.. eleven years on my state public utility commission in south carolina. if you know anything about south carolina with the state that does not have the political balance on its commission. i was either one of one or one of seven, or two of seven depending on where things -- is not a very uncomfortable around commonplace for me. what i feel and what i hope will have going forward is the need to address the communication

need of this nation. there is is a lot of work to do when it comes to broadband coverage. mobile broadband is something i care about in particular. really connecting communities and really bridget in the divide. those are the things i care about. i trusted those were not have partisan. >> do you plan on serving out your term? or or would you like to be renominated. >> i plan on commune completing my term which ends on the 30th of june. this part of the process is something that i do not necessarily have that much of a say in, tradition would have it that particular post, one of the features usually one that the minority leader has a say in. i read things in the paper that i'm not sure what is going to happen with that, i have enjoyed my past seven and half years. it's been the highlight of my professional life. i have been able to influence that in some cases change policy

directives for the betterment of those who previously did not have a voice and previously did not see themselves as beneficiary in the community communication space. i'm very proud of that and would love to continue to serve. and i'm not uncomfortable with this, that is not necessarily my choice or i should say not a decision that i could make it personally. but i've enjoyed it. i think i record speaks for itself. >> you have about one month left of being in the majority, what is the agenda for the fcc in the next month? >> one of the things that you know we have been asked by the leadership to not make any major moves unless we have total consensus. so the last month and a half or so we have been going through items that we feel we can agree

on, we have been going through and green lighting issues and concerns that i think push our agenda forward. i do not think we'll crank the backup into full gear until after the meeting and probably in february and we'll see where things go from here. >> let's bring david from communications daily and tour conversation. >> one of the things that the republican on the hill and at the fcc have been most clear about wanting to undo is your net neutrality decision also called open internet and how you regulate broadband. while beer biggest concern if they move ahead with their promises to undo that? >> i'm very proud of that decision that was upheld by the courts. it offers certainty for consumers and for companies. it is built on the strongest

framework that will ensure their freedoms or the opportunities that we honestly take for granted. where the envy of the rest of the world because we have a framework that says if i have my own device that i can use it if it's not harmful to the network. five a business or entity webpage that our internet service provider might have opposing interest, that provider cannot discriminate or prefer someone else's content or website or business over my. >> this is very empowering and enabling. this has opened the door for millions of people. so many waited and spoke, we joke about it but they literally did crash the website when they weighed in. that's a good thing because it shows how significant and important this decision is. i want that innovation and positive spirit of freedom and

openness to continue. part of what i hope everyone will be mindful of is that we have certainty now. the rules were based on principles that we had bank guide and by since 2005. if there are disruptions within that, then honestly the rest of the ecosystem could be compromised. so i'm hopeful even though i didn't necessarily agree with everything that we voted to approve, but overall i thought it was an incredible framework that will allow this country to be the leader in the world when it comes to innovation and opportunity in communities large and small. i will be vigilant, mindful i'm

vocal about wishing for that to continue. >> to think there is much of a chance, they clearly want to get rid of broadband reclassification which is the traditional phone regulation of broadband, but do you think there is much room for compromise on the underlying net neutrality rules in terms of how you deal with this? >> one of the things that people don't often talk about is the 700 plus rags and rules that we dispense up. it's not your mother and father's title ii. it's not the legacy framework that we use to regulate the telephone service. it is very different. it is mindful of this evolutionary nature that the broadband ecosystem has to offer us. it is not the same, the title might read the same but the application is incredibly different. people want and need certainty. when we talk about what our goals and objectives are in terms of connecting america,

what tools we use to encourage and to ensure that companies are building the infrastructure needed to enable all of these incredible opportunities. if you do not have a backstop when it comes to pull attachments which are part of this framework it enables, then what encourages those companies or cities and municipalities to cite or having reasonable pole attachment rate. what mechanism do we use to encourage all of this. that's why i'm saying we have to be careful and mindful about some of the things.

can we further improve? maybe. hopefully we will take a scalpel approach and not a sledgehammer, i think a sledgehammer approach would have negative unintended consequences. >> have you talked to the current fcc commissioners on the republican side about what their agenda will be? they're going to control the agenda and one will be the chairman for at least a while about how they want to approach things in the next year? are there areas you are starting to look at where you can work at with them. >> i have not spoken to them since the election in terms of policy. we are very clear that we have an interesting, interactive relationship and a lot of the positions are very clear about on the table for a long time. 90% of the votes are unanimous, some critical votes have full and along party lines. i was say there's no real surprises. i continue to be hopeful. we just had one particular decision that when it comes to a particular provider those not

following our rules when it comes to service and the commissioner and i who is the person that you are referencing that is said to be the more likely interim chair. we issued a joint statement because we want our universal service regime to be one that is clear of fraud and abuse. when an entity does that we can agree on that. so we've have times when we've come together in certain items where people might say. it's about connecting america and ensuring that our funds are appropriately spent. i am mindful of the changes on the horizon but i'm hopeful that the spirit in which everyone is a custom it comes to regulation will be realized regardless of

