created as a public service says york public television company provided today by your internet or television provider. >> host: michael o'rielly

of the fcc are in january january 20th year life changes how does a change of that point quick. >> thinks for having me. it is up pleasure to be back. the change amid ministrations will bring change to the activity of like to say very few people vote on telecommunications policies but the it out, does have an impact with of majority in new of the makeup so it will alter our current balance of the breakdown of our five member panel. it will launch a radically change i am sure there are things that will be different but we can get back to regular work. >> host: what do you mean? >> i have worked for quite

awhile with different commissions provide tend to find this commission most troubling however approaches digit - - issue is how i can be involved with certain activities of a bite to believe the majority or minority that you can participate to work with your colleagues collaborative lady in a process with the best outcome. the issues generally and not partisan and good idea is should be taken no matter who offers them but current commission has operated that way. >> host: after january 20th water your priorities? >> they have to flow from the decisions made by the unprecedented elect. i do not speak for him but him and his team had a very successful election outcome

rightfully so to make some big decisions regarding the sec including a new chair% and the direction for the commission so with those decisions will play some small part or whatever role this past to be by anticipate being there with those issues before us. >> host: your role as a commissioner as not affected by. >> correct. >> host: to republican commissioners one of you will be named to the interim chairman so do you have any clarity of that? people think it is probably the senior commissioner. >> i would be surprised if there was information suggesting otherwise. but if it works out that way

and they pick my colleague for myself i will be happy to participate in one ever role they ask of me to do. the question has been posed a interested in chairmen? i say the chips will fall where they make. >> host: was looking forward to doing with the majority? precarious for things and it is humbling because as the president-elect can set some structural changes that will have the influence of the new chair person, to set the agenda but i believe there are some things the commission can do that would be helpful going for word the number of things that are on the books and have been for a long time but don't make sense in the current marketplace. to address the structure and

organization and procedures of the commission itself the internal structure has broken down or by to see that improved. and move forward rather pro-growth innovation agenda . i realize those are buzzwords but there is something the commission can do to be regressive to edge dressing attended san towers for the next generation of wireless networks. and the think the commission will play in to the chair person but also to undo the bad policies adopted by this commission on the partisan basis. would have the input of my fellow commissioner who was not considered or even given the time of days so the

number of items that have been adopted in that fashion i think will be an activity for the next commission to address. >> to have cared to elaborate on that last category greg. >> my defense and a bunch of various from a common theme of the current share to push the agenda with the majority but not seeking power implant -- our input to or that is not mainstream or sustainable or built for collegiality in my opinion. i think title to never should have been adopted the first place it is harmful policy even further than that i think it should be explored in the broader sense i have problems with what is contained within those decisions that are

codified under t6 with the commission's rules and that is a priority but that is up to the chair person. >> water some of the problems that you have with net neutrality? >> the most basic and fundamental there were no demonstrable problems that exist in the marketplace to redress -- address. that was the attempt to redress what the court a college trying to guess what the market would do but in doing so brcs stopping behavior that could be beneficial to consumers. that paid prior transition we began that however we have no evidence of that being in place and maybe that is necessary for a number of different activities for consumers.

you will want to have a signal or network course speed to prioritize over e-mail or video. the internet is prioritized like that today and never has spent that way so there is some fundamental disagreements over the policies and a certain the disagree with title ii. >> host: would you support any type of regulation? >> i want to see a market failure and demonstrable harm but the commission's job is to understand what is happening in the marketplace to follow closely with the determination when i presuppose'' what happened sometimes those rules are still on the books and it is how style because our

decisions import -- impact on what customers and companies do and the products that they enjoy. >> also you have expressed concerns that the current leadership is trying to do something like that? can you tell your concerns and hopes? >> following a pound of this early when the commission started to consider the matter, we asked the team that was looking into the issue and was told the bureau was looking at this issue we kept asking for the latest update new to report. over many months. of the day after the election a letter came from the commission regarding questions of certain activities of certain companies followed by another letter with the same

thing. a do think it has fallen down on the job bob that side of the equation. i have real concerns that if you look at what is operating in the marketplace today consumers are enjoying the benefits of certain products and features of their wireless providers even in dollar wired space but i don't want to cut off this consumers from beneficial services but understand before we regulate those that you will see the adversarial role is quite contentious. >> you also spoke of the need for internal fcc reform >> i've put forward 25 ideas

and to make the pledge when i ran for congress have a like to believe if i was in the majority that they would be adopted as well so i will get that opportunity to educate those changes be made. not majority or minority because it was intending to eliminate the power of any way. and that is key there is 22 left the others have not made the cut yet but they would be considered next year but what is critical is the public release of documents that we will consider at the open meeting. we get the items three weeks ended vans that is the time when the document should be made available publicly so everybody knows what we're talking about to see what is

considered and voted upon. oftentimes people critiqued the item put their information is completely wrong because they had the race to improperly or misinformation. they're operating under a different set of facts. it is just inaccurate because people don't know the base line. masoud this in the debate when the commission was considering the rules in this ariane and in doing so we saw a number of people from capitol hill all boils sides of the aisle trying to make those draft rules available so before we made final decisions people could understand what was debated to make a critique of the situation at hand. >> host: what about combining or eliminating the

different bureaus? >> when i mentioned process i think that should be on the table. our structured today is based on the old markets that does not exist in this universe. the lines are blurring in the commission needs to adopt that change as well i think that will be part of the considerations. >> expressing a lot of interest in reversing title ii to address that neutrality so once you are in the majority do you wait and see first? >> and all present were given vice to former employers are friends but to move forward with to under the policies that were

