they are concerned about the opaque nature of theitu. having civil society groups, non-voting member states joined the itu for $35,000. that is a way of generating money. the new can get certain documents. i have found it -- then it you can get certain documents. i have found it difficult. you need to know somebody. i think it is something they need to work on. >> there are recommendations that the itu have the non-

governmental kotte members. is that something you would agree should happen? if not, there must be a way for them to have some significant way of participating in the session. >> the itu follows the general u.s. model of have the nation's states as the voting members. this is the architecture that was worked out for us. there are opportunities to try to find greater roles for non- agent status participants. there are other forms of membership that are non-voting. it is an objective to find better ways to make the work, this is true of the other u.n.

organizations, more available, but does of the torah, in terms of non-nation states. >> commissioner, he talked about -- you talked about the proposal. is it possible to have any kind of a light touch regulatory regime without threatening internet freedom? it is not possible. >> it is a sales pitch for a much bigger problem. >> thank you. i yield back. >> the gentle lady yields back. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from california. >> gentleman, a general question, i am sure somebody has asked this. everything has been said, not everybody has said it, what did

congress do to ensure a strong position that the internet remain free and open without harmful international regulations? what can we do in congress to help? what must we do? >> i think the resolution that was adopted or promulgated in the last day or two is one very important possibility. it is one that, the more adherents it has come but the better. if the united states is completely unified. i think this hearing is something that is very valuable. it provides a very clear demonstration that we in that the united states are going to fight across our political

lines. that is an important message for the world. the world does pay very close attention to what we do in these areas. we hope to have an opportunity toward the end of this month to introduce our new head of delegation, two members of staff who are interested in speaking with them. we will be able to also provide a sense of what we think are the needs that we have in terms of going forward, preparing for the conference and participating in the conference. >> i would agree with everything the ambassador said. i think we need congress to help by helping us clarify our position. we also have to follow up on the wicket and have a check appearing after the first of the year. there will be many more

circumstances coming forward. >> i spend a lot of time in latin america working on certain problems they have. one of the great opportunities we see, not just in latin america but around the world, is to be able to use the internet to bridge the gap between those in the rural area who cannot go to secondary school. a lot of the things we take for granted, third world people did not have access to. it is necessary that the internet is available. my question is, some of these countries are looking at the international telecommunications union as part of the solution. how should we respond to their concerns? how to make sure that that moves forward? this will do more to help third world countries than a lot of

other stuff, we have spent trillions of dollars on terry >> the itu has a development -- on. >> the itu has a development sector. we think it is good at best practices. it also has regional connect, it connects an american conference with panama. it is one the u.s. will participate in. it is designed to address the kinds of issues that you have described. it is a very valuable instrument in terms of accumulating and disseminating it important information about the kind of social issues you addressed. >> the growth of wireless, wireless internet access has

been explosive. the growth has been tremendous. it is because governments have stayed out of the way, in this country as well. i think we need to let the market work. encourage other countries to try to get out of the way as much as possible. the mobile and that is the future for improving the human condition overall. -- the mobile internet is the future for improving the human condition overall. >> maybe we ought to be looking at the great successes that are being developed in latin america with the private sector is building the infrastructure in a telecommunications way that surpasses activity of countries like costa rica that has had a hard line technology for so long. the great opportunities that is providing for the education of people. i yield back. >> the gentleman yield back.

the chair recognizes the gentleman from new hampshire. >> thank you very much. a lot of the issues i have have already been addressed. i would say, this has been very helpful and informative. you have enlightened us as to how this process works and what the consequences are should there be an implementation of a partial top-down, regulatory structure. your comments about an engineering morass, economic uncertainty, a dark, and dismal specter for economic freedom is very apt. hopefully, third world nations understand the consequences of

this given the fact that the structure of this body is relatively democratic. these third-world nations have quite a bit of power. commissioner, you published an article in the wall street journal in which you mentioned that the internet has helped farmers find buyers for crops. i can give you many examples of small industries in new hampshire that have created a whole new economies that did not exist before by using the internet. i am wondering if you can speak about how the multi-stickle the model -- multi-stake holder model helps small businesses. >> as many people have said, it allows innovation. when you combine the liberty that comes with mobility. when you combine the invention of mobility with the invention

of packet switching and the power of the internet, you change the human condition. you are not just contacting a place or eighth thing, you are able to communicate with a person. that does more to empower the sovereignty of the individual. you do have farmers who can find buyers. without having to take on the risk of traveling to the market where they could lose their crops. they can take care of that transaction. parents can find medicine for their sick children. they can locate possible water -- potable water. >> is not the design, the

governance model, unique in that it prevents government entities and non-governmental entities from controlling the design of the network and the content -- b. you agree with that? -- do you agree with that? >> we think this has been enormously instrumental in creating the internet we have today. we are very anxious that the free flow of information, at the freedom of expression remains as a centerpiece of one of the many capabilities of the internet. the multi-stakeholder model helps to protect that. no one set of voices is privilege.

we think that does help in terms of what you think of as a broader social, political, cultural aspects of the internet. >> to conclude on a personal note. my father had the honor of serving in this body. i remember well go into the space committee. he was -- it was the greatest committee you could be on. it was in the middle of the space race. i was so excited. they went through the hearing, i did not understand a single word. [laughter] i told my friends i knew all kinds of things. griffin, i expected to brief your dad on the steering -- expect you to brief your dad on this hearing.

>> thank you. i ask unanimous consent to insert "in new york times" editorial into the record. >> the chair recognizes the dead man from ohio. >> thank you very much -- the gentleman from ohio. >> thank you very much. thank you for your testimony. everyone across the nation truly believes that we want to make sure we keep our internet free. it has been best to have been dealt with the way it has. from the ground up. from private industry. without government regulation. if i could, i would like to ask a couple questions. i would like to get back to the whole question, i know there has been a lot of question as to businesses and business

regulation. the chairman has conducted hearings on cyber security that have been very insightful. in testimony, you talking about the russian federation asking for jurisdiction over ip addresses because there is a phone number shortages or china would like to see a system in which internet users are registered. the authoritarian regimes, it gives them the ability to identify and silent political dissidents. how would you look at those two areas in those countries or other countries -- it might give them an advantage on attacking the united states or gaining more intellectual property that is being stolen over the internet today?

the more that is out there that these companies have to estimate of themselves, to other countries, -- to submit of themselves to other countries, it is hard enough to protect what we have got. >> the general theme, looking at history, would be a scenario in which they might want the rest of the world to live under a set of rules that they break. they would break the rules. everybody else would abide by them. that would be to their advantage. >> you have a follow-up? >> the general issue that you raise about intellectual property is one that is a very, very serious one. it is one we look at very hard. it is one the administration looks at very hard. these are issues that are

complex in terms of figuring out enforcement. there is no debate about the importance of intellectual property protection in the broader context of the internet. it is very important. >> thank you. something that has not been brought up that he brought up in your testimony -- that you brought up in your testimony that government officials have intimated about having international, universal service whereby state-owned companies will have an international mandate so they can build out of a broad band. so many companies have been spent hundreds of million dollars, would that put u.s. companies at a disadvantage? you would have to find countries

to finance that. >> you have to look at which web destinations attracted the most traffic. especially the video applications is a lot of bandwidth. the point here is that there might be international sanctions or mandates for regulatory regimes to impose these charges. that is a concern. if companies want to enter into a contract, i am all for that. we do not need a regulatory body distorting the marketplace. >> thank you very much. i yield back my time. >> the chair recognizes the tournament from illinois. -- the gentleman from illinois. >> i apologize for keeping this

longer. it is a very important subject. it is very important if you have been involved with democracy and freedom movements, at least in the former captive nations. i pulled up beside her attack on -- up the cybersattack on estonia. just returned from meetings in estonia. i watched the crackdown on dissidents in belarus. you are highlighting the prime minister of russia's exact quote, "international control of the internet through the itu should give everyone cause for concern." those of us who follow this are rightly concerned as was stated in opening statements.

the movement to do this is for regime stability and preservation. it is clear. look at the actors, russia, china, iran, i imagine that north korea would profit on that if they were concerned that anyone had computers. let's briefly talk about, will they be is in, we will go first to the ambassador, they are using cyber security as an excuse to get further control. of that, we should be concerned with, especially from state actors who have used technology to cyber attack other countries.

