to you as a public service by our television provider. > now in her fifth year on the federal communications commission. she served as acting chair for about half the year in 2013. welcome back to the communicators. >> it's my pleasure to be here. >> i want to start with an issue you've worked on for quite a while and that's the prison rate tell phones. what do you think of the current situation with regard to the appeals court and their partial decision on that? >> you were right to say partial because what i am most happy about is on february 11 rate relief will go into effect. so millions of families will have the opportunity to more afford bli communicate. now i will affirm that this is an interstate engagement and we

will continue work on the intrastate engagement. i am really happy that the state did not impact the rates that will go into effect and that's the most important thing. >> i read this is a $1.2 billion industry, prison telephone calls. >> it is an industry also that is highly concentrated. you have two providers that have 80% of the market. you do not have a competitive engagement for the families and for those legal persons that are representing those people in prisons because the only type of competitive engagement is when the facility puts out a bid or some type of notice. so that ends it and so the families do not have that type of engagement like we are afforded each and every day. there might be some reasons for that. but when you have a framework like that, that is not

competitive, that screams loudly to me for regulatory oversight or engagement. >> how long will this rate take effect? when will the next decision be made? this is a temporary engagement at this point. these are interim rates. we will continue to work on that. we are hopeful that by midsummer, early fall that we will have permanent engagement and we will of course continue to work with the states to hopefully ensure they embark on a pathway and if not then we will have to review our options when it comes to intrastate engagement. >> joining our conversation to talk about some of the communications issues facing the fcc is malcolm who is now with the wall street journal. >> the court threw out the rules but found that the fcc does have

authority in that area. what was your reaction and what in your view should be the road for the commission in terms of that neutrality rules? >> to maintain the course for open and free engagement. that has always been the objective. that will always be the objective. and you made it clear that the court gave us a role. it upheld our 706-a and b engagement which covers advanced communications options and opportunities and insent tives and for those who are not -- do not navigate in this space often, we are talking about broad band or high speed internet. it upheld our transparency rules hich means a provider must disclose their rules publicly, their network principles. they must tell us how they are engaging with us. it also laid out a significant roadmap for us which i am very

happy about. it said that if you want to stay the course, if you do not want to make any changes as to how you classify the internet, then you have the data roaming order that you can look at for possible pathway forward. lot o this decision made a of headlines about a lot of legal scholars are debating about what it did not dorks i am concentrating on what it did do. it still provides the public a transparent opportunity to engage with their providers and that's a good change. >> tom wheeler has been cagey about what the road forward is in his perspective but there are indications they are not planning to reclassify broad band. how do you feel about title one versus title two for broad band

internet. >> i take issue with that. he's been very forth right in saying he will accept the court's invitation to act. we are reviewing our options and we of course will again stay firm to objective for a free and open engagement. >> moving to another topic which is of interest to a lot of viewers. it's the blackout rule. we saw this at the end of the season. i believe your last act as chairwoman. >> it was. >> what impact will that have because we are hearing there could be blackouts for nfl games. what impact will it have? >> it's determining what will or will not happen in terms of private negotiations. looking at why the rules were initially enacted, where the moneys -- most of the moneys back then were ticket sales, the majority of that came from ticket sales and there was a

reason 40 plus years ago for this type of engagement. the reason no longer exists. so we are out of that part of the business. we will be. i trust out of that part of the business. and i think the negotiations are where they belong between private enterprises. so i'm hopeful that the fans will have more opportunities to engage but that is of course in the hands of others and hopefully not the f.c.c.. >> another issue that's been discussed publicly and that the f.c.c. is the issue of cell phones in airplanes. how do you personally feel about that issue? >> when you talk about the verbal engagement, i am like many who might not welcome that so broadly. i have often said that when i am traveling on amtrak, that i run, not walk to the quiet car. but what this, i believe and i know will provide for consumers

