have the transcripts actually -- you again stated we will not regulate broadband rates. again, i appreciate that. and you then said you would be willing to offer your assistance to representative crenshaw in developing language on this topic within a couple weeks from the date of that hearing which was march 15th. would you be willing to provide that language to our committee when it's completed which will be around march 29th? >> yes, sir. >> okay. i also want to clear something up. in a recent mark-up on h.r. 2666, a letter from you was entered into the record in which you go to great length to explain why my bill's to inconsistent with your comments before a senate approps committee. given i read you the text of the bill before it was originally introduced and you stated that this is what we're trying to accomplish, i'm a bit confused by your letter, so i just want to clear something up. this is just yes or no. do you believe that the fcc should have the authority to

regulate rates after the fact through enforcement? >> yes, sir. >> okay. >> what i was talking about was the question of de-forbearing. >> okay. >> and i believe that in the open internet rule, as we did, we should forbear from rate regulation. >> but you believe that you should have the authority to regulate rates even though you choose not to at this time, the commission should have that authority? to be able to regulate broadband rates? >> yes, sir. >> that's kind of inconsistent -- >> it is throughout, because here's what's the concept. so, for instance, you know, chairman walden's amendment that you just referenced -- >> yeah. >> the amendment to your original idea, when she said, hey, this will not have any impact on paid prioritization because, obviously -- >> well, no, so -- >> there is a rate -- >> and i appreciate that. and we're willing to work with you. but what i'm kind of confused about we went from you saying, hey, we're going to forbear it, we have no intention of regulating rates on the

internet, and i like the concept of what your bill is even if you don't like the details. we're willing to work with you on the details, but you're saying that you actually disagree that you actually should have the ghrb that's what i'm trying to address. the issue of rates. so, for instance, as chairman walden's amendment said, well, paid prioritization could be rate. that's not what we're talking about. throttling could be rates. and we've all agreed we don't want to do throttling. because how do you throttle? there is a rate you are paying, you are delivering less than the service that you say that you're going to offer. therefore, there is a rate impact -- >> and inderstand there's a lot of details -- >> same thing with blocking. >> there's a lot of details, but we went there you saying i agree we should not be able to regulate broadband rates to now saying we should regulate broadband rate, but i'll forbear it for this moment. there's details, and that's my point. we're willing to work with you

on a lot of these details -- >> yes, sir. >> and we're happy to do it with the other side of the aisle, with you all, and i think that's important. but maybe we made a little headlines. to commissioner pai, do you believe the open internet order leaves open the ability for the fcc to regulate actions after the fact and do you believe congress should act? >> yes and yes. and i think the chairman's commitment should be taken at its word. i don't think it shouldn't be that big of a leap if the president has said i don't want the fcc to regulate broadband internet access rates, if the chairman says i don't want to regulate broadband internet access rates and i don't have a problem with congress codifying that, there should not ban objection when -- be an objection when congress tries to codify that commitment. >> that's right. and that's the role of congress, to make these laws, to make these things that we want our folks to live by or not live by, and it's -- i guess i'm confused but, unfortunately, i'm out of time. thank you all. thanks for being here. >> thank you. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding back. i recognize now ms. clark from

new york. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and i thank our ranking member. good afternoon, chairman wheeler and to the entire panel of commissioners or seated before us today. my time is short, so i want to get right to my question. mr. chairman, as you know, some of my colleagues in the congressional black caucus, the congressional hispanic caucus and i have expressed our concerns about the potentialer reparable harm the et-top box -- set-top box proposal could have on content providers and broadcasters. this concern was also expressed recently by adonis hoffman, a former chief of staff, to a democratic fcc commissioner, and i quote: if the fcc adopts the wheeler proposal in a final order later this year, it will embed a regime that creates more, not fewer, hurdles for smaller players, new entrants and minority content providers

to the pierce the silicone curtain, end quote. mr. chairman, you continue to assert that you don't believe that this disruption will harm or limit minority and independent programming. so has the fcc gathered evidence to the fact? has a disparity study been conducted for programs whose viability is not only driven by increased viewership, but also proven business models? >> thank you, congresswoman. the entire nprm is designed to e elicit this kind of information. and then to collect that information in the first round and then to have a rebuttal to that information or adding -- >> okay, so there's been no study, no -- >> what i'm saying is that's the process, we're collecting that right now. >> so i've asked for a study to be performed on the impact of the set-top box proposal on small and minority programmers

and content providers and broadcasters. i consider this a reasonable request. would you consider delaying the rulemaking until the report is completed and to work with the committee to address any concerns that may be raised by a report? >> well, we would look forward to working with you and the committee on any issues that are raised in this. and as you and i have discussed previously on this. >> so you would consider a delay? >> i don't know how long the delay would be, ma'am. >> okay. we can talk about that. >> yeah. >> commissioner clyburn, i want to commend and congratulate you on all our your efforts on inmate calling services. it has meant so much to so many families across our nation, and i know it will happen. i have a question about the modernization of the lifeline program. i'm hearing from many constituents that they are concerned with the portion of the proposal that would start charging for services that have been free for years. i think that's been a constant, a consistent theme here this morning.

would you further explain the proposal on the modernization of the lifeline program? >> well, what we are attempting to do, and it was a very simple concern for me -- objective, to insure that the lifeline program looks much like everyone else's offerings and options and opportunities. right now it was, it just goes to finance voice services, and we believe in a 21st century economy, in a world that's insufficient. so we are still in the deliberative stage. i have heard concerns as i mentioned in my opening remark from consumers that are concerned particularly on the mobile voice problem, mobile voice, they consider it to be a problem here. but what i want to assure you is i'm going to take all of those into considerations, because i want, as i have, the option to

pay little, none or more depending on, depending on my ability and what i want from the market, and that is what we are attempting to create, all price points starting at zero. >> so my question is related to the maintenance of the voice service for constituents that may not have access to high-period broadband or may not want to adopt the modern technology because they are seniors or disabled or perhaps less literate. is the fcc being too presumptuous that broadband will be competitively available to all americans in the next three years as outlined in the agency's draft proposals? >> i will answer this way and more succinctly based on time: it is my wish that whatever your desire is it -- is from a communications standpoint, what whatever your need is from a communications standpoint, that this is a program that answers your needs. >> very well. mr. chairman, i yield back. thank you very much. >> i thank the gentlelady. the chair now recognizes itself for five minutes.

chairman wheeler, recently i was shown a quote attributed to a former venture capitalist, you, regarding the fcc's regulation of what was then a cutting edge, innovative service. and i quote: i would hope the commission recognizes that despite the fact that they have very capable and kid -- dedicated individuals, it is not smarter than the functions of the marketplace. in that regard, i would just point to the cellular industry. the reason the industry has reached the level it has is because the fcc was smart enough to know that they didn't have all the knowledge. end quote. so looking at the situation with -- [inaudible] and other products, you have a team scrutinizing them, notwithstanding the overwhelming consumer response. it sounds like now the fcc's enforcement bureau does have all of the knowledge in your opinion.

so what has changed at the fcc since you made that statement as head of ctia? >> well, far be it from me to challenge the wisdom of that previous statement, congressman. the model that we built for the open internet is based on section 332, and what i was speaking about at that point in time, and the job that the congress and the commission did in saying it is a common carrier and here are the things from which you will forbear. and that the responsibilities of common carriage continue to obtain them. and just like the common carriage responsibilities of data roaming were applied to wireless carriers in the last several years, so too do we then

look at other common carriage responsibilities that may fall out and be affected by internet service providers. >> okay, well, great. great. so it sounds like your position has changed, that now the enforcement bureau does have more of the knowledge than the private market. let's go on to a second question. on your watch, and one of our colleagues earlier said we're not really talking about your budget which is what you're or here to talk about, but i'm going to segway to that. on your watch average personnel cost for employees in the enforcement bureau have grown faster than was the case under chairman genachowski. certainly, average salaries for those in the enforcement bureau have grown faster during your tenure than was the case under your predecessor. how do you explain this trend toward higher spending? >> you have given me a piece of information that i was unaware of, and i will be -- >> good. would you get back to us, take that question for the record? thank you.