>> in the specific context, there have been contributions suggesting there ought to be some sort of cyber-security regulation. the discussions have been at a high level. all countries should be responsible for protecting their networks. things of that nature. the united states opposes any significant effort to bring cyber security into the itu or similar bodies. there are enormously significant issues surrounding cyber security. there is a great deal of engagement we have with other countries about how to improve the environment. we do not think that a high- level statement about the desirability of security, that

it has any place at all. >> commissioner, and a comment? >> my concern is that such mandates could be used as a sword and a shield by authoritarian regimes. keep in mind, cyber security is discussed in many diplomatic for a. we should be very concerned that before entering into any international agreements, we are not put at a disadvantage. >> i do not know if the congresswoman mentioned this, profits would be an agreement -- with those have to go back to the national government for a treaty ratification? as we see in other treaties, some countries pick it up, some countries never voted on it.

i think that is the issue of balkanization. would it not countries that kept -- would that not descanted franchise those -- disenfranchise countries that are trying to use it for their own stability and preservation. it would hurt them in the global economy. they are cutting off their nose to spite their face. would you agree? >> i would. >> i would agree with that as well. >> thank you. we appreciate your questions and the answers. thank you. you have been most helpful in understanding what we face as a country and the challenge that is ahead for you and for our delegation. thank you.

we appreciate it. we will call up our next panel of witnesses. on our second panel, ambassador gross, former coordinator for information policy, u.s. department of state. ms. shipmen-wentworth she is the senior manager of public policy for internet society. and the chief internet evangelist for google. we all admire that title. protocols and addresses, all of those things you have created. we thank our prior panel and their testimony. we will start with ambassador gross. he will be our lead off witness. pull those microphones close.

you should be good to go. thank you ambassador for your work. we look forward to your comments today. >> thank you, mr. chairman, ranking members. it is an honor to be back here. i appreciate it very much. i should start with an apology. i did not bring lunch. i will try to be brief. i want to underscore a couple of points that were made. first of all, i think it is important for the american people to know that i think the preparations for the upcoming wicket conference are in excellent hands. i think we have seen this demonstrated by the statements and actions by the ambassador who you saw this morning, by the assistant secretary, by the white house, and as was announced earlier, by the

ambassador, the incoming head of delegations, terry kramer. i have known him for many years. we worked together. we have been good friends for many years. i could not be more pleased and confident of its successful outcome because of what i am sure will be his excellent leadership. i would say his leadership is particularly important and helpful in addressing some of the questions that were raised by the first panel about the ability to create and form successful coalitions to be able to identify the issues. he has great experience not only in the telephone industry, but having worked internationally. he knows what it takes to bring people together and to find the consensus that will be very important. i also want to recognize, as you all have done, the extraordinary work that has been done by robert mcdowell. he is tireless and passionate and very focused on this issue in ways that have greatly served

all of us. i personally and professionally in so pleased by his leadership to date. having had the great honor of working on these issues for many years at the u.s. department and elsewhere, i think there are a few core principles that make is particularly important. one that was stressed earlier today about the importance of by partition chip. i would like to commend both sides of the aisle -- bipartisanship. i would like commend both sides of the aisle. the resolution is quite extraordinary. when i had the honor of leading the heads of state summit, is similar resolution was enacted. i found that to be useful and important for us as we went forward. the world recognizes the importance and roll that congress plays on these issues.

it is an important signal. the bipartisanship is an extremely important signal. i would also say that i have the honor of chairing a committee that has been put together to address the with the issues. -- the wicket issues. i think there is a lot to be learned from the diverse membership of that group. that group often takes different views on domestic issues. that is to be expected. they come together and are unified as the american people are unified on the issue that brings us together about the internet, the importance of the internet, and the role of intergovernmental organizations and others. there are two things that are important to focus on. one, it is important to remember this is not just another conference. this is a treaty writing

conference. the output will not just the language. it will be international law. it is very important that the details be dealt with very carefully. it is also important because it affects not just the american people, but people globally. the u.s. is always looked to for that leadership. i am confident it will be maintained. it is the great changes that have happened in the world, the great growth in the internet that has benefited the people in the developing world and elsewhere most dramatically. i think that is something that we always need to keep in mind. it is also important to recognize that this is not about the itu as an institution. it is important to the united states. it has been very important. it has been very helpful to the united states. this is about other member states as has been outlined by a

member of the interest earlier today. -- by a number of answers earlier today. that is what we need to address. with that, i think my time is about to expire. i do not want to delay this any further. >> thank you. your testimony today and your encouragement on a resolution, we hope to be able to move rapidly. we are delighted and honored to have you here today. we look forward to your verbal presentation. >> thank you very much. i see that a ranking member had to depart. i appreciate her participation today. it is an honor to address you. i serve as vice president and chief internet evangelist at google.

as one of the fathers of the internet, i care deeply about the future of the internet. i am here because the internet has never been at higher risk than it is now. a a new international battle is brewing. for all of us, if we don't pay attention to what is going on, users worldwide will be at risk of losing the open and free internet that has brought so much to so many at can bring some much more. if we follow one path, a path of inclusion, openness, and common- sense, i am convinced that the internet of the future will be an even more powerful economic engine and communications tool then it is today. the other path is controlled by governments. this would be a different system.

a system that promotes exclusion, hidden deals, potential for indiscriminate surveillance, any one of which could significantly hindered innovation and growth. at the crossroads stands the international union, an agency of the u.n. that came into being to regulate international telegraph services just four years after the pony express closed its doors. this agency plans to meet in six months to consider a proposed changes to the agreements. until this year, the itu includes 193 member countries and it has focused its attention on a telecommunications networks and policies such as setting standards for telephones and radio frequencies, and

encouraging infrastructure in developing nations. on the whole, this has been a nine and even helpful to the spread of the internet but the organization passed a resolution in guadalajara calling to increase the role of the aitu. this should cause some concern. some member states see and are presented to assert control of the internet through a meeting in to buy. several proposals would threaten free expression on the web. others have called for an unprecedented mandates and regulations which would impose international internet fees in order to generate revenue for state-owned companies. the international attack as many fronts. take for example the shanghai cooperation organization which counts china, russia, uzbek a

stand among its members. they submitted a proposal for a so-called international code of contact -- contact for information security. the organization's stated goal was to establish a government- led international norms and rules, standardizing the behavior of countries concerning information in cyberspace. should one or more of these proposals pass, the implications are disastrous. first, new international control could trigger a race to the bottom with serious limits on the free flow of information that could become the norm rather than the exception. 20 countries have substantial or pervasive online filtering. the centralized architecture that enables the internet's rise would be put on its head. the new structure would have the unintended consequence of

choking innovation and hurting american business abroad. as you can see, the decisions made this summer could put regulatory handcuffs on the net with a remote u.n. agency holding the keys. because the answer only to their member states rather than just citizens, civil society, academia, there is a great need to insert transparency and accountability into this process. what can you do? i encourage this committee to take action now by urging the u.s. government in partnership with like-minded countries and their citizens to engage in this process and protect the current pluralistic system of internet governance and to insist that the debate be open to all stakeholders. it is critically important for you to engage in to help insure that the the world understands that the economic, social, and

technical advances are endangered by these efforts. thank you for the opportunity to testify on this very serious matter and i look forward to answering your questions. >> we appreciate your comments. thank you for being here. we afford to your testimony. >> i'm the senior manager of public policy for the internet society, a nonprofit organization dedicated to ensuring the open development and use of the internet for the benefit of all people. on behalf of the internet society and our more than 55,000 members worldwide, many of whom are watching us in the audience, i would like to thank the chairman, the ranking member, and all the members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to testify on this issue.

the internet society was founded in 1992 by many of the same pioneers that founded the internet parent of the organization has served as a global resource for unbiased information about the internet. as an organizer and driver of community-based internet initiatives around the world. the internet society serves as the home for the internet into during task force whose mission is to make the internet work better. we produce high-quality, relevant documents that influence the way people design, use, and manage the internet. they include the standards, guidelines, and best practices that created and continues to shape the internet. the international telecommunications upcoming world conference on international telecommunications has rightfully drawn heighten the tension. some member states have

proposed amendments to a treaty that could have far reaching implications for the internet. while we have no voting role in the process, we do participate in what we call a sector member. we have raised significant concerns. the outcome of the meeting could undermine the security, stability, and innovative potential of networks worldwide. some of the states are focusing on the internet and its infrastructure. this has changed the nature of the medications globally and many view those as falling under the auspices of the itu. developing nations face pressures as they seek to update their national remarks to allow them to engage fully in the global information economy but we're not convinced that the international process represents

the most effective means to manage cross borders to medications. we are concerned that some of the proposals are not consistent the proven and successful model. we are concerned that the process itself which it severely limits limitations which could provide negative outcomes. the model is characterized by several properties that make it what it means today. a unit of networks that is constantly evolving. this enables extraordinary innovation and this is based on a tradition of open standards. as the internet has flourished, the engine and policy development as a global, regional, national level has continued to work with the internet to ensure its ongoing

development. they have provided the capacity to cope with the fast pace evolution which has characterized the internet today. some submissions seek to apply an old line legacy telecommunications regulation to internet traffic in a manner that could lead to a more fragmented global internet for of parent the proposals related to traffic routing, numbering would have significant impacts on the future growth of the internet. we find strong cause for concern about the agenda for the meeting. they should encourage the ongoing expansion of expansions. many member states including the u.s. have shown that they understand the value of the internet in its unique stakeholder model. they are in a critical position

to advance an agenda that respects the internet and its global contribution while continuing to support the policies that have been so successful since these were first negotiated. working with allies from around the globe, the u.s. government has not presented to chart a productive course forward and insure that the values of the model and a light touch approach is highlighted parent of the internet society stands ready to play its part in the process and to assist the subcommittee in any way it can. >> thank you for your testimony. you mentioned in your testimony that there are other parts of the u.n. that have activities concerning governance. what other things we should be aware of? >> thank you for that question. it is important that we put this

in context. this is an extremely important topic. there are ongoing discussions within the framework, said technology for development, the telecommunications union that would seek to take on these issues of internet governance with a great deal of specificity. all of these discussions are what we are following carefully and we think that the stakeholder engagement and discussion of these issues over the next several years is going to be extremely important. >> i am in agreement. first of all, the itu is not the only element that is interested in internet matters.

the point about the committee on science and technology is one example. there is a long list of players who have seen the internet as a very fundamental part of the environment. i worry about such activities as the and and and society. as responsibility for the subject matter under discussion, this shifted from one body to another. the question about who controls the agenda becomes a big issue. the process of involvement in the u.n. has one unfortunate property that it politicizes everything. all of the considerations that are made are taken and colored

by national interests as a longstanding participate. we checked our guns at the door. we have technical discussions on how best to improve the internet. to caller that with those and not relevant to the technology is a very dangerous precedent and that is where the reasons why i worry so much about the intervention in this space. >> there are some reports that would tend to say that the ambassador's comments, there is not a grave threat. would you agree with this characterization? >> i am very nervous about this process. it is not just a matter of voting question, the substance

of the changes to the treaty are critically -- are critical. we have somewhat more leverage. those are not just a matter of voting. the negotiations and gives no leverage to us than the actual voting process. i have to say that there is a notion called the butterfly effect. the butterfly waives its wings in indonesia and we have a tsunami somewhere else. i worry that small changes can be used and interpreted in ways that can be quite dangerous to the internet. >> what strategies did you employ when you had the opposite to to fend off international regulations?

