there a lot of moving parts to this and every broadcast is unique. >> i heard figures and have difficulty believing that will cover the estimated number they are talking about. so if both of you could get back to me on that i would appreciate it. i am going to yeld become with a minute 37 to go. >> chair recognizes the gentlemen from new mexico. >> thank you. i would like to associate myself with the questions ranking member eshoo and chairman were

asking about the inability to reach out to the american people and get feedback. as we talk about the telephone town halls and i travel to rural communities and one thing i hear from members of the community i represent is sometimes they have to travel three or four hours to get to town centers is how much they appreciate being able to weigh in. if it rule requires them to opt into this program how would we reach out to 7-800,000 people to opt in? we cannot send an e-mail because based on a 2015 press release coming from the fcc only 48% making less than $25,000 have broadband service at home. can i send a letter? but the fcc is working against

that. you don't want to send letters checking a box yes or no and getting it back. i hope we can see how we can address this. i happen it is something we visited with chairman waldon and ranking member eshoo. with that being said additional questions about broadband penetration. there has been a little conversation about broadband. chairman pai, do you see broadband a necessity or a benefit? >> my goal is it make sure any america, when it is tribe in new mexico or somewhere in kansas anyone who wants digital opportunities with broadband should be able to get it. that is why i have laid out so

much to mock sure we have a bunch of competitors out there competing to provide every american with that. as far as the classification i will lead to wiser minds. >> the semantics with the difference between necessity and luxury how would you characterize that accessibility in rural parts? >> i think it is critical. i enjoyed challenge to small towns to be able to see how people have used broadband to get opportunities they would notise have. i have seen in a lot of rural districts if people don't get the high speed connection they will move to a bigger state or city to get it. and i think there are a lot of ideas in rural america withering on the vine for lack of the connection. >> i would characterize it as a necessity not a luxury.

i really appreciate you considering or characterizing it as absolutely critical. i would agree with that assessment as well. with that commissioner pai, as we look to the life line program as well and in the testimony or your decent to the 2015 order, in it there were concerns associated with the cost of the program to date. in your decent you did recognize that there have been some reforms that we looked back to 2012 understanding that in 20 2005-2008 that went from land line phones to go into mobile phones and smart phone appratus. i am trying to get inthe numbers

on the real life savings were as well. you determined people were sign people up fraudly and we need to track them down. there was a reform in there stating the fcc would remove the ability for providers to sign people up for lifeline or verification. is that something that you agree with? were there other areas you disagreed with in the order? >> i would love to work with you. i think verification is a critical critical issue. fly by operators like in oklahoma created so-called lifeline customers and got a lot of money and the ceo pocketed $20 million and spent it on his own private expenses.

we need more enforcement action reform the rules and have the conversation about how to have a fiscally responsible program. >> the last question have is $1.6 billion the right cap? you and i share a concern with broadband availability in communities but i would hope that we both would agree that it is not just accessibility from an infrastructure possibility but an affordability question in many rural areas. what is the right number for a gap? should it be arbitrary or based on data? >> i do believe it should be fact based and that is why i suggested the budget. it was at $800 million and now $1.6. it is the only universal program that is not capped. we need to target them people off line and we have to make

sure we are responsible stewards of the consumer tax dollars. $1.6 seemed a good starting point. >> that is based on last year's number. year to year that number changes undering inflation from 2008-2012 was because the reforms were in place that helped us back the numbers down with reforms in 2012 and recent action by the fcc. maybe we can work on this area together and i look forward to having more conversations. >> we appreciate your participation and that of the witnesses and speaking about data. just in closing, the review i referenced in my opening statement is now eight years old. i hope the commission will deal with the ownership report on a bases that is required by statute. a modernization is high on a number of priorities and on the

d-stack issue we ask in stellar that the commission deal with the downloadable security issue and ait appears they were given data on the screen. i have one letter to put in the record from care payment without objection. and i think you heard mr. chairman, bipartisan concern on tcpa. we realize you are implementing a law that was created in '91 when you got charged are incoming phone calls. no one is talking about robo calls on cell phones but i think we need to look at the law. with that the subcommittee stands adjourned.

jeh johnson on national security at the aspen security forum and then a discussion about the iran nuclear agreement and from george washington university a look at how isis recruits fighters from the west and what happens when they return home. homeland security jeh johnson recently talked about terrorism, isis cyber security and immigration at the aspen security forum. he was interviewed by a new yorker correspondent. this is 45 minutes. [applause]