and it already has on some airlines is more opportunity for data rich engagement. it will open up the market for more competitors to provide options so it will be hopefully over the long term less expensive for those to engage. when you look at the international ecosystem when it comes to this, i have been told that 90% of the engagement is data only. so a very small part is conversation. what is also great about this is up to the carriers, up to the airlines to permit that type of conversation. what i know is already happening, i sat next to someone last night who said thank you for allowing me to engage with my e-reader. don't have to take this big book. it will enable that type of engagement and i think that's good for consumers. so i am not so hung upton voice

engagement because i think the way in which our teenagers and the way in which we engage on spleans very quiet and very data driven. >> one of your greatest accomplishments was the wireless interon rabblet agreement. this is something you collected the various carriers in a room and told them to hash out on agreement. can you tell us more about that process and do you think that's a model for how things can get done at the commission? >> i hope so. i grew up learning by example, the way we conduct ourselves with family and friends. when we have a disagreement we is it down and talk about it. on july 31 we sat in a room with a dozen or so of our closest friends, wink, wink.

and we entered into a series of conversations about why not in this space and how can we get there. and what we saw meaning as the f.c.c. as neutral observers, is that the parties were not that far apart. they were just so firmly entrenched in their positions. so we were able in a relatively short period of time to help broker a voluntary agreement which already is providing dividends for those in rural areas. it's already providing significant build in those areas which were basically landlocked. these small carriers purchased and bid on these properties on this spectrum with the anticipation of being able to build out. now that is possible. and it's possible in an expedited manner because we did not take a route that will be challenged in court. so i'm very proud of that

engagement. we did it the old fashioned way. everybody came out with something. no party came out with everything they wanted and that is the spirit of cooperation and negotiation and i'm very proud of and hope that it is contagious. >> how do you feel about the h block spectrum option so far? >> i am hyped. the last time i looked at this within wednesday morning we were in round 42. there was approximately $1.2 billion already committed. 176 of those areas -- every area is engaged. i am very proud of being able to take credit for circulating that item when i was acting chair because it is going to bring 10 mega hertz to market in a short period of time. it's going to provide a down payment for first responders

network that had l provide a nationwide public safety platform for this nation. again, not so long ago it was spectrum that no one thought was valuable. so our engineers did a lot of hard work to ensure this spectrum was ready and able for this wireless mobile engagement and i am very -- i'm still anticipating. we set a reserve price and i am confident -- i am hopeful we will exceed that. >> what do you see as the timetable for the larger spectrum auctions which are due at the end of this year? >> in terms of aws? you're right we anticipate to be engaged by tend of this year. the big talk is the incentive auctions we anticipate all next year. we are working hard to repurpose a spectrum to its best and most

efficient use. we are engaged in a voluntary process following the model with broadcasters to ensure that we are able to support and to feed the public's desire and need for a rich wireless engagement. , the sprint owup folks visited with chairman wheeler earlier about the t-mobile sprint merger. what's your view of a t-mobile sprint merger? >> that is something i read about just like you. it is not before me at this time. so i don't think it would be wise of me to speculate. i am, of course, interested in a competitive options for others. i am interested in those players that are offering robust and varied services to be as strong as possible.

so whatever comes before me, i assure you that i will review appropriately but i will not engage in any type of speculation at this time. but thank you for the offer. >> setting aside talks of the merger. t-mobile is i think it's fair to say disrupting the wireless market currently. what is your view of competition in that market. the commission voted against at&, the to acquire t-mobile. are you happy with some of the changes we are seeing of late? >> i go back to the question earlier about the interon rabblet agreement. where i lay hope in those smaller regional providers will enable others and enable more competition to become stronger, their footprint would become wider. what i am hopeful as we continue

along this path as we free up more spectrum, as we consider different things and different configurations as it relates to that to possibly have smaller areas in order to bid that we will fuel the type of competition needed for small players to become larger and to fuel this competitive what i think would be mutely beneficial for all in terms of competitive framework. competition is a montra in which you hear us speak about. it is very prominent in the communications act. whatever we can do to help fassthate we will. >> on the other side of the spectrum you have the broadcasters and there are two concerns with them. one is will enough of them show up to bring in the at least 84 mega hertz to make the auction a success. and a lot of people in the industry believe it's the must carry stations which include religious ethnic broadcasters