>> i want to echo what was just said. one of the keys here is that this not a discussion about broad policies. this chamber can appreciate the negotiations over the language. language is important. language has the impact. what would be a real test for our negotiators and all of us to be careful of the language. this does not mean sun today or mean something very different in the way that commissioner mcdowell talk about. this is not a dish to -- an issue for the itu.

the strategies have been adopted by the current group. it is very important to be clear, one of the problems and one of the operas and its use we have had is to find fuzzy language to cover up. the importance of the issue and because of the implications of the issue is to be very clear as to what it is the u.s. is interested and willing to discuss. those areas are red lines. things for which we will not agree. it is yes, it is no, it is very very by mary. the building of the coalition's as we discussed in the first panel is obvious and important and i am confident we will be able to do that. >> which countries are you most

concerned about in terms of their agenda? >> as we heard earlier, the ones that are most visible are russia and china that have the names on a number of proposals. others have come forward surprise and i. the others are the ones you would normally expect we hear from other repressive regimes, even those in saudi arabia. those who are threatened by openness and freedom of expression are the ones that are most interested in gaining control through this maze. there are other motivations that drives this process. the developing world has historically generated revenue.

the internet has become the alternative to what had been in the telecommunications environment and i see them looking for ways and adapting the earlier telecommunications arrangements. >> give us one red line subjects that we should never entertain. >> i think two things. i would like to see the standards be mandatory. second, we should run away from any kind of settlement agreements that would interfere with the open and private- sector aspect of connectivity. today, it is a voluntary system.

it has benefited from that. >> it is there analogy here for the satellite system that allowed governments to extract windfall profits in countries around the world that ran totally contrary to making sure that every citizen has access to a real network? >> i have this feeling that you might deserve the answer that you get. i think that we see a great desire to take advantage of the internet in ways that damage the freedom and openness and the innovation that has allowed it to grow. to allow any rules that sequestered this innovation would damage the future of the internet dramatically. when you see new applications coming along, they come from

virtually anywhere in the world. it is important that we preserve that capability. >> i appreciate the global perspective that you bring. you want to give us the view of where innovation can occur, where disaster can innovate from. that is to you are. that is what this panel is about. do you agree? and you have another issue? >> there are a number of red lines. there should be no top-down

control of the internet associated with any international governmental institution. >> you would agree with the comments with respect to making voluntary standards mandatory and that would have a considerable impact on the engineering and architecture that goes into the internet. we are focused in the definitions in the treaty. these will give you the scope and a number of proposals to change the definitions which would clearly implicate the internet. >> what do you what this committee to remember as we go through the next six months and through the next six years? >> you have already started. this hearing is a wonderful beginning. the proposed legislation speaking to this problem.

voicing your concerns to the executive branch is important and making this visible around the world is also very important. i think of started that process and i'm deeply grateful for it. >> this is really -- i enjoyed this discussion because when a free nations give up their decision making process to a world organization that is not totally designed to be free, then there should be credible concerns. i think we are raising those today. we debate this issue about of

the u.n. we get asked about the role of the u.n., should we be involved? i have tried to keep a balanced view where i have it. i have not voted to leave the u.n., but i have been skeptical about the role that it plays. here are some of the things that the u.n. has done. if cuba was vice president of the human rights council and china, russia is served on that council. north korea and cuba serve as the head of the conference on disarmament. mugabe was just named as a u.n. leader for tourism. iran sits on the commission of the status of women and formerly

chaired the joint board of the u.n. development program and the population fund. saudi arabia is a member of the executive board of u.n. women. i am not making this up. that is a concern. there has been some international debate and discourse about having a world organization based upon shared values -- democracy, freedom, rule of law. this would make the process easier than trying to negotiate with totalitarian regimes. i appreciate you coming. i appreciate you raising this concern and making sure that we are all in and prepared to keep this great architecture.

i took a picture of you when we started and i treat a lot of people and i kind of did the headline of the hearing. i said, if it is not broken, don't fix it. the system has worked. obviously, there is some tinkering that some of you agree must be done, or is there not? should we not touch it? if there is tinkering to be done, what should be done? >> thank you very much. the answer is that there are always opportunities to improve a thing except for my wife who is sitting behind me, of course. i think the key here is to does the tinkering and what the mechanism is. i think the genius of the internet has been not only did the centralized nature but it is multi-stakeholder processes for making decisions.

bringing the best and brightest ideas. to be able to have a say and to make those decisions in a voluntary approach. that approach is the key. the rub here as you have heard this morning and early this afternoon has been concerned about a top down governmental set of ways dealing with real issues. whether it is security, fraud, or a variety of things. we know there are many issues that need to be addressed. >> i want to get a different question. any tinkering a matter how well- intentioned, could it be flexible enough to keep the process moving forward or will this really mess up the stakeholder involvement in a system we have today?

>> we cannot run away from the u.n. because it is too important a body for us to ignore, so we have to participate. we have another opportunity which we should emphasize which is to encourage more international involvement among the various nations dates in the multi stakeholder processes that are open and available to them which includes the internet governance form, the engineering task force. i think if we make these increasingly attractive and effective, that this could be a counterbalance and alternative to the focus of attention which is leading in the direction of the u.n.-based activity. this would reinforce what we discovered which is a multi- stakeholder process which actually works. they do bring many points of view to the table and the

results in better policy. >> i don't have my time to ask a follow-up question but i appreciate your testimony. >> the ambassador said that the u.s. is advocating for the report to be made available at the public. this is to increase transparency. what other can be taken into the processes? >> the obvious possibility would be to open this process up to other stakeholders which is not atypical of inclusion one reaches in international agreements. but it strikes me again reflecting on our successes that transparency and openness produces much better results. whether anyone in the current government to world could be

persuaded about it, i don't know, but i am a great advocate for trying to include the society, the technical world, in matters that have a very direct impact on them. a publication of proposals and the involvement of other stakeholders would be very attractive. >> i would think is critical for the u.s. and other countries to have seen the impact to highlight to the itu stakeholders, the potential issues. would be the role for the private sector? >> the private sector operates most of the internet. i don't know what the numbers are but it probably exceeds 90%. no matter what we do, it is the private sector that operates and its actions in the sense determine what kind of internet we all have.

my belief is that we have an opportunity here to in power the private sector to engage in policy making, which does not have an you will hear them say that they will be a member. he might agree with me that even as a member, meg you do not get the purchase or even have current information about what is under debate. openness is going to be our friend. we have to advocate strongly for it. >> do you have additional comments? >> the internet society has been opening up this process.

internet policy related discussions within the united nations more broadly. we feel they can only benefit from more transparency. we can from the technical community. we think there is a lot that could be said about the technical implications of what is being proposed. how do networks actually work? would even be consistent with the architecture we're trying to keep in place? the answer is no. that is not heard in the current process. we have very limited opportunities to engage. >> i think there are two directives. we should continue to advocate for other members to open up their domestic process to allow for great is part -- greater participation we want to

continue to encourage that. that is the problem here. the idea is by definition an intergovernmental organization. ultimately, this issue is not a big issue with certain sets. we do a certain issue, there are 2 billion people with their access to information. those are people that call into question whether a not what the lines are and what it should or should not be focused on. that is where a lot of the issues can get resolved. >> thank you very much. >> the chair recognizes you for 15 minutes. >> thank you for answers.