where the partisan or political power will and. >> are there strict rules on how you can have a conversation with fellow commissioners and what you think about reforming that now that the new administration is coming in to reform the fcc processes? >> i can one-on-one speak with commissioner. it's when it goes to three and it's a majority then you have to go through noticing requirements. this is is an issue when it comes to reform something i've been talking about for long time. i was chair for a number of years for the state federal universal service joint board. even if you are not poised to make a final decision, what was happening was a strange round-robin approach meaning if i'm on a phone and another commissioners on the telephone than the third commissioner who is on the board wants to call in

and one of us would have to rotate off, not a final decision making place, here a joint board and all the commissioners cannot weigh in. that's very inefficient. i believe that hopefully will look at modifying those rules again. transparency is key particularly when we come up to decision-making but when you're talking about joint boards and other entities, other panels that we have at the fcc that are informative, to have the strict rules in place was an efficient and doesn't make a lot of sense. common sense reforms would be a positive. and i look forward to working with my colleagues in congress to that end. >> over the years that you've served has a got more partisan? >> it's gotten may be more interesting and more intense. my first couple of years i said

again with the same political balance i can say that there was not as much intense when it comes to our interaction. part of that is because we view the application side of the regulatory equation a little differently. i think at the end of the day we want the same results. we want to community to thrive and be robust. we want a functional marketplace when it comes to providers in the companies that we have some oversight. but we do disagree and sometimes very visibly when it comes to the application of that. i am hopeful that everyone will take a pause and will really reset the narrative. my natural posturing and comfort

level is not one of intense confrontation. i really want to do what is best, i take my oath seriously. i want want to do is best for communities large and small. particularly those women left on the wrong side of the divide and look at how can we ensure that the communications act and all that it instructs us to do, how do we make that applicable to all and that's the most important thing to me. >> you just mention the opportunity agenda. one of the things you did was adopted a lifeline overhaul order that extended low subsidies for low-income's consumers consumers to their broadband service. how concerned are you that the republicans are going to their hamstring that are cut it back? currently has a 2.25 annual budget, obviously they want to

cap it at a hard cap of 2,000,000,000 can you elaborate at all? >> you outlined you outlined what i think is the only difference to me and application works the same, because were very mindful, i live within my budget. and i could call it a cat because i only make a certain amount after taxes, but i live within a budget, and i really think that i do not get intensely involved with the wording or phrasing of certain things. i am intensely passionate about this program being reformed, so more competition and more providers will weigh into this so there will be more opportunity for individuals to

really get connected. we have done an incredibly great job when it comes to the infrastructure side of the equation with what we call the connecting funds, the rate with the school and library's funds, that takes care of some of the infrastructure and what some people call anger institution, we have not done a fabulous job when it comes to affordability side. we can build all of the incredible broadband infrastructure that would be the envy of the world and a people cannot afford to use it, then we have only tackled were in essence building this incredible bridge to nowhere. so that's why why i'm so passionate about the lifeline program and why i was not enamored with a cap with the need and opportunity in demand grows, are we going to say to the person who comes after that 2.1 or 2,200,000,000 that you need not apply comes we have

capped out? >> i think that would be a very sad state of affairs to tell than person in line that they don't have the opportunities their neighbors have and that is why it was for budget which gives you a little bit more death stare then a hard cap which means nobody else needs to apply. >> another one of your causes you championed is inmate calling service rates, you have a campaign going on right now for the so call phone injustice which your tweeting about, what are you explain this issue and what you are hoping to achieve. >> williams of americans do not realize that there is a severe economic crisis in burden and the market dysfunction when it comes to what we call the inmate calling services regime. what that is, if you don't know

about it thing great for you, but there are millions of people in america that have at least one family member who is serving time who is behind bars. for the last several years what is been happening is this incredibly sad and perverse egregious structure where inmates or their families mostly our pain incredible high rates. in a couple of particular instances we've heard where one person paid $17 a minute for a call. that's an anomaly but it has happened more than once. typically people who have a person or someone in person and that includes the attorneys who represent these individuals pay and access of a dollar a minute. that is unaffordable to most of us. that is on incredibly on affordable what comes to these families.

the majority was someone in prison are on fixed income. many of these families are really experienced severe economic hardship because of their day to keep in touch. and so your cnn infrastructure that because of some of the kickbacks and some people might put pushback on it but the amount of money a proportion have been going to some of the facilities and they have been enriched by the structure so there's no economic incentive to be the low-cost provider, there's all the incentive in this framework to the highest cost person gets a contract award for the particular facility. that is passed on by the

families and it's an incredible economic cycle that nobody wins. less than 40% of those inmates keep in touch with the families on a regular basis because they cannot afford. it's something about working out for number of years. we have a little bit more insanity when it comes to intrastate rates but 85% of the calls made to and from the facilities are within a particular state. families are paying skyhigh prices. it is a regime where nobody wins except for the providers. and except for the facilities and we need to call more attention to this. >> so what is the hold up of getting reform? >> one of the things we have a stay right now the court and one of the challenges is whether not we have authority when it comes to intrastate rates. there's not been any argument

