television entertainment services with more than 20 million customers in the united states and 15 million customers and latin america -- in latin america. on the worldview corporation board of directors. before joining directv, he was the ceo and vice chairman of pepsico international from 2003 through 2009. prior to that, he served as president and ceo of frito-lay's and asianafrican, division. -- middle east division.

, he wasoining pepsico the senior vice president and general manager for avon products. he worked as a management consultant before that. he holds a masters degree from johns hopkins university and a bachelors degree from boston college. lieberman is a. graduate of johns hopkins. fordhite is also a foundation fellow at leningrad state university in st. petersburg, russia. constituents are very loyal customers. our next witness, we are glad to stephensonr. randall

, the chairman, president of at&t. let me say this. at&t is one of the world's largest telecommunication companies. note that over the past six years, at&t has invested more capital into the united states economy than any other public than $140d more billion invested in wireless operations combined. that is erected to be proud of. i commend you for that. , he servedcoming ceo as the chief financial officer at at&t from 2001 through 2004 and then as the chief operating officer from 2004 through 2007. he was appointed to the board of directors in 2005.

he began his long career in telecommunications in 1982 with southwestern bell telephone in oklahoma. in addition to his leadership at at&t, he is chairman of the business roundtable, an association of leading u.s. ceos.ies' he is a member of the pga tour policy board and a national --cutive order member of the board member of the boy scouts of america. we welcome you. you are obviously plugged into rural consumers, too. your background there in oklahoma. gmeyer, we welcome you.

he advocates for public interests before courts and policy makers and works to make ,ure that all stakeholders including citizens, artists, and innovators, have a say in shaping and merging digital policies. he received his ba in english lit from colorado state university and his jd from the university of colorado law school. our final witness is mr. ross lieberman. he is the senior vice president of governmental affairs at the american cable association, which represents 850 independent cable and broadband operators

serving smaller market central areas. he manages the formulation and implementation of the group's strategic initiative on capitol agencies,ith federal including the fcc. prior to that, he handled government relations for echostar communications , where he oversaw their filings with the fcc. he received his ba in political science from johns hopkins jd fromty and his american university, washington college of law. we welcome you. 's writtene witness statements will be entered into the record in their entirety. at this time, we will ask each of their witnesses -- are witnesses to summarize his testimony in five minutes.

with that, we proceed to hear from our witnesses. mr. y, you go first. -- mr. white, you go first. >> good morning. thank you. my name is mike white. i am ceo of directv. tonk you for inviting me testify on the proposed acquisition of directv. for any business to succeed in the long term, it must satisfy its customers needs better than the competition, day in and day out. this transaction will help directv and at&t do exactly that. by combining complementary assets, products will be able to offer new services to customers at a better value. we will help consumers watch the

video they want, when they wanted, where they want it, and on the devices of their choice and we will be well-positioned to compete well into the future. i would like to briefly describe the perspective on the transaction. tv is aally, direct remarkable american success story. we have competed aggressively by delivering more high-definition , clearer picture, and better customer service than cable. has also had a lot to do with our success. making sure we could a prior -- acquire the programming our subscribers demanded. in recent years, broadband is changing everything. to continue to compete effectively in the internet driven economy, we too must adapt. we must provide an integrated bundle of services. demandingaren't better bundles of video and broadband -- are demanding

ndles of video and broadband. young subscribers in particular want services like youtube, netflix, and hulu. we need a broadband platform to meet their need. changes, wechnology must continue to optimize our own video service. waye's to wait -- two services allow cloud-based features. operators areable leveraging the cloud to improve services quickly and easily. we will need to do all of that if we want to be able to keep up and continue to compete successfully. continue to to manage content cost increases.

writing content cost challenges all video providers. yet bundle competitors can handle this somewhat better because they are never knew from multiple sources. historically, directv has remaind -- tried to group --ve by presenting synthetic bundles. but they make for a bad customer experience. to pay to separate bills and make two calls every time have a problem. they also tend to be more expensive for consumers because each company seeks its own margin on its contribution to the bundle service. this transaction will help us meet all of those challenges head on. it provides directv's assets and at&t's assets.