we'd like to know that. also, chairman wheeler, the fcc as a matter of practice sends a contingent of enforcement bureau field agents to the super bowl, correct? >> yes, sir. >> it's the job of these field agents to insure that no harmful or malicious interference interrupts communications, broadcasting or public safety, that correct? >> yes, sir. >> a group went this year, am i correct? >> yes, sir. >> this past january -- february. i assume that given the task that this team is responsible for, they're made up of primarily engineers that can resolve those problems, is that correct? >> i don't know the answer to that, sir. >> okay. could you get back to us on that. >> >> yes, sir. >> did the chief of the enforcement bureau attend the super bowl as part of the fcc's presence? >> i don't know the answer to that, sir. >> would you get back to us on that? and do you know if any enforcement bureau chiefs in the

past have attended the super bowl? >> i don't know the answer to that. >> okay. so there are three or four questions for you, if you would get pack to us on those. -- back to us on those. sticking with you, chairman here, but changing focus. as the head of an important agency, i'm sure you're aware of challenges that have aprisonning in the epa -- arisen with respect to the use of nonofficial means of communication, often to avoid or evade things like the administrative procedures act or the freedom of information act and the federal records act. does the fcc have a policy that clearly requires fcc employees to comply with these obligations, and how do you enforce that policy and insure that personnel cell phones and direct messaging over social media platforms are not used by your employees to avoid the sunshine and openness we expect in a regulatory agency like the fcc. >> >> i'm sorry, let me see if i understand. you're saying what policy do we

have to make sure that you don't do business on private -- >> yeah, essentially. >> that's policy. >> do you have that policy? >> yes, sir. >> what do you do to enforce it? what kind of enforcement mechanism? >> we don't go spying on our employees. >> i'm sorry? >> we don't go looking at what our employees are doing. >> how do you enforce it? >> we have the rule in place. sir -- >> so you don't enforce it. >> if there's a complaint made against the rule, i'm sure we would enforce it. >> okay. what i hear you saying is you don't enforce it. i yield back, and now i recognize mr. mcnerney for five minutes. >> i thank the chair. concerning the isp privacy proposal, chairman -- >> yes, sir. >> -- wheeler, i believe that consumers should have control over their data, what they disclose and how their data is used. recognizing that the average internet users may not be aware of the multiple entities such as the isp and web sites that

collect their data, will your proposal insure that consumers have an understanding of what entities are collecting their information? >> yes, sir. >> how you do that? >> so there are three legs to this stool. first is transparency. it must be disclosed what information is being collected and then how that information is used when it is collected. the second is that you must be given choice insofar as to you want that -- do you want that information to be collected and used. and the third is that that information be must be secured so that it does not end up violating your privacy by leaking out to some other source. >> are you going to require opt-ins or opt-outs as part of this? >> yes, sir. >> so the consumers will have to opt in or opt out depending on what they want? >> any information that is collected by an isp that may not

be distributed to a non-isp, in other words, may not be sold to an advertiser or somebody like this without the opt-in consent of the consumer. >> thank you. data security is a critical element of the isp private proposal, at least in my opinion. >> yes. >> one of the things you could do is called out by requiring reasonable steps. but what does the commission mean by "reasonable steps"? what does that constitute? >> so there have -- that is noticed by the absence of reasonable steps. the reality is that one company's solution may be as adequate as another company's solution, but what we don't want to do is to say here is the black and white cookie cutter that everybody has to do. but, for instance, let me give you an example. there was one company that

allowed their employees to operate -- allowed is the wrong word. under whose supervision their employees sold the information for about 280,000 customers. there must be a reasonable structure in place to prevent that kind of activity. >> so you don't believe in establishing a standard throh some process and then applying -- >> we established the expectation that you will do it. but there are multiple ways that it can be accomplished. >> okay, thank you. regarding set-top boxes, as you know, i wrote a letter to you with mr. barton and ms. ellmers regarding the privacy issues under your proposals. i appreciate -- you responded. we got that letter last week, although i have a few questions about the certification process. how would consumers go about raising a potential violation of

self-certification or independent certification? >> so the enforcement exists as it does today under section -- excuse me -- under section 631 applicable to wireless carriers, that that is the expectation that applies. there are -- their first role of responsibility is the cable operator themselves, and the second is an appropriate complaint to the ftc or the state a.g., but that we have the same level of private protections that get put in place today with existing alternative set-top boxes such as tivo and roku. >> well, then who would decide if a violation warrants a revocation? >> the revocation of the license in. >> of the certification. >> so the cable operator can make that decision. and there can be enforcement

action taken by the ftc or the a.g.s. >> thank you. commissioner clyburn, i'm also interested in the lifeline, but in california our customers get a state subsidy along with a lifeline subsidy, and yet some of our providers are saying that even with that very, the most generous state subsidy in the united states, they're still not able to supply, provide the basic services that are warranted. do you see that, i mean, how do you see addressing that problem? >> our universal service construct has always been viewed through a public and private lens. and we always knew that there would be certain limitations from a government standpoint in terms of allocation of resources be it state or local. and so what we are attempting to do through our other initiatives and conversations and partnerships that we are continuing to forge is to insure that the market has options that would be more in line with the affordability construct in which

you laid out. so so it's a continual work in process, and i think we're on the correct trajectory to marry in -- [inaudible] >> so there may be co-payments involved. >> what -- we always knew that $9.25 from a federal coffer would not be enough in all cases to bridge the digital divide x. that's why it's so important for, as you mentioned, states like california who recognize that, who complement the fund economically, and we're hoping for more interaction with the private marketplace to bring things closer to affordability for those who could use, who need broadband the most. >> already. thank you, mr. chairman -- all right, thank you, mr. chairman, for indulging me. >> thank the gentleman for yielding back. chair now recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr. bilirakis. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thanks to the panel for your answers today. chairman wheeler, i understand that a lot of robocalls or

automated text messages are an unwelcome part of modern life and should be limited as they are now under the telephone consumer protection act. but in some cases, consumers -- customers have a legitimate need and a real desire to receive important information from some businesses. for example, utilities may need to contact their customers with information about outages, repairs, service restoration or other important service updates. this is especially true in a situation we face in florida when we have hurricanes and tropical storms, so it's a public safety issue. i understand there's a petition from electric and gas utilities currently pending at the commission to clarify that the tcpa does not apply to non-telemarketing informational communications from utilities to their customers. does the commission plan to act on this? or can you comment on the status of the petition, please? >> thank you, congressman.

i'm unfamiliar with that specific petition. we're dealing with several issues that come out of tcpa. i'd love to get back to you with an answer. >> please do. please do. thank you. a second question for chairman wheeler. we recently had firstnet up here along with your public safety bureau. one of the things we discussed was the level of coordination between fcc and firstnet on closing fcc field offices since the field agents play a critical role in resolving interference to public safety communications. yet i still don't have a clear answer to my question. was there any consultation between firstnet and the fcc about reducing the size of a field office -- and a simple yes or no -- >> i don't believe so, sir. >> you don't believe so? >> correct. >> that's probably a no, is that correct? >> yes, sir. to the best of my knowledge. >> all right. commissioners pai and o'reilly,

the chairman's set-top box proposal seems divorced from the reality of how consumers watch video today. the video market already competes for consumers giving numerous viewing options based on single programs, channels or bundles. isn't the fcc's market definition backward-looking considering where the market is going? what do you think? >> congressman, i agree with that characterization. i can't put it better than former chairman of this committee, henry waxman, who said just yesterday that this is a 20th century solution to a problem that the market is already solving on its own. >> i agree. >> commissioner o'rielly, please. >> i agree. >> thank you. next question for the entire panel. is the commission worried about all the automated telephone dialing system cases being decided in court on a case-by-case basis? should the commission revisit the definition and help to bring clarity to the issue so that businesses can have clearer guidance? we'll start with the chairman,

please. >> we had a -- thank you, congressman. we had a large proceeding on that within the last six or eight months, and what we are trying to hue to is the specific language that is in tcpa that says insofar as wireless calls are concerned, the wire -- that wireless subscribers have the right to determine whether or not you get could. >> commissioner clyburn, please. >> so i interpreted your -- hopefully, my interpretation is in sync with the spirit of your question. one of the things that we recognize is that every situation is different, and we must have the capacity when it comes to intake of those calls and complaints which are huge, they're large in numbers, that we have the capacity to compartmentalize and address them. so how we look at them en masse. there are a lot of commonalities to many of these calls, and we will address them in such a manner that would be in sync with that.