he stated that allowing governments to monitor this and the data traffic are of particular concern. could you share with us your views regarding the international data traffic? >> those are critically important issues. there are a number of different pieces of that. it is not about the fact that it may change from a system in which there is voluntary market- driven decisions, contractual decisions made to engage, into

ones which there are some proposals to have some regulatory regime akin to the old settlement. that should be a substantial concern to everyone. that should deal with the issue of innovation generally they're out the internet ecosystem. they are talking about changes in this technology is coming from anywhere, from anyone and the ability for all of us to benefit. all of? often boils down to one of the great core issues for all of us. that is the flow of information. the flow of information will be able to flow seamlessly across the network in ways that

benefit the global community. >> thank you. >> the wonder if i could amplify on this if you would permit. there is a non-trade barrier. what i worry about is the insidious fact of putting in amplifyd rules that appl notions of rejecting those into the internet, having the potential to destroy this permission with innovation and the possibility of destroying potential markets. this is not just an american issue. we care because i google we are a global operation. the converse is true. anyone should be able to reach anyone in the world with a new product in new service. countries that used to go away from that openness are actually harming themselves and their

own opportunity to exploit the internet for gdp growth. i worried greatly about that. >> thank you. >> many countries struggled with bringing broadband access to that. we talked about this briefly earlier. hash a brief response to the legitimate concern? -- how should we respond to the concern? >> this is a wonderful question. the development organization has contributed to the growth. i am a member of the broadband commission bessie's wathat seeks ways to expand. i google, we found many opportunities in the private sector to help expand access

around the world. -- we't need this to donate this. the purpose that equipment. they deliver it to people especially in the southern hemisphere. then they train them and they set them up to actually build and operate east of the one. there are endless opportunities here for the private sector to engage. anything that you can do to make that easier to do would be most helpful. legislation makes it easy for us to read purpose. training will be very helpful. just to advocate for that would be a good thing. >> thank you. i am out of time. >> we want to thank you for

appearing. totalitarian regimes may not care if they have systems that work. as you have these involves in international negotiations, they may want a system that does not work across international lines. the record will remain open for 10 days. he may get additional questions. if you can reply to those. if they come, we may appreciate that. we appreciate your time. this meeting is now adjourned. > [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> earlier, the supreme court heard challenges to the health care law. friday, politico posted a discussion on how states are

implementing exchanges. this is live friday and c-span2. >> saturday, we will bring the part of this year's cable and telecommunications association convention. we discussed the future of cable news and innovation in the industry as long as the 2012 presidential campaign. chris matthews is joined by john king appeared that this saturday at 10:00 a.m. eastern here on c- span. >> the congressional directory is a complete guide to the one hand and told congress, with each member of the house and senate. you also find cabinet members and the nation's governors.

it is $12.95 plus shipping and handling. fo>> spend a weekend in wichita, kan. with but tv and american history television. the american presidents and black entrepreneurs. the founding. also browse the rare book collection. sunday at 5:00 p.m., experience the old cowtown use them. the early days of the aviation use them. also participants from a kansas civil rights movement in 1958. they sat down for service. once a month, c-span's the call will explore the literary life of cities across america.

>> leon panetta delivered the commencement address at the u.s. naval academy on tuesday. his remarks are 25 minutes. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you for the great job you do a secretary of the navy, governor, congressman, and distinguished guests, parents, friends, families, deans and faculty, and above all the class of 2012, it is, for me, a very distinct honor and privilege to take part in this very special occasion as secretary of defense. let me first and foremost

express my best congratulations to all of you in the class of 2012, you made it. [cheers and applause] and i'm sure that right about now your families are all saying, "thank god you made it." it's a real privilege for me to be welcomed here on navy turf as a former army officer, although, i have to tell you that one of our three sons is the former navy officer who served in afghanistan. i try as secretary to be a loyal supporter of each of our great outstanding services, even when i had the opportunity to attend the army navy game, my allegiance was to both teams. i sat on each side of the stadium.

i have to tell you that i'm getting a little tired, you're probably not, but i am, of the west point cheer, "maybe next year, maybe next year, maybe next year." [applause] today's ceremony is your last military duty of the academic year after which most of you will go home, start summer training, and, of course, as you all know, a few of you can't leave the yard because you the conduct system and are being held incommunicado, however, i'm told by tradition, i can set you free, well, as an italian- american, i do things in the italian style which means obviously i treat the navy as family, and i don't like anybody to mess with family.

it also means that i can make you an offer you can't refuse. [laughter] so in exchange for freeing your classmates on restriction, i got an offer. i want the entire brigade to lead the class of 2012 and their one big cheer, and i need to hear from everyone or it doesn't count, so let's hear a big "go navy" on my count, and remember, this is the difference between salvation or purgatory. on three, one, two, three! go navy! well done.

[applause] admiral miller, i exercise my authority as secretary of defense to grant amnesty to all men on restriction or minor conduct offenses. [laughter] as a catholic, i'm tempted to order you to do three hail marys. [laughter] with that out of the way, let me deepest thanks.

first and foremost offer my deepest thanks. thank you to the class of 2012 and to all mid shipment for your decision to serve this nation at a time of war. you have set yourselves apart in a profound, and in an honorable way. thank you also for all of those in uniform, including the officers, senior enlisted leaders, and instructors for your dedication and loyalty to our country. finally, thank you to the families, sponsor families, the the administrators, professors,

and the friends here today. this is every bit your day to celebrate along with this extraordinary class of 2012. class of '12, over the past four years, you have passed the test of character, you chose to give up the life of a normal college student and endured the demands of navy life rising before dawn, putting on the uniform of our country, standing watch, marching in formation. the highs and lows of your life here have changed you in ways that you may not fully understand for years or even decades to come. you experienced defining moments together as a class celebrates, and a few of you pulled off a daring mission, building an unmanned vehicle flying over the superintendent's house at night and using it to place a hat on top of the chapel

dome. [cheers and applause] could have used you at the cia. [laughter] two years later, along with the rest of the country, you paid tribute to your navy brethren who pulled off that great daring mission ridding the world of osama bin laden. [applause] having had the honor to work on that mission as directer of the cia, i'll never forget that moment coming out of the white house after the president's announcement and hearing the

cheers coming from the crowds that had spontaneously gathered outside the white house. "usa, usa." and i know i heard "cia, cia" as well. you are men and women from every state in the union, from 12 foreign nations, rich and poor, secular and religious, black, white, latino, native american, asian, straight and gay. diversity of this class is a tribute to the life and service commander wesley brown, class of '49, first african-american graduate of the naval academy. [applause]

wesley passed away last week at the age of 85, and today we honor his ground breaking legacy. while your class progressed from the first honor of induction day up to this moment, the world has undergone its own transformation naval academy graduates have had a lot to do with that transformation. retired admiral mike mullen, class of '68 fought a strategy in two wars to be ready for future challenges. erik bolton, class of '73 led special efforts to go after al- qaeda. general john allen, class of 1976 led in afghanistan with outstanding leadership. admiral sam lockhear, class of 1977 commands u.s.-pacific

command and spearheaded nato's effort, a campaign that led to the fall of the nazis. -- fall of gaddafi. the list goes on. the chief of naval operations, john and a number of other naval academy alumni who are influencing events around the entire globe. throughout my time in government, i've relied on a vision and the advice of the officers. president clinton's chief of staff, director of cia, and now director of defense, because of their efforts and sacrifices as

brave men and women across our services, today the united states stands at a strategic turning point after a decade of war. our combat forces have come home from iraq. nato just approved a plan last week in chicago, a plan by general allen to fully transition the lead for security to afghan forces by the end of 2014. we have successfully gone after the leadership of al-qaeda to send a very clear message that no one, one attacks the united states and gets away with it. [applause]

and we successfully fought with our nato allies to give libya back to the libyan people, and yet, we still face significant challenges and risks. we continue to face the threat of violence extremism, those who continue to threaten attacks on our homeland. we're still at war. we confront the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, destabilizing behavior of iran and north korea, military modernization across the asia pacific, turmoil in the middle east, pie piracy on the high seas, increasing and creative attacks, cyber attacks here in our country and elsewhere. all of this, all of this coming at a time of increasing budget challenges here at home.

our nation now looks to you. the next generation of military leaders to confront the challenges i just outlined, to protect our nation, and to ensure that america always has the strongest military force in the world. that is the way it's always been, that's the way it will always be. across the generation, navy and marine corp. have led our nation and military into the future. to your generation to ensure that our fleet remains earth.

unrivaled by any other nation on earth. that's why you came here. for the challenge of leading others at sea, deploying to every part of a world, risks in the skies, fighting ferociously and giving our enemies hell wherever you find them. after you leave here, the challenge that i just outlined is exactly what you get, and it won't be easy. you'll need every quality that got you through the last four years. love of country, desire to learn, the will to work hard, the will to sacrifice, the judgment to make good decisions, and the drive to overcome any odds.

no one can tell you what challenges you will face in the future, but one thing is for sure. you must be prepared to respond to whatever task we confront in the future with courage, with creativity, and with leadership. adapting to new challenges is what the naval service does best. best. what the nature service does this is not a time for playing it safe. it's a time for imagination, a time for initiatives, time for putting new ideas into action. that has always been at the heart of the naval service. the dawn of the republic, commodore edward urged the young officers to take the navy in a new direction during the war of 1812.

his voice improvised the construction of a flotilla that defeated the british on lake eerie and helped save the nation from domination. during the civil war, the young officers embraced the revolutionary technology of all iron ships, blockaded the rebel rebellion. there were famous words from one of history's finest expressions of initiative, and they are built into your very bones. admiral miller tells me you can finish this one. let me hear it from all of you loud and clear. damn the torpedos. that initiative is what carried us through the generation. teddy roosevelt sent a great

fleet around the world. the admirals at that time didn't want to bring along the brand new destroyers. that didn't sit well with a group of very young lieutenants, and so the enterprising junior offers found roosevelt aboard the presidential yacht and asked him to overrule the admirals. roosevelt did. proving junior officers can have the best ideas. you just have to have the guts to prove it. down through time, our nation has needed military leaders with that kind of vision. they screened formations to push the japanese across back the pacific.

nuclear power from ships and submarines and computer genius and anticipated a network fleet. the future is no different, and that's why we developed a new defense strategy adapting to the budget requirements that we face, but more importantly to ensure that our military can meet the challenges of the 21st century. our military force for the future must be agile, it must be flexible, deployable, and technologically advanced. we will strengthen key alliances and partnerships around the world. we'll ensure our military can confront aggression and defeat any opponent any time anywhere, and we will protect investments in new capability from cyber to unmanned systems to space to special operation forces. the navy and marine corp. are fundamental to every element of that strategy.