it will mean better bundles, more internet, particularly in rural areas, better video, lower , and it means more and better broadband to 15 million new locations, predominantly in rural areas. more innovation, particularly combining our expertise in video with expertise from at&t in wireless. if you put it all together, you put a transaction that lets us better serve our customers, unlocks incremental job growth opportunities, and sustains long-term competitiveness. it opens up a new world of possibilities for directv subscribers. they queue for inviting me to speak today. i look forward to your questions. -- thank you for inviting me to speak today. i look forward to your questions. i'm randall stephenson. chairman and ceo of at&t.

i appreciate the opportunity to visit with you. transaction is unlike most mergers. it primarily confined -- joins companies with complementary services. the rationale for us coming together is simple. it is about meeting consumer demand. it is something that consumers can get from the cable providers -- directv has the premier pay service, but it does not have a broadband product. to compete, at&t offers bundles , most importantly broadband and tv.

less than 2% of our customers purchase tv on a standalone basis we don't actively marketed because we don't make money on it. we can only offer video and a small portion of the country. we don't even cover all of our broadband footprint with video. that is due to technology and economic limitations. no significant competitive overlap between at&t and direct tv. the consumer benefits of this transaction are significant. being able to offer directv nationwide is a game changer in terms of the economics for deploying broadband. to expand andus enhance broadband service to at least 15 million locations

andss 48 different states those are mostly in underserved, rural areas. this directly results from the synergies created by the transactions. this commitment includes 13 million locations, 85% of which are outside our traditional footprint. we think this is big news for rural america. theseimate that 20% of customers have no access to broadband. another 27% are hostage to only one provider. at&t service will be the fastest available. their first will be chance for truly high-speed broadband. this also allows us to expand our one gigabit service. we will not be able to serve 70

million customer locations with broadband. this will allow us to price more competitively and provide consumers a more high-quality experience. consumers will receive greater convenience from a single point of contact, as you heard mike described. we will be able to accelerate the deployment of our new over-the-top video services offered by at&t, as well as those offered by netflix, amazon, and hulu. we will be able to deliver them to any screen. in a competitive environment which is only becoming more competitive. the cable companies are ready dominate broadband and video today. ever faster wireless services are transforming competition daily.

to be a moreow us effective competitor to cable. i want to are sure you and our customers that we will do all of these things well meeting or exceeding the fcc net neutrality ourdards and exceeding labor practices to employees and providers of the companies. thank you for the opportunity. >> thank you. >> good morning. thank you for the opportunity to participate in today's hearing. i will describe how the merger can harm the public. is clear.standard antitrust authorities cannot allow this merger to succeed if it may reduce competition in any market. this tocannot allow proceed unless at&t can show that it would benefit the public. based on the record so far, at&t has not met its burden.

additionally, policymakers should be aware of other dangers. at&t may leave rural americans behind. at&t may plan to use the acquisition of directv to jumpstart an online video service. at&t must offer any service in a nondiscriminatory way. it would reduce competition in the pay tv market. they compete head-to-head in the pay tv marketplace in more than 60 local marketplaces. lose aers will competitive choice. the level of market concentration would exceed department of justice guidelines. that means higher prices and servicevice -- worse for many viewers.

this does not address the structural problem that at&t would cause to remove the competitor from the marketplace. at&t's public interests are less than meets the eye. record withpotty regard to past merger commitments. at&t now claims that there -- if committed in 2006 to serve 100 percent of residences with in its services with broadband. why are people still unserved? at&t also has a history of using already planned buildout as a merger promise. when you strip away previously announced plans, even at&t's best case is less than it appears. it is simply stating that it will upgrade portions of its network. that is not much. adding a new kind of home

wireless service to an existing wireless coverage area is not a significant investment. there are for the public interest charms. universal service laws state shouldose in rural areas have access to telecommunication services that are reasonably comparable to those provided in urban areas. at&t has not shown that its wireless home product is not comparable. policymakers should be concerned. at&t plans to create a new online video service. they should be free to enter this market. it cannot take advantage to favor its own services at the expense of competition. while it has agreed to abide by the terms of the fcc, those rules provide a lesser degree of protection for wireless users. thank you.