when it comes to the intrastate with the federal side of the weather not we have authority, we believe we do when it's a regulated monitoring intrastate rate. i am hopeful that the agency will affirm its position and if we are given our day in court to challenge, at the end of the day regardless of where the call is made to and from, families deserve i believe a reasonable and fair rates. it is a societal benefit of people keep in touch. 75% of those incarcerated back into the facility after five years in a large part of it is because they can afford to keep in touch with their loved ones. something that we should look at. something that i believe is important. it's costing us dearly that

revolving door it has to stop. one way we can do that is to have reasonable and fair rates. >> in your view what you think tom wheeler's legacy is? >> i think tom wheeler is an incredibly multi dimensional individual who has got backgrounds and table and mobile, when i think about him i say this person has been on the cusp of two of the most incredibly life-changing when it comes to the communications in the us, industries industries that we now take for granted, cable as well as -- he is a person person passionate about providing opportunities, looking through a current day lands with some legacy background.

i believe that he has been an incredibly effective chairperson , moving the needle in challenging all of us. there's things inside and outside the agency. i think your regulator should be one that not only is in tune with the times, but will challenge all of us, consumers and companies alike to be better at it. so i think that even if you don't agree with every decision or every speech is made, he has made us better at what our respective portfolios or gains are. i think history will be kind to him. >> what about the commissioner who is the ugly leased interim chairman. >> he is incredibly bright. i don't know where he gets all of his references from, if you

ever watch some of his speeches from the days, his incredibly witty. but he is extremely bright. he is committed i believe to ensure that america is connected, i mentioned to you that there are places where we do agree. and where we do agree we are embracing of that. there some places and avenues that we diverge, but what i am hopeful if all predictions are true, that will meet and come together, and really not allow one or two things where we might differ cause us to not move ahead unanimously with an item that i think would be for the good of the country.

i start from the 50-yard line, i don't start from a place or posture where i'm going to get 100% of everything that i want. compromises on my middle name, but it is a posture and a place from which i start. i am willing and i believe in reciprocity. >> is there any chance, there's been some rumors and one of the democrats was not reconfirmed, is there any chance and you intend to serve out your term through june 30 and you could stay longer, is is there any chance you quit before the if it would deny the republicans a quorum to actually act? >> i've been hearing that, i don't know people are giving me credible or not for being incredibly crafty or not, that is not how i'm wired. the way that i am wired as i

mentioned is to make a difference in an atmosphere that will allow for input and opportunities. again, i'm not looking to get 100% of anything that i ask for. i am looking for certain baselines that i hope where we can agree. so i'm not planning some type of, again thank you for giving me credit and it's incredibly noble from that perspective, that's not something that i'm planning. i take my oath seriously. and it is not any type of trying to be crafty, that honestly is not my makeup, i'm here here to serve and i'm a natural public servant and i don't think part of that is some grand vision of being a disruptor. >> commissioner is someone who is served as interim chair, what is your advice for the incoming interim chair?

>> start at the 50-yard line. honestly i think it works of being inclusive and attempting to find common ground. if you disagree and one, two, three things i don't i don't think you should throughout an entire item, i don't think you should compromise your core principles because i will not. so when it talks about the four pillars in the communications act which includes competition and consumer protections, those things are very much important and they should never be on the table when it comes to compromise. but i really think what work for me in those five and half months rice served, is that we talked, we, we had meetings every couple months with my colleagues, and we attempted to work out items where we could agree. i think if we start from that vantage point, was the goal and objective in which we want to do, what's the the statement of

the item and if we can work from there i think at the end of the day we can come to's consensus and in a less contentious way. we can draft and vote on orders that would continue to be the envy of the world. that is my goal and my advice to anyone late in the agency. >> time for one more question. >> well there's always been speculation about what your future plans might be. and since were getting close we don't know exactly how long, any thoughts you might have on a future including maybe possibly running for congress in a particular seat in south carolina for certain distinguished gentleman steps down. >> let me answer by saying this, whatever is next for me, it will include and embrace all of the experiences i've had over the

past seven and half and plus 11 years on the state commission. i'm very comfortable in the space, i'm very moved and excited about connecting communities and serving. i'm really excited about what the intersect of health and technology, what that can breathing, so so whatever is next for me i will embrace it and i will assure you that you will see continuity when it comes to my core principles and interest no matter what my title will or will not be, it will definitely be in line with what you have seen with the title of commissioner. did that answer your question? >> that was a very good commissioner thank you for being

on the communicator. >> it's been my pleasure. [inaudible] [inaudible] >> c-span where history unfolds daily, 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies, it's brought to today by your cable or satellite provider. >> this is book tv on c-span to come television for serious readers, here's our primetime lineup, starting shortly we read lead a discussion on the inner universe. then mit professor remembers william f buckley's television program and we wrap up our monday primetime lineup at 1145 with author with author courtney