america is the maritime nation, and we are returning to our maritime roots. one of the key projects that your generation will have to face is sustaining and enhancing american strength across the great maritime region of the pacific.

america's future prosperity and security are tied to the ability to advance peace and security along the arc extending from the western pacific and east asia asia. into the indian ocean and south asia. that reality is inescapable for our country and military which is already begun broadening and deepening asia pacific. our engagement throughout the one of your great challenges as an officer in the navy will be to ensure the peace and prosperity of the asia pacific region for the 21st century. we need you to project america's power and to reflect america's character to serve on ships and submarines, to fly planes, and train and operate throughout that region. to train and operate throughout we need you to do the important work of strengthening and modernizing our historic alliances with japan, with korea, with australia, with thailand. countries like malaysia and indonesia, vietnam and others. we need your to strengthen ties with china, the military is growing and modernizing.

we must be vigilant and strong. we must be prepared to confront any challenge. the key to that region is going to be developing a new era of defense cooperation between our countries. one in which our military shares burdens in order to the advance peace in the asia-pacific and around the world. tomorrow i depart on a trip to southeast asia. later this year, i will visit china, for the first time a secretary of defense. our will tell all of these nations that united states will remain a pacific power and i will tell them why. because of you. because during your careers, many of you will be headed to the pacific. there and across the globe, the navy and marine corps must lead a resurgence of america's enduring maritime presence and power.

as graduates of the navy academy, you have earned much and you have been given much. now as officers, your nation will ask that you give much of yourselves to service to this country. it is about giving back something to this country. that's what service is all about. as second quarter tear of -- secretery of defense i could not be more proud of all of you for choosing to serve this great country. as mentioned i'm the son of

italian immigrants and as a young boy i once asked my dad why did you travel all distance coming to a strange country, no language ability, no money, no skills, why would you do that? my father said that he did it because he and my mother believed they could give their children a better life in america. that is the american dream. it's the dream that we all want for our children, to have a better life, and it's that dream that depends on people like you who are willing to serve and to fight for america. a u.s. navy ship captain once wrote that he could think of no greater prize for anyone than an appointment to the naval academy for as you put it, there may be more money elsewhere but there is no more honor anywhere. indeed, thereis no more honor anywhere than right here and as you leave here, carry that honor with you, defend it, fight for it and it.

yes, if necessary, die for it. the honor is yours, now earn it. congratulations to all of you. god bless you, god bless the navy, the marine corps and 2012. -- and fair winds to the class of 2012. thank you. [applause] according to a report, th seven crime accounts for a large amount of incidents.

the said committee investigates security threats to the u.s. financial industry. that is live at 9:30 a.m. eastern on c-span2. >> friday, jeb bush and henry waxman testify at the health budget committee looking at the regulatory portion of the plan. its stars freddie and 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span3. >> thursday, at the official portrait of george w. bush and laura bush were unveiled. at the ceremony, president obama said "we may have our differences politically but the presidency transcends those differences." the house is a private lunch for the former president and first lady that included george h. w. bush and barbara bush.

from the east room, this is 30 minutes. ♪ >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states and mrs. obama accompanied by george w. bush and mrs. laura bush.

♪

[hail to the chief playing] [applause] >> could f. been in. i am chairman of the board of the white house -- good afternoon. i am chairman of the board of the white house historical association. the association was founded 50 years ago with two specific missions, the first is to educate and inform the public

about the history of the white house and the distinguished groups of americans who have the -- inhabited it. it is an exciting time for us. we marked our 50th anniversary. to the north of the white house we have just launched the new national center for let us history. the next year, to the south, we will open a new white house this their center. it will give millions of visitors -- the visitor center. it will give millions of visitors a new understanding. if we acquire something on the east and west we will have the police surrounded. are proud to have provided funds for financial support. through the portraits of our presidents, it is a wonderful tradition that here, our country honors those who have

honored us. the tradition began with the acquisition of george washington's portrait in 1800. it was purchased by the united states government. it was viewed as such as an important national treasure it was the object of dolly madison's concern we have been commissioned to complete the portraits of every first lady and president in the past 50 years. in our world, with so many images are flashes on the screen, these portraits by acclaimed artist are lasting tribute to our presidents and first ladies and will forever be part of the collection.

today, the portrait of president george w. bush and laura bush will be added to the unique collection of those who have occupied this house. to those great presidential portrait artists whose works include gilbert stuart, we now had john howard -- add john howard. at a great debate, strong arguments on both sides, not over issues, it is the debate as to whether of a portrait actually looks like the president and first lady. -- as to whether the portrait actually looks like the president and first lady. it is my distinct pleasure to

introduce the president of the united states. [applause] >> thank you. thank you so much. thank you. please, everybody, have a seat. good afternoon everybody. thank you for that introduction. to the president and barbara, to all of the members of the bush family, it is a great privilege to have you here today. to president and mrs. bush, welcome back to the house that you called home for eight years. the white house is many things at once. it is a working office, it is a living museum, it is and in doing symbol of our with democracy. -- is an enduring symbol of our democracy. a few of us are blessed with the honor of living here. i think it is fair to say that every president is aware that we are temporary residence. we are renters.

we are charged with the upkeep until our lease runs out. we also leave a piece of ourselves in this place. today, with the unveiling of the portraits next to me, president and mrs. bush will take their place alongside men and women who built this country and those who worked to perfect it. it can be said that no one can understand what it is like being president until they sit behind the desk and feel the weight and responsibility for the first time, it is true. after three and a half years in office, i have a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by the presidents who came before me, including president bush. in this job, no decision that reaches your desk is easy. no choice you make is without

cost. no matter how hard you try, you are not going to make everybody happy. that is something president bush and i both learned quickly. that is why, from time to time, those of us who have had the privilege to hold this office turned to the people who know the feeling. we may have our differences politically, but the presidency transcends those differences. we all love this country. we all want america to succeed. we all believe that when it comes to moving america forward, we have an obligation to pull together. we all follow the example of our first president, george washington, who knew that a true test of patriotism is the willingness to freely and graciously passed the reins of power on to somebody else. that has been true of president

bush. the months before it took the oath of office were chaotic. we knew our economy was in trouble. our americans were in pain. we would not know until later how breathtaking the financial crisis had been. still, over those two and a half months, president bush, his cabinet, his staff, many of you who are here today, went out of your ways, george, you went out of your way, to make sure the transition was as seamless as possible. president bush understood that rescuing our economy was not just a democratic or republican issue, it was an american priority. i will always be grateful for that. the same is true for our national security. none of us will forget where we were on that terrible september day when our country was

attacked. all of us will remember the image of president bush standing on the pile of rubble bullhorn in hand, the, when the strength and resolve -- rubble, bullhorn in hand, and of the strength and resolve of the american people. my first call once american forces were out of harm's way was to president bush. protecting our country is knighted the work of one person with the task of one time, it is an ongoing obligation we all share. finally, on a personal note, michele and i are grateful to the entire bush family for their guidance and example during our tradition. george, i will always remember the gathering you posted for all of the living former presidents. plus, you left me a really good tv sports package. [laughter]

i use it. laura, you reminded us that the most rewarding thing about living in this house is not the title or power but the chance to shine a spotlight on the issues that matter the most. the fact that you enjoyed raised two smart and beautiful daughters, as teenagers preparing to head out into the world, that gives us tremendous help. -- hope. we will never forget the advice you give our daughters as they began their lives in washington. they tell them to surround themselves with loyal friends. never stop doing what they love. slide down the banisters.

place settings on the lawn. meet new people. enjoy all that. i can tell you that they took that advice to heart. it really meant a lot. one of the greatest strengths of our democracy is our ability to peacefully and routinely go through transitions of power. we have always had the leaders who believe in america and everything it stands for. leaders and families who are willing to devote their lives to the country they love. this is what we will think about every time we pass these portraits, just as millions of others of visitors will do in the decades to come. i want to thank the artist behind these beautiful works. on behalf of the american people, i want to thank president and mrs. bush for their extraordinary service to our country.

i would like to invite them on stage to take part in the presentation. [applause]

[applause] [applause] >> thank you, sit down. sit down. behavior cells. -- behave yourselves. thank you so much for inviting our rowdy friends to my hanging. we are honored to be here. mr. vice president, thank you for coming. we are overwhelmed. thank you for feeding the bush family, all 14 members of us. i want to thank our girls for coming.

i thank mom and dad, brother, sister, in laws, aunts and uncles. i know you were as excited to be able to come back and thank the people who helped make this house a home for us. the white house staff. i want to thank fred ryan and the white house curator. i am pleased that my portrait brings an interesting symmetry to the white house collection. it now starts and ends with a george w. george w. [applause] when the british burned the white house in 1814, and dolly madison saved this portrait of the first door to the idea -- first george w. if anything happens there is your man. [laughter] [applause]

i am pleased that when you are wondering these halls he would now be able to the is that this portrait and ask "what would george do?" [laughter] i am honored to be hanging there with the man they gave me the greatest give possible, unconditional love, no. 41.