>> thank you. an unprecedented wave of consolidation is occurring within the video programming and distribution industries that will transform the competitive market and consumer experience. this is cause for concern. congress and regulators must not only review the pending deal, it must almost examine and address the underlying market problems feeling it. focusing on at&t's deal, it is important to realize that direct tv is not only a nationwide provider of pay tv service, it is also a programmer with interests in three regional sports networks and national programming. this gives direct tv and economic incentive and ability to charge its rivals higher fees especiallygramming,

its regional sports networks. this could lead programmers to hold up for higher rates. at&t and directv combined will command better programming deals. this means higher video profits for both services. that asrs have accepted a per video subscriber process of a vertically integrated pay-tv rise, so does its interest in boosting its rivals costs for its programming. will feel thers pinch when negotiating and their customers will pay. approvers should not the merger without addressing this measure.

there is no longer an arbitration commission. however, this is not enough. this left smaller cable operators under protect it. -- protected. congress must also look at the bigger picture, by reviewing existing roles to ensure that industrywide problems are addressed. this will ensure that consumers continue to benefit from a competitive pay-tv market that includes smaller operators. aca members have long raised alarms. the programming costs were smaller providers significantly higher than for larger providers. the spread, around 30% come up with my members at a substantial

disadvantage to bigger competitors, like directv, dish network, and comcast. acquire directv does not surprise smaller operators. even though the subscriber base nearly exceeds that of all smaller cable operators combined , its motives for buying directv .2 it facing similar market problems. to it facing similar market problems. while at&t can lower programming ,osts and better compete smaller operators cannot because they lack the financial resources. scale. unable to spend their way out of trouble, these video providers struggle increasingly to remain viable.

dealcritics of at&t's raise concern about the number reducing providers from four to three. some smaller cable operators of closed systems, leaving consumers with only two satellite providers. competition has not generated much concern from washington, it should. americarmful to rural and signals wider market problems. aese trends are not reversible. congress and regulators can take action to prevent my members and their customers from simply being unreasonably disadvantaged compared to their larger competitors. in conclusion, there are three areas were oversight and action would be meaningful. by examining and

addressing programmers discriminatory pricing practices against smaller pay-tv providers. second, by modernizing program by updating pay-tv paysories so that everyone their fair share. thank you and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. at this time, i recognize chairman of the committee for five minutes. >> thank you. thank you all for your testimony. mr. stevenson, i noticed you taking some notes during the testimony. are there one or two points you want to make in response to the criticisms of the merger? not a criticism of the

merger, he was siding a blogger that said we had not fulfilled merger conditions and i would like to make sure that the committee hears that that blogger was patently inaccurate, the data was false, we totally complied with every single condition imposed in that merger. in fact, what the merger required was that we provide 100% of rock band coverage, 85% of fixed broadband services. at that time -- >> we have a limited amount of time. i get your response. let me go onto my main -- >> we have all been blogged before. >> we understand that. to me going to my main point. this is all about what happens to the consumer. let me talk about my consumers in my district, in my hometown of roanoke number virginia, the bundle package that you refer to

right now is available for verizon customers with directv. i and others can get that package that you refer to. what will happen to that package that i have or someone else might have with verizon and directv end of this merger? >> my expectation is nothing should change. >> what about at&t? do you offer those packages as well? >> yes, we do. mike referred to those as synthetic bundles. choir's it necessary to to bundle -- acquire directv continue the bundle? >> i would like mike to address that, if that's ok. >> we measure customer satisfaction on everything we do. satisfactionre the of a bundle experience versus someone who is just buying directv solo, it is dramatically

poorer. two bills.ations, >> how does verizon solve the problem? do they acquire dish? i'm not sure what i have available to me with at&t. i know what is available with verizon and that does not solve the complaint you just outlined with regard to verizon. though i'm not familiar with the complaint. we like the service we get. >> the only way for us to get a seamless, integrated bundle -- we have tried to find a way to get better value for the customers -- when you have two separate companies tracing margin as to one integrated company that can spread the cost over that one install.