>> thank you. any other commissioner or wish to comment? >> as the chairman alluded to, we did address auto-dialer capacity in the summer of 2015, and our most recent decision under the telephone consumer protection act. but if i could make one point, it would be a plea. this is a law from 1991. and one of the challenges that the agency has right now is we are taking all sorts of technologies that did not exist in the early '90s and trying to figure out how to fit them into this old law. we are, as a result, struggling with more robocalls for consumers and more challenging lawsuits for companies that never intended to be on the wrong side of the consumers they're calling. >> commissioner pai, should the commission revisit the definition and help to bring clarity to the issue so that businesses -- [inaudible] >> without question, congressman. but in the absence of the commission doing it, i don't see any indication that it will. i think as commissioner rosenworcel pointed out, it

would be helpful for congress to update the telephone consumer protection act. one of the strange situations we find ourselves in now, on one hand having perverted the definition of auto-dialer to include everything more sophisticated than a rotary phone, all these businesses are now seeking a special exemption from the tcpa's strictures and the various class actions that are sure to follow. at the same time, exempting entire categories of favored robocallers such as the prison pay phone industry and others. they get a pass whereas a lot of these legitimate businesses don't. that's an untenable state of affairs. >> commissioner o'rielly? >> i'll just say i agree. i think the definition was wrong at the time, and we should clarify. >> thank you. i yield back, mr. chairman. appreciate it. >> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from missouri, mr. long. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and before i give my remarks, i'd like to just, along with many others, send out thought thoughts and prayers to the victims of the tragedy in

brussels today including a u.s. service member and four of his family members that were injured and three mormon in missionaries who were also injured, two of which i know are jason chaffetz's, chairman of oversight and government reform, constituents of his. and another note, note the passing of my predecessor's father, roy blunt's dad passed away last night, and i know that a lot of folks had not heard that. and i want to add to the accolades, even though he's not in the room, that everyone's been throwing out to ray baum today. after he wrote wizard of oz, i thought he'd be done. [laughter] i thought he could live off his residuals. but ray is a great, great guy, and i was, came to congress from a different background than most. i was an auction near and a real estate broker for over 30 years. i'm a salesman, and a salesman has to be upbeat, optimistic,

open, and ray, i've never seen him in a bad mood. he's always upbeat, optimist optimistic, so i wish him the best of luck over at the n.a.b.. and i just realized out in the hall that he is one week younger than i am. i know you can't tell by looking -- [laughter] anyway, congratulations to ray on his move. commissioner rosenworcel, i want to commend you on your trip down to austin promoting the broadband to rural areas which is a very, very key object or whatever that we've been working on that, that we need to work on. i too spoke in austin and participated in a panel today on that very subject, on delivering broadband to the rural areas which for the students in their studies and everything, it's critical that we get that done. so i just wanted to congratulate you on your trip to austin to promote same thing. chairman wheeler, in the spirit of don dingell, i'm going to ask

you for yes or no answers to my questions. i've got a few here. i don't have a lot. but, chairman wheeler, i'd like to focus this morning -- or this afternoon i guess it is now, on your treatment of television joint sales agreements known as jsas. i don't know if you're aware, but there's a jsa in my district in joplin, missouri, and it was because of this jsa that kode was able to buy doppler radar which at the time was, obviously, a benefit to the joplin community. but in 2011 when the ef5 tornado ripped through joplin killing 161 people in a town of 50,000, so even knew someone from that tragedy, when it ripped through joplin, there wasn't anything much more important to my community than the doppler radar which tracked a multiple vortex tornado, stayed on the ground

for six miles, and the reason kode was able to afford this piece of weather equipment was because of the jsa. .. clearly, many others in congress have the same frustration, which is my last year we included a 10 year grandfather before march of 2014 in the spending bill. chairman wheeler, again in the spirit of a yes or no answer were you aware of the passage of this law? >> yes, sir. >> good. i thought when congress passed a law it would have been ended the conversation, but unfortunately to my surprise i see the fcc decided the merger process to circumvent or recently passed law and a number of instances

the fcc did not provide the grandfather to j essay provided in merger. is that correct, yes or no québec no, sir. >> that is not correct? >> that is not correct. >> i am aware you argue there is long-standing precedents that gives the sec the right to modify. have you read the language and the ominous of bill that grandfathers j essay? >> yes, sir. >> can you tell me if it includes-- includes exceptions. >> are you talking about license >> yes or no. let me repeat the question. can you tell me if that language includes exceptions to that 10 year grandfather of jsa? >> in the definition-- >> yes or no. can you give me yes or no?

that's a simple question. >> yes. >> thank you. did include exception in the case of merger reviews or fcc precedents, yes or no? >> guess the mac in the case with fcc press attends that conflicts with a federal statute , which prompts, is of the statute-- it's in the statute, is meant? >> the statute does not conflict. >> it appears others were surprised that your interpretation of the statute recently the 12 bipartisan senators represent a spectrum from senator schubert to senator blanche and wicker set you a letter telling you that congressional intent of that language namely to grandfather all jsa created before march 14. are you in receipt of that letter? >> yes. >> i yield back.

>> the chair now recognizes the gentle lady from north carolina. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i will continue the tradition we are carrying on the here of dingell and cheerleading-- chairman wheeler i have legislature in requiring the fcc publisher rule changes on their website within 24 hours. hr 2489. transparency has been a priority for this administration, so i find it strange some have lost in this proposal and to that and i would like to ask you a few yes or no questions. dubbed sec have the ability to publish rule changes online within 24 hours? >> yes. >> so, you confirm with 24 hours we will be able to publish that information? >> you are asking question do we have technical ability to publish within 24 hours. >> in your answer is yes; correct? >> yes.

>> i want to move onto another subject subject. chairman wheeler, i have been a bit to disturb to about the fcc's quote antibusiness bias in a recent article. the commissioners job is to ensure the communications, marketplaces functioning to promote the benefits for consumers and not to be beholden to two radical special interest groups. are you really listening to the wide range of stakeholders involved in the matters or is they-- they're a real bias as has been pointed out in this article? >> yes and no. there were two questions there. one was am i listening and the other is there a bias. >> yes, you are listening and no to the bias? >> correct. >> in 2012, there was a paper that was created and mr. chairman i ask unanimous consent to submit this form the

record. >> without objection. >> it was a paper on video reform from one of these groups, special interest group called: publish knowledge. it indicates you are listening to very few voices. i look at the executive summary and find there are formal recreations listed here that you have basically initiated by your administration and i will go through a couple of them, if i'm allowed. one, the fcc should declaratory ruling that channel video programming distributors and goes on to say may not engage in unfair methods of competition or deception accent practices. with regard to online video distributors. you started this process. have you not started that process? >> i'm sorry. on confused. i wasn't chairman in 2012. >> you were part of the fcc at

that time, though. >> no ma'am to make you are-- >> i was a businessman, then. >> basically that point i am making is in 2012, not that you were there in 2012, this white paper was generated in 2012, but the point i'm trying to make is that you are adhering to this white paper student i have unfamiliar with that paper. >> i will just point out then that this particular white paper outlines this particular suggestion and you are following it. >> on which topic? >> i will read it again for you. the fcc should issue a declaratory ruling that multichannel video programming distributors and it goes on to say may not engage in unfair methods of competition or deceptive acts or practices with regard to online video distributors.