i want to thank john howard for agreeing to use his considerable talents to paint my likeness. you have done a fine job with a challenging subjects. in the portrait there is a painting called "a charge to keep" that hung in the oval office for the eight years of my presidency. it reminds me of the wonderful people with whom i was privileged to serve. these men and women, many of whom who are here worked hard

and served with honor. we had a charge to keep. it is my privilege to introduce the great as first lady ever, sorry mom. [laughter] would you agree to a tie? a woman who brought such grace and dignity and love in this house. >> thank you all. thank you. thank you everybody.

thanks everyone. thank you very much. thank you president and mrs. obama. it was really gracious of you to invite us back to the white house to hang a few family pictures. i am sure you know nothing makes a house a home than its former occupants staring down from the walls. this is not the first time i have had the opportunity to confront an artistic likeness of myself. a few years ago after the 2008 election, a friend sent me something he found in the gift shop of the national constitutional center in philadelphia. it was a laura bush bobblehead doll he said he found on the clearance shell.

i am grateful to know that this work as a permanent home and things to be masterful talent of john howard sandon. you are terrific to work with. -- john howard sanden. you are terrific to work with. it is wonderful to know that these portraits will be on view at the white house and walking down the hall from my mother in law and that george's portrait will hang very close to his dad's. it is meaningful to me as a citizen. this is my family's home for eight years. it was our home but not our house.

this house belongs to the people whose portraits will never hang there, the ordinary people whose lives inspired us and his expectations guided us during the years we lived here. in this room are many of the people who stood by us as we face the tragedy of september 11 and to work with us in the years after. thank you to each and everyone of you for your service to our country. [applause] i hope others will see what i see, a woman he was honored and humbled to live in the white

house during a time of great challenge and to will never forget the countless american faces who make up the true portrait of that time. thanks so much. thank you, michele. >> i do not think we have enough tissue to go round. jenna and barbara are a mess. i want to thank you for joining us today. i would like to take this opportunity to thank laura for providing such a wonderful model of strength and grace for me to follow as first lady.

it is an interesting job. it has been amazing to learn from your example not just as a first lady but as a mother of two wonderful daughters.

. .

.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> it is not reasonable to assume if something really ruinous is adopted for a particular legislation, that you would see something against enforcement of that regulation. there is no other way for enforcement to be done. this current -- this is very important in terms of establishing expeck tages in terms of commercial activities and information. but they are very, very different as it involves the congress, for example, the

subject to all enforcement mechanisms. >> we are running out of time. do you have any comments? can you add to this? >> i don't think i can. >> thank you very much. >> the other gentlelady from southern california, marybono. >> thank you for your testimony. you certainly did not mince words that you feel strongly. i agree with everything that you said. it is hard to question witnesses when you are trying to make them agree with you more than you already do. i will do my best and just try to get out of you a little explanation. as dora was just saying, a bigger explanation for the american people is what's at stake here. i started talking about this well over a year ago. people started viewing me as sort of a tin foil hat on my

head, we clearly understand the arab spring and what this means and that the internet is the biggest tool for freedom around the world that man kind has ever seen. so taking that aside, instead can you talk a little about the proposal and how it will affect u.s. business and what it means for the bottom line for business should this occur. >> sure. and thank you for your leadership on this issue. in the early days, there were folks who questioned whether or not this was real. at a minimum, it creates uncertainty and drives up costs. that alone can be damaging. let's take an example. harswrard and m.i.t. -- harvard and m.i.t. recently announced they are going to offer courses online for free. ultimately consumers pay for those costs one way or the other.

it always pays to increased costs due to regulation. at a maximum, you would have some bifurcated internet technology which would bring more value to consumers and raising standards ultimately. that could be jeopardized as it becomes harder to figure out how do youening fleer these technologies across borders when in the past the internet did not have to worry about that as much. >> thank you, ambassador. >> i would certainly agree with the commissioner on that. the free flow of information, including the free flow of commercial information is something that studies have been cited this morning indicating it has added measureably to the world's wealth. so we're very anxious there

might be anything that would exhibit that. for example, some suggestions have been made by some countries that we ought to have content providers contribute to the cost of transmission coverage for traffic. there are a variety of reasons why that seems to us not to be a good idea. you could see where what could turn out to be marginal imposition early in that with the commercial value. we're very anxious to avoid that. >> ambassador, you speak a little bit -- in your testimony you mention there are proposals and regulations that would allow governments to restrict content and monitor users. can i speak a little about how the u.s. is working to stop

countries from already censoring the internet. >> we are anxious to overcome that there ought to be content-related restrictions. the suggestions at this time come, as mr. mcdonald indicated in his testimony, not just for even in the context, but in other fore-- forums as well. they tend to come from nondemocratic conditions. and on the other hand we are starting from sincere beliefs that stability is very important. that there are objectionable from a political perspective, there is such a thing as material so objective, it ought to be excluded.

that said, we obviously disagree with that. we particularly disagree with this. this set of issues arrives more extensively than the suggestion that we are trying in uzbekistan. >> thank you very much for your testimony. i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you, marry. i want to thank you for your good efforts on your resolution. >> i am wearing a tinfoil hat. >> this time it is not necessary. i am proud of the work you have done in presenting the bipartisan. we're all in agreement on this one. mr. dingle. >> mr. chairman, i appreciate

your currency. first i would loik to address the bureau chief of the three bureaus of the f.c.c. back in the 1970's and served the department of justice before that. mr. ambassador walker. and commissioner mcdowell, we thank you for your service and thank you for being here this morning. now, is it true that some members may propose some suggestions for internet and cyber-security? yes or no? >> the answer is yes. >> to both witnesses. do you think it is wise for the

united states for internet matters not settled definitively? that is, privacy and cyber-security? yes or no? >> by consensus. >> it would be a bad idea. >> now, i understand that some of the countries, like russia and china, believe that policies for internet related is a sovereign rights of states and not multieye stake holders. is that correct? yes or no? yes, that's correct. >> that's their position?

is that the question? as i understand their position, yes. >> it is wise to maintain that most closely resembles the procedure act model that we use in the united states as opposed to what china and russia propose? yes or no? >> i would not want a legal stake put in place at the multistate level. i want to make that point clear. >> looks like we're in agreement on that.

i know you are both aware the president has signed legislation that pre-- permits the f.c.c. to have an auction in which sellers and broadcastees can eekt -- elect licenses in return for revenues. when the incentive auction is over. now, would you please bring the subcommittee up to speed with where things stand in canada and mexico with respect to this very important matter, particularly for our constituents particularly as there is no additional freak wednesdayies

available for displaced stations in my hometown of detroit if the ban is prep started. i would ask you to be bree on this. >> these are things that have to be worked out and must be worked out by agreement between the two countries. as you mentioned, there is a legislative ban that no one deems -- so this is going to be

a complicated engineering matter. there is both the treaty and the statchtri obstacle gages that need to be observed. >> is there -- yes or no? >> yes. >> i'm a little list comfortable about some of the other folks down at the commission. are you comfortable with everybody else that the commission hairs your good will on this matter? >> i certainly hope so, sir. >> i do, too.

i'm like the felt owe walking down the street and they asked, are you an optimist or pessimist. he said i'm an optimist. they said why you are stopping? he said i'm not sure my optimism is in check. >> thank you mr. dingell. now we recognize the gentleman from tennessee for five minutes. >> again, i thank you all. mr. ambassador, a couple questions for you. when was the last time that the state department published a notice of an official meeting to prepare for the wicket 12? >> you know, i'm not sure when they did. i understand that we had an obligation to publish notices.

>> let me help you out with that a little bit. the last public notice i could find was january 11. from what i've been able to find out, the state department is holding regular meetings of stake holders on a regular basis, and you've done this all year long. to prepare for the conference. isn't that correct? >> are you managing a list serve for stake holders to circulate position papers to inform the u.s. delegation in advance of the wicket 12 prep tri meetings? >> yes, that's also correct. >> that's correct. so then, first of all, how do you get on the list serve so that your aware of what's going on, and then how can my constituents that are not just

the largest and wealthiest companies on the internet or the intellectual elites participate in the process if there is no way for them to know how to participate in that process or when the meetings are going to take place? how do we advice them on this? >> this is a legitimate question. the notices that are made, and to my recollection, and the lawyers in the state department was that we could notice -- we could provide a general motoris as a legal matter for these regular meetings. it is easy to get on the list if you know who to contact. it is something that is impeerkal public information. >> i would like to make certain,

because this was going to be the most trans-- transparent issue, and now we get to an issue important to a lot of my constituents, and they feel blocked out of this process. commissioner mcdowell, i appreciate that you have been an outspoken critic of wicket 12 and appreciate your effort. let me ask you this. you have been to nashville. you have done a town hall meeting in nashville. you know that they are very concerned about what international control of the internet would do to them and do to their lively hoods. so, you know, how do we go about this if the f.c.c. doesn't have an open docket for comments?

don't you think that would be a good idea to have an open docket if these individuals, these small business operators would be invoight vited for comment? you know, i know that at one point, there was one. >> as i look at this issue with the docket, one of the things that concerns me is that the f.c.c. still has a proceeding to

reclassify the internet, telecom service. tell me this. how is that open proceeding different from the proposals in front of the i.t.u.? shouldn't we close that docket immediately? >> yes, we should. i think it sends the wrong signal internationally and this should be closed as soon as possible. >> thank you for that. >> my time is expired. i thank you for the questions. >> thank you. the gentlelady from britain. >> i want to thank both the ambassador and the commissioner. it is great to have such bipartisan support on this issue. i want to thank the chairman and ranking member for having this learg as we approach the wcit.