every time we send up a new customer, we spend $850 come a we can probably reduce up to 20%. that savings going to get on to the consumer? an economistd study it. the bundles would be a better value for consumers. anothere ask you about issue related to this. directv does not provide local --risonburg comerford genia despiteburg, virginia being legally able to do so. directv beams in content from washington dc, which is many hours away from my district. can you explain why directv has opted to not provide this

valuable local content to my constituents and can you commit to resolving this situation so that my constituents can receive local content than washing -- washington, d.c. content? in alks back home live different world. they want to watch that world on tv. >> we have been working on our system for many years. we now serve 99.4 percent of american households with local channels. we still have a few gaps and you have pointed out one of them. >> there are more. >> that is correct. there are. we are continuing to build out as we get satellite capacity. we have two more satellites getting up in the next few months. the others will be on the list as well. there are orphan counties. we would be happy to work with you on coverage in some of the orphan counties, provided we don't have to pay retransmission .ees twice

it comes back to the rules we have to abide by. >> thank you. i yield back. >> this time i recognize the ranking member of the subcommittee. >> as i noted in my opening statement, this transaction substantial opportunities for transforming labor standards in the telecommunications industry. the communications workers of america noted in a letter that largest full-time union work of any company in america. i know everybody doesn't agree that that is something that is worth a, but i think it is very worthwhile. i would ask unanimous consent to ake it part of the record letter from the communications workers of america in support of

this merger. >> without objection. without objection, i'm sorry. stephenson, many of your employees, including workers and union positions enjoy great benefits. plan to extend this industry-leading respect for the rights of employees to directv as a result of the proposed merger? mentioned, we have the largest full-time union in the united states. we have a long history of working with our union members at -- in collective bargaining. we have always been open to contract neutrality and we have opened employees to make the choice as to whether they wanted

to be represented in collective bargaining or not. with directv, we should assume that they will be offered that same option, to collectively bargain or not. it will be their choice. >> i agree. i agree. we certainly welcome the opportunity. i think there is fabulous talent that at&t brings. think directv has great talent as well. we think they're world-class benefit programs will be a good thing. i would like to ask you both to talk a little bit about the 's commitment to diversity, the merged company's commitment to diversity in a number of different contexts. everyone will agree that having a diverse group of individuals as real partners, both inside and outside the company is important.

at&t's public interest statement pledges that at&t's diversity best practices will be applied to directv. such action would be laudable, given at&t's history and promoting supplier diversity and inclusion. cleese describe the best practices -- please describe the best practices referred to in the public interest statement. will start with employees. we have a strong belief that our employees on to reflect the markets we serve. i don't believe you can be successful in a marketplace of you don't have employees, executives, and all the way up to the board that reflect the market we serve. we think we have a good track record in that regard, all the way from our board down to our front-line employees serving the market. we also extend the commitment and expectations were -- to our supplier community. in 2013, our supplier community,

, overou look at the total 25% of our spend has been diverse suppliers. of billions ofss dollars in diverse suppliers. our cultures are very compatible. we look at direct ev, we see comparable practices. -- directv, we see comparable practices. >> anything to add? >> 40% of our workforce are people of color. 43% of our new hires were people of color. 42% of our summer interns are people of color. i passionately believe that you cannot understand customers, if your employee base and management base and your board, and our board does as well, reflects that diversity. commitments of our to diversity and inclusion at directv. i would say, i look forward to

leveraging some of the supply chain. best in class work in that area. >> that is great to hear. do these best practices for diversity apply to banking and finance? >> yes, for at&t, it is through all the disciplines. it is 25% across all disciplines. we impose these supply requirements -- diverse supply requirements. >> thank you. i yield back. question -- how the proposed merger will affect americans jobs. let me go further than that and say also, the prices that constituents pay for both video and internet. benefit?customers

will this create jobs? >> mike made this comment in his opening statement. this deal is about growth. i'm very enthusiastic about this for a couple of reasons. as we both stated, these are complementary assets. you are not going to have the significant overlap of responsibilities as you do in a traditional merger. in 75% of the united states, we don't compete at any degree. to the extent that there are overlapping jobs that need to be taken care of, we have a very good track record at at&t of elegantly working our way through those, using attrition, placing people in other assignments.