who are taking this money and going out of business. will that impact communities underserved by media? >> that is definitely a concern of mine. those who might be more economically vulnerable. those who are filling some diversity gaps might be impacted. but with me, the market and the voluntary options should be open for all. and so what i am hoping as with other things if this does impact in that manner that we will continue to think creatively about how we can insent others cooperativend these relationships that could provide other opportunities. what can we do to intent is market to be reflective of the american experience? it's going to be a challenge if some of the pro dictions are true but there are going to be a

whole host of opportunities that channel holders will entertain. because in order to engage, you do not have to sell 100% of it. you can have partial engagement and that could pro mote and provide opportunities for the type of rich opportunities that we all want. >> do you foresee rule making or any action on media ownership rules this year by the f.c.c.? >> i anticipate some action on that in the coming weeks? >> in the coming weeks? >> is there anything you can tell us about the direction because the commission previously discussed relaxing the newspaper broadcast rule. are you for or against that? did you have a sfans on that issue and do you think it will be revisited? had >> these are things we have been talking about for a number of months as you know. i am looking forward to whatever the chairman circulates.

and at the i will be in a better position to answer your questions. again, i thank you for the opportunity. >> you mentioned talking with your fellow commisioners. greg wall don has proposed some f.c.c. reforms. would that make your job easier or more difficult? >> the spirit i think will make the engagement more robust and i think improved. we're taking -- if you followed our meeting this past january, we are doing some internal things in terms of process reforms ourselves. we have done an incredible job, our staff has done an incredible ob in circumstances, we've had shutdowns and budget constraints and the like. but we can't to do the public's

work. and so we've done some remarkable things under those circumstances but we know we can continue to do better. so the chairman has put forth in a crowd sources manner, a mechanism and a means for us to self-evaluate. we are not in isolation. we are not working in a vacuum. we continue to work with congress to better the process. but we continue to look within ourselves. getting information from those o do business with us from those internal in terms of -- i always say from the guard's desk to the chairman's desk. just looking at creative new ideas in order to improve ourselves. we are in the reform business. we are in the process reform business and i am really happy that we are not satisfied. we are doing a great job but we are not satisfied with that. we want to do better. >> you are in your fifth year at

the f.c.c. have you been surprised at the engagement of the american public with the commission? >> i am pleased because people recognize particularly with one of our key objectives providing a more umbick to us broad band pportunity in this nation. communities know how enabling this is. i'm pleased at the level of engagement. i am pleased people have figured out i'm at the f.c.c. and not the f.t.c. they recognize how important this agency is and it can be a partner to progress. the word is pleased for me in this context. >> turning back to broadcast. some groups in town have been circulating concerns turnover lack of diversity among the owners of broadcast stations. the broadcast market has

consolidated quite a bit in the last couple of years and by some counts there are no stations owned by african-americans. as somebody who was a media entrepreneur yourself, is this a concern and do you see the internet filling this gap at all? >> that is absolutely a concern. i am looking at the internet and other platforms to august meant. it's not a substitution. and i will not be satisfied until there are pathways to parody in terms of engagement. it is important by way of programming and ownership that the american experience is reflected. i just really think that's important for opportunities, for information dissemination. the critical need of our society i think are better met when there is a reflective engagement. so i remain concerned and will not be satisfied until there are

opportunities for all on all platforms. >> now of course, representation of minorities in the media has declained significantly since the recession at a greater rate than other groups. we do not see what we once saw in this area which is the commission reviewing the broadcast licenses of individual companies. are there any that would encourage representation. >> that is one of the areas i continue to be reflective on and welcome robust engagement from the public in terms of guidance. >> commissioner, one paragraph in the president's recent state of the union address addressed broad band and public private partnership. will the f.c.c. have a role instering those private moneys from the different telecom companies? >> we are doing some of that now. when you look at the connect

america fund that used to be the high cost fund for the universal service fund. we are leveraging private dollars and targeting public dollars to areas where there is not broad band enabled service. we are already doing that by enabling investment and opportunities. we embrace the president's initiatives. i had the tubte to attend the announcement at buck lodge middle school. and i was in there with an enthusiastic audience willing to embrace that engagement. we know government cannot do it alone, not with the current economic state of play. we are looking for legally sustainable creative ideas that will close those gaps. we have 15 million americans who do not have the infrastructure for broad band today.