i'm not sure that all the questions that need to be asked have not been asked. but as my colleague usually says, not everyone has asked them. some have suggested there is need for greater transparancy in the i.t. process. do you agree? if you do think there is a need for greater transparancy can it be accomplished without regulation that hampers the freedom of access? >> if i understand your question, the desireability of global transparancy in nen for the i.t.u. process, yes, we have recommended various measures along those lines over the years, and i've seen some come to fruition, some not. there are steps that we can and we do take here in the u.s. to try to aid noni.t.u. members to

understand what's going on there in terms of making materials available that are available to us as a member of the i.t.u., and as i mentioned earlier, the speck information with it, the council report, document, one of the most critical documents should be made public once it is, in fact, an issue. in the next several weeks. >> commissioner, do you have anything to add? >> i have nothing further to add scompept to say that i have heard time and time -- compebt to say that i have heard that the i.t.u. generates revenue from having civil society groups, non-voting member states join the i.t.u. for i think about $35,000 or the equivalent

thereof and that's a way of generating money for the i.t.u., and then you can get certain documents. i have found it difficult to get some i.t.u. documents, and you kind of have to know somebody, and i am working for the u.s. government. this is something we are working on. i have faith in the incoming ambassadors to address that issue. >> there is also a suggestion that the i.t.u. should have nongovernmental voting members. is that something you think should happen? if not, there must be a way for them to have some significant way of participating in the discussion.

>> well, the i.t.u. follows the general u.n. model in terms of voting members. this is essentially the architect of the great estrogen racial. -- of the greatest generation. there is an opportunity to find greater roles in non-state participants. there are other forms of membership in the i.t.u. that are nonvoting. this helps make the other members more successful and participate tri in terms of non-nation states that may be involved.

>> you talk about the proposal, but is it possible to have any kind of a light-touch regulation without threatening freedom? >> no. >> it is not possible. >> it is a sales pitch for a much bigger problem. >> i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleladieesees. jsh the gentleladiees back the balance of her time. >> everything has been said, just not everybody's said it. what in congress do you hope that the norks with other countries to ensure a strong position that the internet remain free and open without the harmful -- that the negotiations

with other countries to ensure a strong position that the internet remain free and open? >> as prom gated in the last day -- an idea prom you will gated in the -- an idea promulgated in the last day or two, it becomes clearer the united states is unified on this particular set of issues. secondly, i think this hearing itself is something very valuable. it provides a demonstration that we in the united states are united across political lines. we hope to have an opportunity toward the end of this month.

this is for members and staff p interesting in speaking on it. it also provides a sense of some of what we think are the needs that we have in terms of going forward and participating in the conference. >> i would agree with everything the ambassador said. i think we need congress to clarify a position that not even the smallest change should be allowed. but also, following up on the -- having another check-up here and maybe the first of of the year, because there will be many more similar circumstances coming forward.

>> to help bridge the gap for those who can't get education, a lot of things we take for granted that third world people do not have access, too. it is essential that the internet is available to bridge that education gap in third world countries. the question is, some of these countries are looking at the international telecommunications unit as part of the solution on that. how should we respond to this legitimate concerns and how do we coordinate them to enhure -- ensure that moves forward. this would do more to help third world countries' progress than a lot of other stuff that we've spent trillions trillions of dollars on. >> we think it is very valuable.

it also, as regional aconnect -- regional meeting that the u.s. can participate in, and it is addressed to the kinds of issues that you have described. so it is a very valuable instrument in terms of disseminating certain information on social issues. >> i think that is the growth of wireless, and wireless access has been explosive to growth there. it has been tremendous. that is primarily because governments have stayed out of the way, as in this country as well. so i think we need to let the market work and encourage other countries to get out of the way

as much as possible, because the mobile internet is the future for improving the glotion condition overall. >> they may be able to learn, as far as our approach to distance learning, ladies and gentlemen, maybe we ought to be looking at the great successes being developed in places like panama and latin america where the privet sector is building nationally the infrastructure in a telecommunications way that actually surpasses even activity in countries like costa rica that has had a hard line and the great opportunities that's providing for, the education in third world countries. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back his time. the gentleman recognizes mr. bass. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. again, a lot of the issues and questions i have have already been addressed by other members of the committee. i would say this has been helpful and informtive.

both about how the process works and how there should be an implementation or a top-down implementation of the internet, if you will. and your comments about an engineering morass and economic uncertainty i guess is sort of dark and dismal spectre for economic freedom over the internet is very apt and hopefully many other nations, especially third-world nations understand the consequence of this, given the fact that the structure is delivered to bodies relatively democratic and third world nations have quite a bit of power. commissioner mcdowell, you published an op-ed recently in the "wall street journal" in

which you mentioned the internet has helped farmers find buyers for crops. i can give you examples of industries that have created whole new economies that did not exist before, before using the internet. i was wondering if you can speak about how the multistate model helps small businesses and how the international regular layings if they went in effect would hinder them. >> well, as many people have said already, it allows innovation without permission. so when you combine liberty that comes with mobility and you combine the invention of mobility for marty cooper with the invention of pacca switching and the power of the internet, you fundamentally change the human condition more so than any other invention i can think of maybe compebt except fire, and i'm trying not to be hyperbolic.

you are able to communicate with a person, and that does more to empower the sovereignty of the individual than any other element i can think of. so you have farmers that can find buyers for their crops without having to take on the risks of traveling to the market where they could lose their crops and they could be stolen, or the buyer might not show up. so they can take care of that atransaction. parents can find medicine for their sick children. much more powerfully through the power of the internet. >> doesn't the multistake holder design really unique in that it prevents government entities and nongovernment entities for that matter from controling the design of the network and thereby the content that rides over it.

do you agree with that? do you have any comment or collaboration on that? >> i think generally we think this is enormous and instrumental in the internet that we have today. we are really anxious that the freedom of information remains as a centerpiece in terms of one of the many capabilities of the internet. and this multieye stake holder modl tries to protect this. it brings all voices to the table. there is an ethic in terms of no one set of voices is especially privileged -- privileged. >> i'll just conclude. my father had the honor of serving in this body when i was

about the age of your son sitting behind you. i remember well going to a science meeting, called the space committee in those days. it was the greatest committee you could be on at the time. he was so excited that here i was in this great place, and i wept through this hearing, and i didn't understand a single word, but when i got out i told all my friends that i knew call kinds of things about where i was going. so griffin, i expect you to brief your dad and make sure he's set straight on where we are headed. >> i appreciate that. with that, i recognize the gentlewoman from the virgin islands. >> i would ask you to insert the "new york times" editorial onto the record. >> without objection. the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio for five

minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> thank you everyone for your testimony. keeping the internet free from government regulation. i would like to ask a couple questions briefly. i would like to go back to the whole question as to businesses and business regulation that can happen out there. but the chairman has conducted hearings on cyber-security that have been very insightful while we are here. in your testimony, you have the

russian federation bill asking for i.p. addresses. there will be phone number shortages or the chinese would like to see the creation of internet users registered using i.p. addresses. i think, you know, you end up with a lot of totalitarian regimes that gives them the ability to identify and silence political disdense -- disidence. how would you look at those areas that would give those countries some other kind of advantage on, you know, attacking the united states or gaining more intellectual property that's being stolen within that today? because, again, the more it is out there, the more countries have to submit of themselves to other countries. upping, it is hard enough right now to protect what we've ghot. >> i think the general theme with that, also just looking at

history and other signalies, would be a scenario where they might want the rest of the world to live under a set of rules that they then break. in other words, they would break the rules, and that would be to their advantage. >> this is one the state department looks at very hard. it is one the state department accepts. these are issues that obviously are complex in terms of getting around appropriate enforcement modes and so on. there is certainly debate about the importance of intellectual property protection in the context of the internet. it is something that's very important. >> thank you.

and mr. commissioner, you brought up your testimony about that there are some government officials that may have had international universal service fund whereby state-owned telephone companies would have mandates to charge on a basis with broad band. when someone comes to the united states and has spent hundreds of millions of dollars to do that, would that then put u.s. companies at a disadvantage? especially since you've been looking at a lot of companies in this country having financing? >> i think you have to look at what destinations attract the most traffic. it might be youtube or itunes, or netflix is expanding internationally as well. especially with the video

applications, they use a lot of band width. the point here is there might be international mandate for some sort of regulatory regime to impose these charges. and that is the concern. if companies want to enter into contracts in a competitive market, i'm all for that. but we don't need an international body applying this to anyone that's disadvantaged. >> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. shimkus, who i think is the last person to ask questions of this panel. >> thank you. i apologize for keeping us longer. it is a very important subject. it is important if you have been involved in democracy and freedom movements in at least the eastern european countries. i pulled up great technology, the cyber-attack in 2007.

just returned from the nato assembly meetings in estonia over the break. i have watched the crackdown of dissidents in belarus. and commissioner mcdowell, you're highlighting the prime minister of russia's compam compact quote, -- russia's exact quote, international control of the i.t.u. should give every one of us concern. those of us who follow these movementses -- movements are rightly concerned about question and answer statements. the movement to do this is for regime stability and regime preservation. i mean, it is clear. look at the actors -- russia, china, iran, i imagine north korea would probably be on there

if they had any concern of anyone having computers to begin with, other than the handful that they allow. downloading movies, i'm not going to go there. and briefly talking about, will they -- the whole cyber-security is linked into this somehow and they are using cyber-security as an excuse to get further control . and with that we should be concerned with, especially from state actors who have used technology to cyber-attack other countries. they would be the last members of the system. embassadors, you want to comment on that? >> in the specific context of content contributions asserting there ought to be some sort of regulations. discussions have tended to be at a very high level.