this deal has a lot of investment tied to it. enhancing 15 million homes with new broadband is a significant capital outlay, in spite of what some of the comments were, this is significant capital. these are hardhat jobs that will be deploying this capital. arrays,ves new antenna installations in the home. there is a lot of capital investment tied to this. capital investment is synonymous with jobs in our industry. i so good about this from a jobs standpoint. >> do you have anything to add? >> i would only echo what randall said. athink of this is complementary combination, taking the best assets of two. this size,merger of

there are significant job losses. that is not the case. this is a very different transaction. this is going to create job growth. it is going to create better broadband access to rural america and it is a win-win for both sides. >> we are talking about two service calls on two different days. customers benefit from one call. that is not the kind of job consolidation any of us are concerned about. we would love to have new services offered and capital created is new jobs what we are looking for, not duplication of the same job. this is been described as a merger between a broadband provider and an internet provider. --hink that is somewhat true i mean a video provider, i'm sorry. and a broadband provider.

universe -- you do have a video offering -- u -verse -- you do have a video offering. that is very popular in my area. i want to know what is that going to do going forward -- would effect is this going to have on u-verse? u-verse will continue to expand. one of the advantages of this is that directv, because of their content programmer relationships, we feel very good about what it will do to our overall content on u-verse.ing we are losing money on u-verse. this will allow us to turn that into a profitable operation.

this changes the economics. we can expand it. -- wee an opportunity have committed to expanding the platform by an additional 2 with a full one gigabyte broadband capability. >> thank you. i final question is this. is this.al question many rural members were concerned about issues related to rural programming and the importance to customers. many have interest in rural communities. i have asked you a similar question. important toica at&t? rural america is very

important to us. we had opportunities in the past to sell off our rural assets. we have chosen not to. we have been working digitally ash diligently to provide a broadband solution for rural america. now, when you have a profitable tv product that reaches railamerica, it changes the economics even for rural broadband deployment. this is going to allow us to build out a rural broadband footprint using new wireless technology -- fixed wireless local loop. this is one of the more exciting technologies i have been a part of for quite some time. to building aed 13 million homes in rural america. it will be priced like a landline service. thehink this gives us

opportunity to do exciting things for rural america. at this time, i recognize the former committee chairman, mr. conyers. >> maybe future chairman. [laughter] >> you can leave it like that. i just want to ask about the comment anything mr. burgmayer shared. >> when it comes to the investment promises at&t is making, i would urge the subcommittee to put them in context. it is important to distinguish

upgrades from new build outs. a lot of at&t's numbers consist of upgrades, adding a fixed wireless product to an existing wireless coverage area. that might be some amount of .nvestment it is important to put it into the context of the existing upgrade plans. they already have a fairly ambitious buildup plan that has something called project vip, which talks about a lot of the new buildup in coverage that at&t plans to do. it has an initiative where wants to upgrade and number of activities -- cities. , the not exactly clear scope of at&t's existing plans. we know that they are, but it is hard to quantify them. anys difficult to compare new commitments they are making today to those existing plans. when it comes to broadband

coverage, i would make the point evolvingdband is an standard. if we expected at&t to provide a certain level of service in 2006, you would hope they would meet any commitment and continue to upgrade the service as the definition of broadband continues to be reworked by the fcc and policymakers. that is my concern. it is not enough to simply meet a certain commitment and then stay there. we expect a continuing level of investment. >> do you generally agree with those comments? >> no, sir. i generally do not agree. the commitments we have made, i think they're very well-documented. we will build broadband to 57 million homes. we will expand our video foot rent by 8 million homes. we will pass one million business locations with fiber. people pass 300 million