that part of the white paper. you started this process with questions to that practice is that not true? >> i guess i apologize. on online video distributor-- >> let's leave that one aside. the fcc this is again in the white paper, the fcc should begin a proceeding to determine which regulation ought to apply to zero bg that choose to operate. you have begun this rulemaking as well, have you not? >> thank you. i have proposed and then-- >> yes or no. >> have not moved on. >> there again i would like to submit a couple more of the quotes from the white paper. we are cemented the white paper for the record, but chairman, i will be honest and tell you at this point and after watching this process i'm not sure exactly whose opinion you are actually--

>> will the gentle lady-- >> my time has expired or in this is troubling to me, sir. very troubling and i think that we need to take more time to acknowledge the fact that you may be taking over opinions that are truly bias of that is frightening to me moving forward and i yield back, mr. chairman. >> did the gentle lady went to specifically say what she wanted to add to the record there, your last comment. >> out-- i basically, mr. chairman, and i think you. i have a couple of quotes and basically i will ask for those yes or no answers. >> without objection. >> in the written form. >> thank you, mr. chairman and a thank you, witnesses. it's been almost a three-hour hearing. i took a break and had lunch. what would be a hearing without the new york guy asking about private to radio.

i won't take the whole five minutes, but mr. wheeler you and i have had this discussion and so in questions after-- following the march 19, oversight hearing you were asked about the report that showed a decline in enforcement on pirate radio. and the question was, has any guidance or instruction been given by the office of the chairman or enforcement bureau to commission staff not to enforce the statute or commission rules with regard to unlawful operations. july 21, we did get a response july 21, 2015, that stated the office of the chairman and the enforcement bureau have not given or instructed to the commission staff not to enforce the statute or commission rules with regard to unlawful operations. i assume you remember that. >> yes, sir. >> one week later july 28, we spoke again in this hearing and

i asked if there was any truth to the reports to the suggestion that the fcc had actually directed field offices to step down and back away from enforcement. you responded, i have heard that and you further added that any such commanded not come from you. so, last december, the existence of an eternal-- internal e-mail within the enforcement bureau last december was disclosed that in october of 2014, the staff of the bureaus in northeast region was informed that the fcc's response to pirate radio operations was being scaled back. and the enforcement bureau would not the issuing notices of apparent liability to the majority of individuals engaged in such unlawful behavior, so my

question is since that disclosure came forward at last december have you looked into that directive? >> i have not looked into that. i maybe had was not-- i do not remember that. but, i have taken serious interest in pirate radio and i am told that about 20% of the activities in the enforcement bureau are directed to pirate radio. we have had about 130 enforcement actions last year that we continue on that and i would add my voice to commissioner o'reilly's comment earlier about one of the realities that we are fighting here is that we need to get to those who enable it.

we can't just pat ourselves on the back for playing whack a mole, that we need to get to those that enable it and if there could be legislation that would address that and empower us to do it the best-- >> first of all, i would like if you could look into that directive and get back to our committee. >> thank you. >> about who issue that threat because we would like to know where that came from-- >> the e-mail does not-- i'm sorry, is there an e-mail. >> i don't have the details, but quickly. you just mentioned the need for congressional action to take on the landlords and others that might be behind the scenes working on this. but, by the same token there was recently released from fcc on advisory notice from the enforcement bureau that stated that the fcc already has the ability to take fcc enforcement

against a those individuals, your own bulletin said that. so, i think it's a bit disingenuous to say you need congressional action when your own enforcement bureau regulations as you already have the authority. >> we would love to come back to you and be able to specifically identify the legislative authority that we are talking about. >> but, your own enforcement people say you already have the authority. >> the question is what is the extent to that-- >> in my last 12 seconds i want to ask a very direct question because it's been suggested that senior managers of the enforcement bureau do not want to shut down pirate radio operations because they serve a certain communities certainly within new york city that might not have otherwise access to that. is there any truth in that? >> that would be wrong. >> there is no truth in that and

it would be wrong. >> it's news to me. >> i appreciate that fairly direct answer. i yield back. >> the chair recognizes ranking member. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i have unanimous reset-- consent request to place into the record a compilation of. of the documents include press reports documenting that broadband investment has not decreased as a result of the title ii reclassification, documents also include an analysis of fcc filings and earnings report said that major telecom companies similarly showing that broadband investment has not decreased and also a letter relative to broadband privacy rulemaking, all of which we have shared with your counsel and ask that the-- these be placed in the record.

>> without objection, so ordered i remind members that they had-- first of all i want to thank the panel for being with us today. thank you very much. i'm not used it to be sitting in this chair and i almost forgot that part. >> i will remind members that they have 10 days to submit questions and i asked the members should respond probably and they would have questions by april 6. without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] tran 11. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] tran 11. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

clec here's a look at our prime time schedule tonight on c-span networks. beginning at eight eastern on c-span we will show a supreme court oral argument in a case challenging the healthcare law contraceptive care coverage. on c-span to its book tv with authors and books from recent book festivals and on c-span 3 american history to the as we look at american artifacts from travel to the stork sites and museums. also tonight remarks from duke university professor christopher bale on his book "terrified: how anti-muslim fringe organizations became mainstream" he discussed the rising influence of anti- muslim groups in america. here's a look. >> i will argue today that a small network of anti- muslim organizations in the wake of the september 11 attacks captivated the media specifically through emotional appeal and though these organizations were once per referral actors within the

broader family of organizations trying to shape public discourse about islam they have raised more than 242 main dollars to mount one of the most significant campaigns to shift american public opinion against islam and i will show you how they have exerted influence among our counterterrorism policy, the recent wave of so-called anti- sharia laws and perhaps most disturbingly how they have even been hired to count-- train our counterterrorism officials. all of this occurs in the broader context of the so-called battle for hearts and minds that we currently find ourselves in against groups like isis and as i will show you attend my talk these fringe ideas about these anti- muslim ideas are avid travelers and get picked up by international media where i think they do their most

significant harm by tarnishing the reputation of the united states, which was once a paragon for religious freedom and making it seem as though the us is in fact anti- muslim thereby validating the claim of groups like isis that the us is fundamentally at war with islam. >> that is just a portion of what professor they'll had to send the rising influence on anti- muslim groups in america. you can see his remarks night at 9:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. book tv has 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors every weekend. here are programs to watch for. this we can join us for the 22nd annual virginia festival of the book in charlottesville starting saturday at noon eastern. programs include author bruce hillman who discusses his book the man who stocked einstein or have nazi scientists believe he

change the course of history. saturday evening at seven partition valve scott, women's studies at the university of georgia on the firebrand and first lady, portrait of a friendship, eleanor roosevelt and the struggle for social justice. the book expires the relationship between civil rights activists, cofounder of the national organization for women and first lady eleanor roosevelt. patricia bell scott speaks with author and historian at roosevelt house in new york city. on sunday beginning at 1:00 p.m. eastern more from the virginia festival of the book including kelly carlin, george carlin's daughter who talks about her life growing up with the comedian in her book: a carlin home companion and sunday night at 9:00 p.m. afterwards we have historian nancy:, author breakthrough, making of america's first president. looks at political leaders and the advances they are making. she is interviewed by-- call

cofounder of cornell's law school for women and justice. >> for a woman to be at the head of the most powerful country in the world when one of our key allies don't allow women to drive and are most significant enemy at this time, isis is literally executing women and girls simply for being women and girls and i think this sends a powerful message from the bully pulpit about what america stands for. >> go to book tv .-dot orc for the complete we can schedule. >> the need for horses on the farm began to decline it radically in 1930s. it was not until the 1930s that they figured out how to make a rubber tire big enough to fit on a tractor and starting in the 1930s and 1940s you had almost complete replacement of horses

as work animals on farms. i do believe one of my books on horses i read that in the decade after world war ii we had something like a horse holocaust that the horses were no longer needed and we do not get rid of them in a pretty way. >> this looks at the growth of the american standard of living between 1870 and 1970 and questions its future. >> one thing that often interests people is the impact of the super storms seen any on the coast back in 2012. that wiped out the 20th century for many people. the elevators no longer worked in new york, the electricity stopped and you could not charge your cell phone. you couldn't pump gas in your car because it required electricity.