for example, something like all countries should be possible for protecting things of that nature. the united states opposes any significant effort to bring regulation into the i.t.u. or governing bodies. there are enormously significant issues involving cyber-security. there is a great deal of engagement in the united states and other countries about how to improve the cyber-environment. they don't think they can open desireability that goes any place at all in terms of these i.t.o.'s. >> any comment on that? >> my concern is that such international mandates could be used as a sword and shield by awe thoretarne -- by

authoritarian regimes at the same time. as a general matter, we should be very concerned before entering into any international agreements on this that we are disadvantaged. >> before i had to leave the room. the process with the consensus agreement would though then have to go back to this -- the national governments for, like, a treaty ratification. as we have seen in other treaties like kyoto, not to pick on it, some countries picked it up. some countries -- the united states never voted on it. i think that's the issue of balkanization that you are refering to. would not countries that kept -- wouldn't that disenfranchise those countries that think they are trying to use it for their

own regime stability and regime preservation? but it would really hurt them in the global economy and developmental process? so they are cutting off their noast to spite -- they are cutting off their nose to spite their face if they do this? >> would you agree with that? >> i would. >> i would. >> thank you mr. shimkus. we appreciate the questions and answers from our two panelests. you have been most helpful in what we face as a country and the challenges ahead for dubai. thank you. we appreciate it. we'll call up our next panel of witnesses. ambassador david a. gross. former u.s. coordinator for international communications and technology. u.s. department of state on behalf of the world conference

international telecommunications ad hoc working group. miss sally shipman. senior manager for public policy for internet society, and mr. surf, vice president and chief of internet evangelist for google. we all admire that title it certainly has aed us to have internet connections and all those things you helped create. internet evangelist. we thank our panel and we will start in with ambassador gross. he will be our lead-off witness on the second panel. again, just pull those microphones close, make sure the lights are lit, and you should be good to go. thank you, ambassador, for your work on this issue in the past, and we look forward to your comments today. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. ranking member. it is a great privilege and honor to be back here with you all today. i probably should start with an

apology to the audience that i did not bring lunch with us, so i will try to be brief. i want to underscore a couple points that have been made both by the questions and answers presented by the first panel. first of all, i think it is important for the american people to know i think the preparations for the upcoming wicket conference are in excellent hands. i think we have seen this demonstrated by the statements and actions of the ambassador we saw this morning, by assistant secretary larry strickling, by the white house which plays an important role, and as was announced earlier today, by ambassador beer, the incoming head of delegation terry framer. i will con fepsfess i have known

>> the world recognizes the role congress plays on these issues domestically and internationally. these are issues for which we are all together.

we have a committee put together to address the issues, and i think there is much to be learned from the diverse membership of that group. that group that often takes different views on domestic issues, and that's to be expected. but they come together and are unified as the american people are unified on the issue that brings us together like the internet, the importance of the internet and the role of interdepartmental organizes in regard to that going forward. there are two things i think are particularly important to focus on about wicket. one is its important to remember this is not just another conference but this is a treaty writing conference. the outfit of this will not be just language that is used but international law. and therefore, it is very, very important that the details be dealt with very carefully.

i am confident that leadership will be maintained. it is the great road to the internet that has benefited the people in the developing world and elsewhere perhaps most dramatically. i think that is first and foremost to keep in mind. it is also important to recognize as we made our comments this morning, that this is not about the i.t.u. institution. the i.t.u. is an important institution of the united states. something the attorney general has been important as a leader and helpful to the united states and otherwise. having said that, this is about other member states as has been outlined by a number of the answers earlier today, and those are the issues in the coalition group to build the issues we need to address and the fact that we need to guide them. and with that, i believe my time is about to expire and i don't want to delay this any further.

>> thank you for your leadership on this issue but your testimony today and your encouragement on our bipartisan issue which we hope to move rather rapidly. we are delighted to have you here today, mr. surf. we look forward to your insights on this matter. >> thank you very much, chairman walden. i see the ranking member has departed. i appreciate your participating today. members, it is my honor to address you. i am currently vice president and chief internet evangelist. as one of the nears of the internet i am here today because the open access to the internet has never been at higher risk than it is now. a new internet battle is brewing

which will determine the future of the internet and all of us. from people to internet cafe and far-off countries do not pay attention to what's going on, users will lose the open and free internet that has brought so much to so many and can bring so much more. if we follow the path of inclusion, openness and common sense, i am convinced the internet of the future will be even more powerful and even tsh an even more powerful economic engine and communications tool than it is today. the other path is a role of top-down indication by government. this is a system that promotes exclusion, hidden deals, attention to indiscriminate surveillance. any one of which can significantly hinder internet innovation and growth. at the crossroads stands the international telecommunications

union, an agency of the united nations that came into being to regulate international telegraph services four years after the pony express closed its doors. this agency plans to meet in six months to propose changes to the international agreements governing telecommunications. until this year, the i.t.u., which through the u.n. includes 193 member countries, each with only a single vote has focused its attention ton telecommunications networks and -- attention on telecommunications networks and standards such as the radio freak sizz and encouraging -- frequencies and developing the internet on the whole. the organization recently passed a resolution in gaudharia --

guadalajara calling for an increased roll in i.t.u.'s in governments. this should cause significant concern. in addition some powerful states see an opportunity to assert control over the internet through a meaning -- through a meeting in dubai. several states would threaten free expression on the web. others have called for unprecedented mandates and economic regulations that would, for example, impose international internet fees in order to generate revenue for state-opened telecommunications companies. the attack on the open internet has many fronts. say, for example, the shanghai cooperation organization which counts china, russia, youzhny -- uzbekistan as its members. it was proposed to the general aassembly for a so-called international code of conduct for information security. the organization's stated goal

was to establish government-led international forums and rules standardizing the behavior of countries concerning and sipe cyberspace. should one or more of these proposals pass, the implications are potentially disastrous. first, new international control over the internet could trigger a race to the bottom where a serious free-flow of information could become the norm rather than the exception. already more than 20 countries have substantial for pervasive online programs according to the initiative. the decentralized architecture that enabled the internet's meteoric rise would be flipped on its head. the new structure would have the consequence of hurting american business abroad. the decisions made this december in the i.t.u. could put regulatory handcuffs on the net th a remote agency holding the keys. because the i.t.u. answers only

to its members states rather than civilians, civil society, the acedemia and private sector there is a great need to insert transparancy into this process. so what can you do? i encourage this committee to take action now by urging the u.s. government in partnership with like-minded countries and their citizens to engage in this process and protect the current bottom-up pluralistic system of internet governments and to insist that the debate of the i.t.u. and all other international forums be open to all stakeholders. it is critically important for you to engage in helping ensure that the world understands that the economic, technical, and social enhances driven by the internet are endangered by these efforts. thank you for the opportunity to testify on this veerous matter. i will answer your questions. >> thank you. we appreciate your leadership and comments, mr. cerf.

>> we go to ms. shipman. thank you for being here. we look forward to your testimony as well. >> good afternoon. i am here representing a nonprofit organization dedicated to ensuring the open development, evolution, and use of the internet for the benefit of all people throughout the world. on behalf of the internet society and our more than 55,000 members worldwide, many of whom are joining us in the audience and are watching the web cast around the world, i would like to sincerely thank chairman walden, ranking member eschew and all the members. the internet was founded in 1992 by many of the same pioneers that built the internet, one who is sitting next to me. since that time the organization has served as a tpwhrobal resource for unbias information about the net. as an indicator for

technologists worldwide and as an oger of community-based initiatives around the world. the internet society serves as the organizational home fofert internet task force whose mission it is to make the internet work better. we produce high quality relevant technical documents that influence the way people design, use, and manage the internet. these types of documents include standards, guidelines, and best practices that create and continue to shape the internet today. the international telecommunications upcoming conference on international telecommunications has rightfully drawn heightened attention in the international community. some i.t. member states have proposed amendment to' key treaty that could have far-reaching implications for the internet. the internet has no voting role in the i.t. process we do participate as a sector member. in that capacity we have raised

significant concerns that rather than enhancing global property, the outlook could undermine the security, stability, and innovative potential of networks worldwide. the internet society understands why some of the i.t. member states are focusing on the internet. the internet has fundamentally changed the nature of communications globally and many of those follow under the auspices of the i.t.u. some proposals stem from the real pressures that developing nations face as they seek to update international policy networks to allow them to engage fully in a global information economy. we are not convinced the international treaty making process represents the most effect yive means to effect cross-border communications or achieve greater connectivity worldwide. we are concerned some of the proposals being floated in advance are not consistent with the proven and successful multieye stake -- multistake

model. we are afraid this could create negative outcomes for the internet. the internet model is characterized by several essential properties which make it what it is todays, a global network of networks constantly evolving that enables extraordinary envision and whose robustness is based on open standards, community collaborations and bottom-up consensus. as the internet was -- internet policy has continued to evolve to work harmoniously with the internet to ensure its on going development. this process that is provided the capacity to work with the necessary and fast-paced technological evolution. in contrast to this approach, some wicket legacy