without broadband, mobile broadband lte service. those are all documented public record and are in our financial filings and we're fulfilling those. -- commitments we have made 50 million new or enhanced broadband are all on top of that commitment that is in the public domain. the capital requirements to do that. just 2 million households with fiber to the home is a significant capital investment. the 13 million fixed wireless local loops, that is a massive geography we are talking about passing. it may be incremental to investment that is already there. >> do we have a consensus here of his rebuttal? does that work out for you? i understand that at&t has a

very ambitious buildup plan. some of the numbers in question that are supposedly in the public filings are rejected and confidential in the sec filings, i i -- fcc filings, so haven't looked at them. it is difficult to see how the numbers are simultaneously rejected and public -- redacted and public. how merger specific are these, says? these merger specific are promises? >> mr. stephenson, how would allowing this transaction to go forward result in putting onnward pricing pressure cable products? >> it is an interesting one.

you heard mike described the process by which he sells video services. you put the two together and you have a lot of customer efficiencies that come with that. we had an economist study this. we had a detailed econometric model. before the merger synergies were incorporated, this would have not only a downward pricing bias on our prices, but also on the cable companies prices. >> let me get a response from mr. lieberman before we close out. >> mr. stephenson and white are polished about the benefits they are willing to make. we have not heard them talk about the concerns that they are vertically integrating programming, particularly sports

channels. they will have an incentive ability to increase prices. if they're going to be making public interest commitments, it would be nice to hear them talk about a commitment to address that problem him as well. >> the time has expired. the chair recognizes himself or his questions. something.o back to i want to make it clear that directv will not be forced to unionize, correct? >> no, sir. we leave it up to the employees. >> will it be a required vote? >> the union has to go in and solicit and see if they can hold about. ? -- hold a vote.

>> i had previous questions about the time warner merger. when the subcommittee held a hearing on that merger earlier this year, could you give me your opinion on that issue? >> aca is confirmed -- concerned that time warner cable would be able to exclude agents and advertisers from regional advertising interconnect. this would not be the case from at&t and directv, which do not control and advertising interconnect. >> i would like to open it up. >> i would make two comments. differentg is quite a business model. most of our advertising is national. i don't think it affects the market at all. it will open up opportunities for small businesses to advertise. as it relates to the regional sports networks, we have three

of them. at&t does not even have a foot rent in those three states -- footprint in those three states. and we are subject to the program access requirements of the fcc. i believe the vigorous competition will help consumers get a good deal. is genuine markets choice. directv's&t and written testimony, you say this merger will increase competition. , buttition is not an end it should help consumers realize an actual benefit. or atu say with certainty least is it possible in the business world at this merger will or will not directly result in more choice in short-term and long-term and to what extent? it is portrayed in these mergers that this is what will happen, but the reality is spotlights are often this does not happen.

i would like to hear each of you answer that question. take the pay-tv side. wem a customer standpoint, believe in choice. we sell a pure play offering. it is going to be like vanilla, chocolate, and strawberry. we will have a pure play, a , adle with at&t capability new benefit for consumers. in terms of the overall value to consumers, today those bundles are not very competitively priced. when you make one company, you will see a better value on goal offer to those customers. >> a quick question. full disclosure. will the two different services become a bundle opportunity for us or are we stuck? >> that would be your choice.

the way we have built our business, it is up to the customer to decide. we will give that choice. you can choose a, b, or c or you can stay where you are. >> there is another facet to this. when you ask about consumer benefits, the over-the-top model is developing very quickly. million wireless subscribers at at&t or demanding access to the types of content that mike has on the directv product. one thing you should expect to see as we begin to integrate the offerings and deliver that content seamlessly across the mobile devices, that is one benefit. the second is in terms of consumer benefits, the 15 million additional broadband homes passed is a in -- a significant consumer benefit that would not happen but for this transaction. obviously, the pricing implications. i will not go into the

econometric model, but it is really compelling for what happens to rising across the industry. assume the other to disagree with that. this issueo back to the chairman brought up. conversations with your folks. i want to continue to harp on this until we get this fixed. this is not an issue i am going to let go of. my time is expired. we will go to the gentleman from new york. >> thank you. let me thank the witnesses for your testimony today. there has been some discussion about the workforce transition. i want to go over some of the ground again.