so, the power of electricity in the internal combustion engine to make my life possible is it something that people take for granted. >> sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span q1 day. yesterday the national lieutenant governors association held its annual meeting to explain ways to advance federal state relation and that bad-- panel focused on efforts to combat the opioid addiction. this is about one hour. [applause]. >> thank you very much. thank you. it is good to be here and good to go to a conference that is a couple miles down the road, so it's always convenient. although dealing with traffic is not always the best thing. i want to think director bocelli

a number of things he talked about and in particular responses to some of the questions that came in. i think that we addressed in maryland and continue to address this is really working well. i want to ask those to come to the stage, mark those in an secretary frank. if they could make their way. the previous conversation and discussion is a good jumping off point as we get more specific in terms of pot calling that opioid abuse issues in the states. for the department of health and human services is executing a multi- pronged fights in dealing with the opiate epidemic and i would like to have us welcome from hhs, assistant secretary richard frank. [applause].

>> i am pleased to be here and usually mike botticelli and i do this as a pair, so i'm not just following him, but what i would like to do is really focus in on what hhs is doing and i'm going to sort of discussed this in three parts. first come i would like to briefly review what the hhs strategy is and put it into context and give you a brief progress report on where we have come and then i went to spend a couple of minutes about where we are going and that's really the focus on this year's presidential budget proposal and i would be happy to take questions.

last week as you all know the cdc released prescribing guidelines and hhs released its natch-- national pain strategy and believe it or not that is not a coincidence. because, in fact we view the two of them marching in lockstep together that we have a pain problem and it opioid problem that are interconnected and can only be dealt with together. so, the prescribing guidelines are really aimed at addressing one piece of the pain problem, which is how casually do use opioids to deal with pain, how we do it in the safest possible way and then the pain strategy outlines beyond that a program of research, provider education, patient education and continues sort of programmatic development so that we do a better job on

pain management in this country and do it safely. all of this is embedded in that president's approach to corralling the opioid epidemic, so what i would like to do is first quickly remind you what the strategy is. there is three prongs. a literally the week that sylvia burwell arrived at hhs she convened a meeting where she directed us to develop an evidence -based of focused plan to do with opioid epidemic. then, as you probably, many of you who have seen the secretary in action, she wanted a quick. [laughter] >> she is all about execution and believe it or not we got it to her quick and there are three parts to it. the first part focuses on dealing with opioid prescribing practices and that involved the combination of doing things to

improve clinical decision-making such as the guidelines, provider education, but also decision support like using our health information technology and drug monitoring program so that we support doctors in making the best possible decisions. then, we also want to make the data flow more easily and more freely so that, in fact, a doctor can see a patient's entire treatment history and all of the places they are touching the medical system and what's happening there so in fact he did not get the situation that was recently pointed out where 70% of people who recently overdosed from a prescription pain medication get a new prescription for pain medication. that's not happening because doctors are doing a bad job.

it's happening because they don't see the whole picture and so this is very important. the second part is about naltrexone and that is we have a drug that reverses overdoses. what we are really focused on his two things, one, getting it in the right hands at the right time and that involves sort of tweaking the science so that we get more user-friendly versions on the street and into the right hands. in fact, overdoses don't necessarily happen near any emergency room or necessarily near a well-trained first responder. very often it is the police and family member or someone else on the playground who is actually the first responder and having a user-friendly way to administer the drug is important and so we have been pushing this

development as well as making it financially possible for communities in high need to sort of deal with it. the third piece of the puzzle is medication assisted treatment. that is, we have a package of very strongly supported evidence -based treatment for dealing with opal you read use disorder and those are medication assisted treatments that involve three drugs, naltrexone, buprenorphine and methadone and what we are really bent on doing is making sure that we expand access to those treatments and really fill that treatment. right now there is about 2.2 million people in this country who haven't opioid use disorder, a little under a blanket treatment and we believe that some people don't believe

that they need treatment and those are hard to get, but there's a lot of people who don't get it because it's not available, they can afford it, they are not fully sure what to do about their addiction and it's those people we believe that we can it all of them into treatment by making the right investments. let me now turn to the progress we have made on each of these areas. as you know, the cdc guidelines came out last week along with the payment strategies and i think that is an important first step and we are coupling that as i will tell you a bit more about in a minute with money to make sure that we educate the physician communities and support the surgeon general in his effort to educate doctors and other providers and really get the word out and make a part of our electronic decision support system. second, in a september we

released a variety of funds to help the cdc expand the use of prescription drug monitoring program across the country. the cdc just put out an announcement where we are going to go from 16 to about 28 state and then hopefully by the end of the year to 50 states where we have really invested in prescription drug monitoring program. the president put out a presidential memorandum in october, where he insisted that all federal departments take measures to do several things. first, to train all their physicians inappropriate prescribing and literally every month we meet and we monitor. we have a dashboard and for example, hh s is now at 93%. dod is moving ahead quickly and

va has been accelerating over the last few months and so we are really pushing our own doctors because in fact, we have to get our own house in order if we ask anyone else to. the president also directed us to review all of our programs to see where it is we are imposing impediments to things like medication assisted treatment, so we are working on clearing those away. third, at the presidential event in west virginia the administration announced that 40 provider groups have voluntarily agreed to up their games in terms of training their members inappropriate prescribing. we meet monthly with those groups and we are getting great responses and everyone is committee to numbers and metrics and we are moving ahead with that. lets me now turn to the budget. you have heard hhs portion of it

is about 1.1 billion dollars in new money. the lions share of that money, about 9.6-- i mean, $960 million is going to expanding treatment opportunities to close that treatment i mentioned earlier. as i said, we believe that we know what to do. we have the treatments. we understand where the holes are in the system, both geographically and sort of institutionally and so in many respects, getting the people who are interested in getting treatment and can't get it or who are doing our outreach work to persuade those who are persuadable we think we know how to do it and it's really about the money.

in addition to that, we are putting $10 million of new funds into expanding the prescribing guidelines and disseminating them in developing support tools based on those that can be used in that position community. this is on top of that new investments we are making the prescription drug monitoring program for a total of about $77 million. finally, we are targeting high need low resource little communities to purchase locked zone-- naltrexone and train first responders, so even though we have seen great progress at the fda and have approved a new version, a user-friendly version of naltrexone that is intranasal so that laypeople can administer it. knowing how to do it, having as many health professionals

trained in how to administer naltrexone in the safest possible way is key, so we are putting to main dollars and targeted that communities of high need and low resources. in wrapping up, we are tracking these trends carefully. we have active monitoring and research program. we track our own progress. we track everyone else's progress. we meet monthly. it starts at the white house and michael and i see each other a lot. we are really sort of focus on those three targeted things. that doesn't mean that we are not doing a variety of other things and michael touched on a few of those in his remarks, but we really think that the evidence points us to make the biggest difference in having the highest impact by focusing on the proved prescribing, expanded

use of naltrexone and really making big investments in medication assisted treatments. when it comes to the states, literally we touch you guys in different ways every day and you'll notice if you look into the details of the budget that the medication assisted treatment grant programs, cooperative agreements and they are really meant to be partnerships. we recognize that one size does not fit all. we recognize circumstances and values differ dramatically across this country. it's a big country. but, most importantly, we also recognize that we have learned things from the science and from our experience so that, in fact, there are things that we know work and there are some things we know don't work and so we

view our partnership as a sort of offering sort of some general guidance on what the evidence base playing field looks like and then we just view ourselves as wanting to partner with you all to make headway. dauntingly, i think this is one of those areas where there is a huge amount of difference in the end is. i think that ideas are shared by parson, share between state and federal governments. some of the execution differs, but that is natural. what's really is the sort of keys to the kingdom here is putting the money-- the right amount of money in the right places and so i will stop there. [applause].