wrongly imposed. if congress would act in this space i would be supportive and i have been in the past four will never issues they make we will implement the law that they enacted in the meantime we need to take something off the books. >> privacy? >> bath flows from the the net neutrality decision the chairman made that argument now we have the mandate under net neutrality. i think one flows from the other and there is the appropriate agency of the ft c the federal trade commission has done a good job but on this issue to support the activities that the commission did on brand upon negative broadband so i imagine that is part of the

examination. >> has the trump transition team? >> they are getting obtuse speed i want to be careful about my comments with their activities but i am sure they will be more active as the season goes on how decisions were made and then be at a place that they can make decisions for the president-elect to make a final decision. >> and to know the transition team at all question mcadoo node jeff from capitol hill i have interacted with him but not so much with dr. jameson and the third person is part of the team i think they are very thoughtful and actors with the communication

policy space l. aboard to working with them. >> the question has been raised is there a need for the fcc? >> perhaps then folks that would like to eliminate the commission as a whole but i do think there are functions that our important but how do you handle spectrum or the commercial side or those consumption's now whether it is the fcc or something else or reinvigorated those are open questions for anybody to consider by a employed that need by all - - and also open to considering all changes. >> one thing that will affect how fast you can undo what the democrats did when

they had the majority when the commissioner was stepping down with the fcc to credit commissioner sochi you have any insight or wild guesses as to what the chairman will do or what he should do? >> the nomination reprocess in is done by the u.s. senate. i have a number of good friends there. i leave that to them how that shakes out budget i don't have any clue what he mayor may not do but to resign the instance of the new commission i would not be surprised if that is the case.

those are similar problems we have had been. >> to have any of their areas of concern were the democratic majority may push something through? >> we're trying to find those items that are not controversial we do have some items we will have a meeting in today's that will be the last so we try to work with through that what could be or what is not appropriate and i am not at liberty to tell a discuss internal negotiations but we could discuss if it is the open meeting or circulation. >> commissioner what you think the current commissioners legacy will be quite. >> that this is an open question. it is partly tied to the decisions that he made.

we have a very friendly relationship personally but we disagreed on the outcome and i imagine we will address the outcome side. i am travel after many years , some of the legacy in terms of policy would no longer be an existence for the commission. they could be adopted in a bipartisan collegial way. and i don't see that incurred so to improve the commission functions so we don't do that began - -

again. >> president-elect is a nominee from my party and i give him all the credit for the campaign that they ran. i share his views on policy i do appreciate he is supporting to eliminate the two regulations for everyone adopted. people say that this simplistic but if you look at how the commission operates we would have a much smaller code if we could eliminate a number of regulations that no longer needed. soul every month gifford take three items that was the regulatory burden and if we had to strike to regulations which could be done a lot could go then we would have a much more effective and efficient

agency with more opportunity for providers to serve. >> what is your view? >> and also my first employment. the people we worked with in the past and congress had a wonderful number of people the chairman is the great outcome might can imagine you will have a lot of activity with his past subcommittee. >> media ownership is another issue. do you see that popping up quite. >> i do. it gets to the opportunity of a statutory obligation in

did think we dropped the ball and in doing so we had the opportunity to prove the cost of ownership for those limitations that existed from the johnson threw nixon administration with the elimination and the fed chairman they were willing to do so but the policies put forward will only help three commissioners could be adopted so the policy was not changed endeavor like to think we could change that with limitations while still protecting diversity in public-interest. >> one more question on net neutrality running a more bipartisan commission. but if you revoke title ii

and net neutrality? >> that definitely flows from whoever is the chair person and their agenda but i suspect i would not be surprised the new minority could have trouble with the activities they are doing but at the same time and think we can build a better practice going for word there's only so much you can have with net neutrality the what we fought about for a long time with an opportunity to consider what they would like to do. there is some room but i understand if this say tough couple months ahead as other

people have strong views but now at the same time to have good policy to find commonality with the commission going for word. >> one of the things. >> i never make comments regarding pending riposte and with the decisions you have to make a case and and those applicants who will have to make a decision at the appropriate time. >> what about cybersecurity? getting attention right now with what happened during the campaign. but not, you have a role in that correct. >> it is a very important

issue that congress has been aggressive to find the right solution. as the other agencies are as well but the fcc is limited by the statutes that govern it and while i do believe the government has a role to monitor this space they are not authorized so i am troubled by the administration not just to do with a pink is investor interest the appropriate action is to go to congress and they will have paid will presented the argument to the congress and the american people to authorize the commission to do something. until then i'm reluctant to take action and in fairness

it is in your best so they're working as hard as possible with any type of intrusions that security problem is a tough circumstance for their network. they're probably better positioned than the fcc could ever be. >> in the two minutes we have left, what about the update of that incentive auction? >> it is not for lack of interest, and they don't share any information they said that this is same information that i have. and what is happening or who is participating but that prevents us from moving markets we have an opportunity to comment flu is bidding or not.

so that is problematic but i don't have anything to share in you will have to see what the outcome is. there are so many stages if you move out the calendar to look at the end date and we will decide we do have an end date in the statue when it is supposed to be received by a belief notwithstanding some of those decisions i like to believe we will have a successful auction with the need for spectrum with those comments that occupy the space with the statute underline the commission's activity