unionizedhe largest work force of the country, correct? >> full-time union. .> i commend you for that you have been able to be an incredibly successful company with that workforce. europe lawyers are represented by the communications workers of america, correct? >> yes. >> what is the percentage of unionization of your current work force at directv? we have outsourced partners, but specifically as it relates to directv, in terms of owned employees, it is mostly a nonunion workforce. some of our installers in the northeast and elsewhere are union. >> have there been efforts in the past? >> we have had a vote in one geography in california. >> what was the outcome? >> that result was in favor of

unionizing. we have had some questions from our standpoint about going through with the commission about challenging that. we are waiting for the ruling. legacy directv employees, i believe you have indicated that they will have an opportunity to join the union? >> we have it policy of open card check neutrality. that potential transition will be through neutrality in terms of card track. >> when we bought at&t wireless for example, we opened up the workforce to card check. vote,ion came in, held a and across many locations, they voted to join or to become part of the collective bargaining process. we leave that up to the employees to make that decision. you expect the merger to create jobs.

you both testified in that regard, correct? >> yes, we are enthusiastic about that. in 15are investing million home build outs. >> in terms of the ambitious capital buildup program and the complementary nature of the company, there does not seem to be much disagreement about that, there is an expectation that you would create jobs. mayer, is there a reason for you to disagree with that? >> in mergers, there are usually job redundancies. that is not the focus of my concern. i am more focused on the consumer side here today. the potential creation of jobs, is there a specific reason -- a regional distribution you would anticipate with -- would receive

any job growth? more so than other parts of the country? >> the places that come to mind first are the 2 million homes that we are passing with their gigabit technology, high-speed broadband capability. that involves taking fiber all the way to the home, putting electronics in the field. that is a significant build. that will be within our old traditional franchise landline territory. the 22 states where we operate today. built, theroadband wireless deployment, will hit 48 states. that is going to be a fairly broad-based deployment. jobs align with n our company. they're perfectly correlated. i don't want to mislead. there will be places where there are redundancies in jobs. but we do have a very good track record on how to address those situations and we use extensively patrician and --

attrition and also good about that regard. >> you don't currently offer video services in the new york city market, is that correct? >> we offer wireless services and large corporate businesses we offer service to. >> but not video. >> not today. >> directv does offer video in new york city, that's right? >> we do. >> how do you expect the potentially merged entity to the nature of the services that would be offered by a combined company? >> in urban markets like new york, there were not be any change, frankly, in general, to what a pay-tv standpoint. we will continue to compete hard. we will have an opportunity to bundle on the wireless side. that is something different we have -- than we have done before. >> there is no current bundle in

the new york city market. >> we might with verizon and was slower speed internet service. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. at this time, i recognize the gentleman from texas. >> thank you. he is the vice chairman of the subcommittee. >> i would like to follow-up with you on the question that mr. collins asked about local broadcasters. as the satellite technology is adopted in homes, how does the local car dealer reach that market outside the local broadcast stations that you carry? whomever canr or go to a cable company and by sales of theocal channels and with satellite it does not. i would assume u-verse had an

ability to buy local ads on cable and if you didn't, you should have. >> because it is a local product, it does of local advertising. as competing with the large media companies that are much larger than we are. more recently we have a new technology that is a bully us to do targeted advertising. it is the new technology leveraging the internet, which is enabling us to target homes, and we are hopeful to grow the local advertising, but historic of 60070 million dollars and advertising his local advertising and very small. >> i wanted to talk now common

sense to meet dictates if you have a driving force behind broadband right now is a video. if you have a cheap way to deliver video through satellite as opposed to broadband, there is discouragement in rolling out your fiber network. i read an article in the dallas you arenews about how still rolling it out because you are competing with google, fiber. so how are we going to see the rollout affected in market and when is it going to out to the misguided -- midsized cities and eventually the smaller towns? it's one of the interesting things about this transaction, and i have referenced it a couple of times now. our video service, whether over