>> thank you, mr. secretary. we will hold the question until we get to the end of the panel. next, i would like to bring up a gentleman who will talk about the pharmaceutical industries efforts and new formulations as well as more informational medically assisted treatment, so these will come promises and mark bosen. [applause]. >> thank you. it's an honor for me to be here this morning. my name is mark bosen. in way of disclosure i work for a company that is the manufacture of a medication called vivitrol which is the extended release version of naltrexone, not to be confused with moloch sound. so, wanted to disclose that bias that i will bring to the presentation. i'm not here to talk exclusively about vivitrol, but more specifically about medication assisted treatment.

my background is a pharmacist and attorney, mostly as a pharmacist. i began my career early on working for the main association of substance abuse programs. it was during a time when it was the early '90s when we only had one fda approved medication to treat opioid addiction that was methadone. buprenorphine was on the horizon would be later approved and used more widely in the year 2000 and then in the year 2006, the fda approved extended release naltrexone to treat alcoholism. four years later the fda approved extended release naltrexone to prevent the relapse of opioid edition and i will talk about all three dozen occasions, but let me start with a history as so of substance abuse treatment and one of the challenges we are still fighting today is that evidence -based substance abuse treatment is not very old.

the american society of addiction medicine the published placement criteria guidelines in 2012, and i like the analogy they use and therefore. they talk about the evolution of substance abuse treatment in the united states as using a cycling reference. i thought, gosh, i had to see how they work that in. they talk about at the beginning of this past century and for many many decades of until modern times the prevalence of substance abuse treatment modality was 12 step programs. twelve-step programs are very effective for thousands, perhaps millions of people, but it was referred to as sort of a unicycle approach. some people can learn how to ride a unicycle and some can do it well, but it is very difficult and there are a number of people who will never despite how much training they get they will ever be proficient and writing a unicycle. so, as substance abuse treatment involved we that we have to

something else for those people who can't quite get recovery with the twelve-step program alone so they added recovery support programs recognizing that substance abuse treatment is not just twelve-step program, isn't just counseling, but also affects so much of your life that we need to put recovery support programs behind a. they talk about the three legged stool and you think should be left housing, education, jobs. those things all contribute to someone's successful recovery pathway. it was referred to as twelve-step program along with psychosocial support, along with lifestyle management sport, education, job training, housing and that was the bicycle, many many more people have successful recovery because the bicycle is easier to write than the unicycle, but we still have people falling over. we still have people suffering with this disease and it was not until we recognized that this

was a brain disorder and in-- it was a brain disorder we had no cure for. it's a lifetime affliction. the description of the tricycle as that component that takes all of the interventions that we have discovered have been successful, psychosocial support, recovery support services, and medication for treatment. we talk about-- director botticelli talked about people being treated with diabetes, 80% of those with diabetic disorders are presumably receiving adequate treatment, you get a small percentage with substance abuse disorders get adequate-- adequate treatment to treatment at all. implementing medication assisted treatment is the current state-of-the-art evidence -based approach to giving people the

best chance of recovery and recognizing that without evidence -based medicine we are not going to get very far and we won't have much impact on this program. to that end, what can the states do and what are the states doing? there are tooth things the states can be doing, what is been were the payment models provide equal access to all evidence -based medicine. director botticelli described the best return on your investment-- investment, investing in substance abuse treatment particular medication assisted in making sure that no one-size-fits-all and making sure patients have access to our fda approved medication and particularly when a consumer some of the issues going on. there are two things that i

would like to highlight. one of them actually started in maryland. washington county maryland was the first county in the united states that decided to use extended-- extended release naltrexone to help with the prisoner release it reentry program. understanding that the revolving door of incarceration often has its roots in substance abuse disorder and by utilizing the medication like extended release naltrexone, which is once a month, last four 30 days and checkable medication, patients have a blockade-- let me back up a little bit. i promised to talk about all three medications at how they work. let's start with methadone. that the oldest medication. methadone is an opiate, a full agonist medication in the same

class as morphine, oxycodone and other long acting pain medications. it's very effective because it is a long acting opiate micaceous self when used under appropriate medical supervision people are able to satiate their cravings because they are getting opiate replacement therapy in on controlled by them and they tend to do-- many patients tend to do well on methadone replacement therapy. they take it every day and often report two and they have to report to a licensed methadone treatment center to get this care. it is not available in the regular primary care setting. has to be done in a methadone treatment facility. the next iteration is another opioid medication called a partial agonist. works similarly to the full agonist in that it binds to the opioid and safety needs the craving and allows people to function and one of its benefits is a can be used in a primary

care setting with credentialing of the prescriber. one of its deficits is prescribers need to get special training for it. they need to obtain a waiver and it's frankly not a difficult process would have the appropriate training, but the number of patients a primary care doctor can see is limited to 100 per doctor. vivitrol or extended release naltrexone is a whole blocker. it sits on the opiate receptor, blocks that affect of opiates if a person were to relapse and use opiates and it lasts for 30 days when given as an injectable form and does not require special training. anyone with any prescribing credential whether it be a allopathic osteopathic physician or mid-level provider can prescribe or administer this medication, but it's highly underutilized because it's

fairly new and it's it on injectable. people when given a choice would rather have an oral medication versus injectables and there's a lot of education because with it. there is also an education gap. there are a number of primary care doctors, even addiction that-- messaging medicine specialist that are unfamiliar with it. i like to tell the story that when i was hired in my life is a nurse and she said now what are they due and i said they make a one-month injectable to prevent alcoholism and she said what, there's one of those drugs, why aren't more people on that. i said i know. we are working on it. what are the states doing with these therapies, particularly with the newest one which is the extended release naltrexone? started to talk about it and i will go back to it. the washington county maryland program recognizing there was a revolving door of people who had

been arrested and incarcerated predominantly as a result of substance abuse addiction disorders, we wanted to figure out a way to get these people into recovery in a way that perhaps did not involve a controlled substance. frankly, some of the criminal behavior had to do with usage, possession and diversion of a controlled substance and providing them with another controlled substance baby was not the preferred mechanism that we wanted to go to. so, utilizing the extended release naltrexone, which is a blocker, nonverbal, nonnarcotic, non- addictive that is acted for 30 days combined that with the psychosocial support and recovery support services, counties like washington county maryland several years ago ran a successful prison reentry program where people would get a shot before they were released

and within that community support providers would provide wraparound services, provide more injections upon release and the fda study of vivitrol said at about six months is a good time to reevaluate the person to see if they still need the medication. is not a lifelong medication and one that someone who with the right support can be an long-term recovery even without the medication. today there are over 100 programs and 30 different states regarding prison reentry jails and prisons. the other application for extended release naltrexone is utilized in the foster care program. i come from arizona. the governor approached us and is said 80% of the children that we removed from the home are not removed because of it abuse, but because of neglect and of that 80%, 80% of those people can-- that abuse can be attributed to some sort of substance abuse disorder.

i would like to be more aggressive and implement the program where we treat the parents of these kids so we can send them back home. that is a program that is in its earliest stages and one that has tremendous theoretical process at arizona study in the implementation there. i will end my remarks because i have big yellow lights and i am pleased to be here and pleased to answer questions you might have at the end. [applause]. >> thank you very much. it was much appreciated. i'm going to speak for a few minutes about what we have been doing a maryland, over the last year, which has occupied a good portion of my time as the governor asked me to head the harrowing and opiate emerges a task force it really started a little more than a year ago or almost two years ago when we were campaigning and traveling around the state and we would talk to thousands of individuals and mostly talking to the local officials.