they are primarily in rural areas but not 100%. we have a little less than 100 million people who have not adopted broad band in home and when you talk to them the economics is the primary reason they cannot afford broad band after paying the rest of their bills. we have some very significant issues to attend to. we have some very significant problems we need to address and only through a collective engagement, a public private partnership, in some ways a public public partnership can we narrow those divides and address those gaps. >> you mentioned the digital divide and the fact that cost is the driving factor in broad band aadoption. there are some debates over this. some people say digital literacy or people don't understand the

advantage of broad band internet. if cost is the primary issue, it would seem an argument for reclassification which there could be cost program terse put on broad band by the government. do you see a program like that to subsidize broadband cost for lower income households. ? >> one of the things we are doing we have some broad band pilot trials, we have about 14 or 17 models where we will see, we will glean from that data exactly what direction the most effective means for to us head. e have not been satisfied with only targeting rightfully targeting that type of financial incentives and engagements in those areas. we are really trying to see what types of things work, what types of insent tives work. and hopefully within a few

months i will be able to look at that data and come back to you and say here is the pathway we think is best to address those issues that you put forth. >> what kind of state of disruption right now in the telecommunications world when u think of google tv and netflix, the aerial case is at the supreme court. is it time to rewrite the 1996 telecom act? how often do you have to refer back to the 1934 radio television act? is it possible in today east world to regulate and manage all these components? >> it's becoming more and more of a challenge. i cannot is it here and say that it hasn't been. we've been talking about i.p. transitions but we're going through technology transitions. sometimes people say that we are in a digital world and trying to

fit analog regular tear framework. i won't get into that argument with you today but what i will say is that we are increasingly forced to be more creative in erms of how we deliberate. we are continuing to be engaged experiments which will take part, we will see in some of the i.p. trials that we are i think we will get more feel and more by march 6 is when some of the experiments are due to come in. sooned this type of engagement is a recognition that we may have some challenges as it relates to the existing framework but we mutely recognize that things are changing, things are evolving and it's in everyone's best interest to retro fit and work

together for the greater good. >> the i.p. transition is something that has taken up a lot of the commission's attention of late. we ran an article on this and we received quite a few letters some of which we published regarding the fact that the i.p. network is not as resilient as the existing phone network and at times of disaster, it is not as reliable. how can this be addressed and what do -- which values and regulations should be transferred from the existing phone network to this i.p. network? >> the existing values that are cod fide in the act remain. those are non-negotiateable. so one of the reasons for these experiments or these trials is to address the very same issues that you put porth. the transitions in which we are experiencing have offered some incredible positive engagement, more opportunities, more

capacity, more options for those with disabilities, video call e-91tunities for those for engagement. but you do address some of the challenges in which the reason for these i.p. trials are we think it's so important for a host of people to engage from public safety networks to those dealing with healthcare issues, big and small, rural cities and urban centers. it's so important for to us address those issues. things are changing. we are migrating and cutting the cord. we are moving from wired line to broad and t.v.m. to band. it will include and ensure these

networks as hardened as possible. working with the utility companies meaning legacy utility the electric gas companies to help with resiliency. when we talk about location, the accuracy in terms of cell phones, indoor accuracy, all of these things are issues that are important, that need to be addressed and they will hopefully with a robust i.p. trials which technology transition trials will be adequately addressed. s.f.c.c. ne of five commission neers. she's been our guest today. >> c-span scrated by america's cable companies in 1979 brought to you as a public service by your television provider.

>> tonight c-span's first ladies series continues with a discussion about the life and career of laura bush. followed by an interview with the former first lady at the george w. bush presidential center in dallas, texas. and later the 70th annual washington press club foundation dinner. featuring members of congress, journalists and other dignitaries. >> i'm here to voice my strong support for the courageous people of afghanistan. women and men who have suffered for years under the taliban regime. each and every one of us has the responsibility to stop the suffering caused by malaria. because every life in every land matters.