all of you have done that process and you go through and talk to local officials and say what are the biggest issues you are confronting and we would hear over and over again that it was heroine and it didn't matter if we were in large communities, large urban areas or suburban or small rural towns. we were hearing heroine and the governor decided that once we were elected we would do something about it and get very much involved in trying to address this particular issue. in fact, the governor had lost a cousin to heroine just a few years ago, so he had a personal interest in it as well and so we heard of the devastation to families and how it had overrun local and state efforts and had created essentially public health issue, family crisis as well as a law enforcement issue. so, we set out to what elected

we set out to put together this task force. we brought together experts in medicine, substance abuse treatment and law enforcement. we held meetings, which we called regional summits around the state and we produced the report in december of this past year with 33 recommendations to the governor on actions that we can take to try to address this issue. prior to the final report, we put out an interim report back in the summer. it had 10 steps that we could take immediately because we felt that we didn't want to just wait until the end of the year with the report if there were things we could take through our state agencies. most of that had to do with treatment because we had access to funding in the year-end we could expand the vivitrol

program that was just mentioned that we knew about that was going on at the local level as well as some additional educational and prevention efforts. so, the recommendation-- the final recommendation that-- don't a lot with improving public awareness and prevention, access to treatment, quality of care, alternatives to incarceration for those nonviolent offenders who had substance abuse disorders as well as better law enforcement coordination. as governor michelle talked about, the-- one of the things we also recommended was integrating our systems a lot better. our information systems. and i'm going to say it, one of the stars in our cabinet is our secretary of human resources which heads up all of our social service agencies and he does not come from a public health or

public service area. he comes from information technology and so one of the things he noted right away was the state touches the number of people in different places in the state, but we don't know, we are not coordinated. if they come in with social services and child welfare, we don't know they have also been touched by our criminal justice system or we don't know that they have been touched by our public housing am so we talk about-- and the health aspect as well and so we are trying to put together, bring together a lot of the information with the understanding that privacy is a concern, but-- and it's also-- you probably know as well as i do, you can have john smith in one system, j smith in a different system of a jj smith junior in another system and so is to bring all of that together so we know where we are touching them. after the report while the task force ended and we were in an

implementation process and members of the task force are still involved and still in contact with us because they came from the community. we did not fill it with a just government people. we have individuals in the community, internet programs, some were former users that were involved with us to help us formulate these recommendations. one of the things we looked at because prior to our coming into office a lot of the efforts had to do with overdose prevention, which was quite understandable because of the surge in actual deaths associated with this disease. but, we also said we needed to take a long-term multifaceted approach. we had to, as i would always say we had to stop the pipeline of new users. that is the prevention aspect. that's the prescription drug monitoring that was talked about because the new gateway drug are

these prescription opiates. but, as well as what director botticelli said, we have an issue in terms of some individuals that start with marijuana, tobacco, alcohol, so we have to look at that as well, but a large portion of the new users, 70%, close to 80% are coming up prescription medications, so we needed to make sure we educated the populace, people who didn't think we had a problem as well as deal with that stigma. as people, more and more people talked about it they realized that their neighbor or their neighbor's kid or when they talk to their child that their child the people who were having these problems or talk to a neighbor and it was their husband or wife also had this problem. so, it was an eye-opening program, i mean, process that we went through. we realized as far as the

prevention and educational aspects that there had been a gap since the 1980s, i would say where there was a lot of emphasis on the dare program's. nancy reagan's just say no program. after that there had been somewhat of a gap in terms of public information. one of the things i would say over and over again is virtually every third grader can tell you how bad cigarettes are for you, but they cannot tell you the dangers associated with taking someone else's prescription medications work so, we set out in october, as part of our interim report a public information campaign in the local schools. we also encouraged our state board of education to start implementing substance abuse disorder or drug education earlier in school and not waiting until high school health

classes to start really talking about it. at an age-appropriate level, start as early as elementary school to talk about such things as not taking someone else's prescription medications. including it in more classes. including biology classes, possibly history class. we had opium wards-- wars in this world, so it was to try to get more information out. we also started running public service announcements with some help from the local universities in terms of setting up a competition amongst the local film schools to come up with and develop these messages that could go out to people in their age group as well as a little older. we had an ulterior motive, two of them. number one, we didn't have to pay for them. number two, you get younger people to talk to younger people versus an old guy like me trying to talk to them. those were a number of items

that we submitted to the governor. probably six or seven recommendations require legislation and so we are working through that process. .-dot governor also included additional money in his budget to deal with overdose prevention as well as treatment, additional treatment money and then in a supplemental budget we added additional money that is administered through the court system, which provides alternatives to incarceration for those who their main issue is that they have a substance abuse disorder. ..

and what are the modalities we can use to treat it, but that is

the holy grail and i know there are benefactors chasing that. i don't know how close we are though. my guess is we are not close yet, but certainly we know that is the next iteration. we know that is the next iteration. interestingly enough. it is a stable medication used for short-term pain. but it isn't so. but he fda several years ago found that it wasn't very effective and withdrew from the market and so the regulators do keep up with the research and constantly looking at these ancient medications.

we don't see it anymore because it isn't on the market anymore. and that is mostly because there was a lack of risk-benefit information that was positive. but like i said the companies are chasing. it is as much as we get from time to time. we really do view ourselves as a partner on the health care team to try to improve the health and well-being of people throughout the world and do it in as safe a manner as possible and i hope that is a message i can relay on the entire industry. >> there's a lot of research that seems to be going on with the whole medical marijuana and that is an area that a number of entities are looking into whether that can address some of the issues and some of the areas of pain.

>> really good question. three parts to the answer. one, the industry chasing this and part of the reason they are chasing it is the drug abuse is putting a lot of money to help them chase and also partnering with university researchers across the country. and there is an extraordinarily active program to help with the industry to develop the non- opioid pain medications. find out how under utilized things like cognitive behavioral therapy is a. and making sure those diffused appropriately is a second part to the answer.

the third part is the abuse deterrent formulations and we had a first generation that's out there now that is really in its infancy but there is a sort of new science in the pipeline that will potentially make the abuse deterrent formulations really abusive and not something that can be defeated by fairly easy science. there is reason to be optimistic. i served one of my constitutional duties as the chairman of the board and is so i'd say about half of the folks have some kind of drug or alcohol issue in their past

which they often say is resolved, so a member of the board members are interested in are a poor working a program so you made a point about we've gone a long way to believe in the 12 step programs that are the key. some folks are of the school of thought that it is the only effective way to treat addiction, but there are things that happen in life where it's difficult for most people to continue on in that so we've been at the point that we have actually worked against a stigma against people that aren't in 12 step programs and if someone is seeking a part what are you doing for your recovery. i just pray or a working hard,

usually that that isn't perceived well but that goes back into the issue of stigma and addiction and we are starting to learn more and more things. my only problem is i am still learning to find acceptance for the idea because basically i feel like with methadone you are carrying on this cycle of the opioid addiction and in some way -- and a citizen to ni citizens is a remnant of the 70s 70s can't we do better than this but i know that there's still some places for it but i think what we are talking about here is a growing area where we are all still learning and it's hard to agree that this is a health crisis that we are still learning. i am with the school of thought and we just legalized medical marijuana for children's

diseases and traumatic injury in pennsylvania. but i'm one of those believers that marijuana is a gateway drug for a lot of folks. so i guess what i'd done again has made a speech. but i really appreciate the experience. if we have folks who put that out there i think it makes it a lot easier for other people out there that have the issue of addiction in their lives and families. but look forward to working with you folks and governors as we go forward. >> we are quick putting together our task force. they come in with a bias, 12

step works. not being involved in learning the process. the bias that i have is is a bit concerned that the concern that you have that methadone treatment. that's why we talk about quality of care is there an exit ramp from that type of treatment, is it something else that we would then be able to get your body off of these treatments but i don't know that. >> is a basic question the drug monitoring program to be

expanded to the 50 states out of the virgin islands and other territories >> my understanding is that it is state specific many have a monitoring program. some states like maryland are voluntary but we have the legislation to make it mandatory registration and inquiry. we are still in session so i don't want to -- things look good now but i probably just jinxed the whole thing. there is resistance particularly from the medical community that there is so much on the other side of that is putting pressure on them to come to understand that this is where we are going and i think what the federal was talking about is that there is

integration with the other states. >> 49 of the states voluntarily have the drug monitoring programs. there's just one that isn't that seems to be on a glide path to get there. what we are a trained to do is support them using the best technology for the electronic health records so that it becomes easy for the doctors to track things. if you don't make it easy for doctors given how busy they are and how much they have flying at them, you will never get there. so that is where we are making our investments. we do work with the territories, and we have to work on that with you. the other thing that we are trying to do with the prescription drug money program

is examined across states. in a number of states have made great progress. there's one state that can now connect to 28 other states but we are moving in fits and starts we are working with states about to have original outreaches where we help you with best practices. spin it as a pharmacist who practiced in the industry and father of the growth i would like to recommend to the state as you consider the usefulness, one of the challenges, one of the resistance when it comes to the mandatory usages is what do i do now? so i found someone who is clearly addicted. what are the resources in my

community that i can get this person treatment? and it's stunning mostly because of the new aspect of biomedical waste treatment -- medical treatment of the people on the ground in that setting and in the independent pharmacies and a chain of the pharmacies i would suspect many of them don't know what to do next. if you turn them away and turn them off it didn't go away they will get them from somewhere else and turned to the street. we have to have a plan and program to teach prescribers and pharmacist what do you do now that you know and that is the next iteration. >> thank you, governor, for your leadership in the state. i have a question. i am under a conversation i had at the head of the emergency

room and i said when people come into the door and they are insured and prescribed opioid-based drugs, why would you give them such a high dosage and continue to do this? he said our whole training is centered around keeping people out of pain. i responded by saying if you knew her to have this injury that would lead to a lifetime of addiction why would you keep doing it and he said we are rated by how we keep people out of pain by the federal government and they are reimbursed and tied to that so in that sense that we are incentivizing this overprescription because of the standards which if that is the case people have to change can you comment on that? >> it's a great question. as part of the answer that simple and part that's complicated. the simple part is the two

important things that we are in the middle of studying this so i will give you the report of where we are. question number one how much money is on the line if you prescribed more? so let's say there's a connection between more prescribing, more pain relief, higher ratings how much would you benefit financially the answer is we are talking pennies, not enough money to get anyone to change their behavior so that's one thing. when you prescribed more aggressively do you get higher ratings? there've been three or four studies done of this and the answer is no you don't get higher ratings and sometimes you get lower because inside when you prescribed more you tend to spend less time talking to your patients and the thing that gets you good scores is talking to your patients to solve the problems with you. third, having said that, the

perception is real and what you point off we hear every day the problem is one of education and understanding so let me pose to you our problem which is it's very important to manage pain. the major source of data on whether we are doing it reasonably is those questions he referred to on the h. tap which is the quality program. one thought was let's get rid of the questions because then there will be no misunderstanding that we are not. on the other hand that is the major source on how we are doing that. so, really what i think we are going to do is icky hard look at how the questions are asked and

then we have to go out and educate and work with the community because in fact if they pursue that path, they are not going to get higher scores are extra money that we are going to continue to have the problem. >> thank you, governor this has been very helpful. i know that the governor is collecting a few of the documents that we have spoken of today. not that i want to copy the report private like to contrast and compare those -- >> it's actually on the website but i will make sure to get it. thank you so much. >> i think that was it. thank you all. [applause]

were from the annual meeting of the lieutenant governors association a panel discussion on veterans issues including homelessness and job placement. this is about an hour. [laughter] >> absolutely. thank you governor that was a great session. i would like to ask general blackburn to come up to the stage. i know that this is an issue that the lieutenant governor is leading on national. before i was elected the governor, i continue to serve as an officer in the national guard, and as a judge advocate

so i got the chance to serve with folks who have been to war and getting a lot of exposure to the veterans. and as lieutenant governor, one of the things i wanted to do is find a way to connect more and more with folks from the military and veterans that two or all of the major military installations in pennsylvania. and asked a lot of questions and listened. one of the things we found out was that we have to get a little bit better at communicating with our veteran community and connecting with them to the programs that they are in need of so it is a fundamental issue of communications. i have the privilege of introducing him. they will talk about that issue of the folks here and finding ways to support them and serve

them as they've done for us so join me in welcoming the director scott blackburn of the mighty mine va task force in u.s. department of veterans affairs. [applause] it's not in my script. [laughter] but that was all hell breaking loose now, we are going to have carol and she's a retired general and vice president of military veterans affairs from pennsylvania, and the panelists

are going to play off each other so with that, general, take over [applause] >> that's what you get when you put a general and a director on the panel. so thank you, governor, appreciate that. i must say retired general sounds good to me serving with the commandant at the college it is also great to switch over and serve the public sector. i continue to be in the public service. i was asked to speak today about some of the challenges of the veteran because i've seen both sides of it. both as an individual that did the transition and then as one of the private sector that is assisting the veterans. so, it's important to understand that every year, about a quarter of a million, 250,000 returned

to the communities across america. at the 2014 study done by joe lieberman and kathryn stewart we agree the general computation considers our veterans as broken heroes who are more likely and the nonveterans to be unemployed , undereducated, homess, experiencing mental health issues, but the reality is so much different and so much more complex. and it's important that we all challenge these claims in order to change the public perceptions of our veterans. these are not broken heroes. i like to think of them as hidden heroes. are there any veterans in the room? stand up if you are. [applause] does he look like a pilot to

you? he always wears blue suits. i don't quite get back. you would never know it. but i would add i think i can speak for most veterans that we certainly don't consider ourselves heroes. we are we're getting the job for the nation granted i don't think you'll ever hear any of us calling them that. the majority return home seeking new challenges and opportunities. looking for ways to continue to serve the community and their country so just think about it. almost half of today's veterans were members of the all volunteer force. so, it makes sense these were individuals who volunteer to serve in uniform so it follows that when they return home they volunteer to serve their communities. and they are uniquely qualified to do just that.

they are experienced in their leadership abilities. they are training their own skill sets, petitions that we continue to seek solutions that continue to face the communities. in recent years we have seen the veterans leading across the nation very important movements. think of disaster relief and community preparedness or do you think of the team rubicon, think of promoting physical fitness, who ran around the nation with the flag? team red, white and blue. the home campaign increasing obtained or the student veterans in america. so these folks have come back. too often the negative stereotypes about the veteran dominate the public dialogue. it's more likely than the

nonveterans as i said to experience unemployment, incarceration, homelessness and other issues and those notions are in fact misconceptions. they paint as i said a veteran that is broken and as a result, many of us feel pity more than respect and i think of them as hidden heroes. we need to make sure we understand who they are and highlight their contributions to the communities and the nation. a great report is out there that i recommend you all read. 250 veteran health index. it was prepared with american express, got your six, the hewlett foundation and points of life. the compass of the report was to foster understanding and pacific strength of the veteran population and provide a data

informed platform through which to eliminate the misconceptions about veterans so i would like to cite some of the findings. the veteran unemployment rate has been employment rate has been below every year for the last decade from 2015 to 2014 the average non- veteran unemployment rate was 13% higher than the veteran. income from 2005 to 2013 veterans had consistently earned significantly more than about homelessness, nonveterans comprised 91% of the homeless division while veterans comprised 8%. there are 578,000 homeless individuals and almost 50,000 of them are veterans so that is a small portion of the total population. posttraumatic stress disorder which many like to think of as