fiber or fiber to technology, we lose video service. directv and creating the opportunity to make our programming costs look like direct tv makes our fiber-based tv product profitable. it was -- once it becomes profitable it fundamentally changes the economics of a fiber build. so we state when we announce the deal that we will expand fiber to the home footprint by 2 million homes, it is because of the economics of a more profitable video product. --your district, corporate corpus christi, 60,000 homes will get fiber optics as a result of the transaction. so it changes the economics of a broadband bill in mixed fiber

deployment more compelling, not less. >> you are willing to tell me under oath it will not slow down your fiber the appointment? this will cause us to do more fiber deployment. about lowering programming costs and the buying power you get with the merger him and i see how that it is a competitive advantage. what about making space available for new coming new television networks or you see a huge growing market and spanish-language networks, a growing language in sports and news for the sorts of things. what is going to happen with respect to if i got for bid did not get the next year and decide to start blake to be. >-- tv. as you can imagine, we get

request or new channels all the time. right now we are considering 50. what are the request? 152 independent channels. we welcome that as of the -- important part of the diversity of the offerings. gigabit to like the the home where you can do affordably you can do video that we would have more diversity of independent channels. >> thank you very much. i see my time is expired. >> thank you. .> thank you >> thank you to the witnesses for being here. i would like to start with mr. stevenson. at&t has failed to demonstrate any public interest benefits from the transaction, and in large part, he argues the buildup you are speaking about is 13 million customers

enhancements rather than build was part of your capital investment anyway. not specific to this merger. how manypeak to this? filled out for new customers? isn't something you plan to do anyway and not specific to the merger? not to say it is not a good thing. and you respond to that. i went through earlier what specifically have made. they are in financial comments. meet -- 300 million people. all of that is baseline. we are finishing that construction now. the 15 million broadband either enhancements or editions are all incremental.

the team million is split. 13 million this technology we are very enthusiastic about. fixed wireless local loop. interesting name for the technology. it is taking advantage of areas where we have significant spectrum. we are deploying the technology and using wireless to deliver 15-20 megabits to those homes. use significant infrastructure to put up the capability but a lot of installation required. there are 2 million homes were it is called enhanced but we are deploying fiber to the home. digging up streets and putting fiber into the home is a significant incremental commitment to what we have already made. several witnesses and the testimony have raised issue with , andct to net neutrality

should part of the remedy to address the issues that have been raised with the transaction rules toet neutrality wireless? should we do that? we have been very constructive in the net neutrality debate. we worked extensively to design the rules and make sure it accomplished what the tech industry people needed. on thek they landed right place. they were very cautious to head into the wireless area. we have limited spectrum. it constrains what you can do to deliver traffic can be very hazardous to service quality in general. we we ought to walk very

cautiously and the delicate and how we deal with the wireless situation. >> could you talk to me about what directv is committed to doing or why it will be part of the merger agreement to make sure smaller, independent -- aels will be paid us fair rate given that at&t is the second-largest video distributor and will only have a market position enhanced? what commitments have you made or what term's will through part of the merger agreement to t?otect that jacob clearly every distributor of video is struggling with rising content costs. they are growing as far in incomes. consumer high single digits. this is put tremendous pressure

on the business and need to raise consumer prices. i would say that covers how we look at all negotiations with egg and small. on the big guys. i think we're probably been a leader in the industry to keep costs lower. we have the public interest obligations we continue to live with him a four percent of the channels would be pio's. 152 independent channels. in today's world and over-the-top as an option, we can put things up as an application, just like we have done with pandora and youtube so we can expand beyond that. >> i would ask the final two witnesses to submit written answers to the question. if there are things you suggest we can do that would eliminate

the concerns you have raised, actions we could take that would respond to the important issues you raised, you would answer that and writing, i would be grateful. i yield back. issa.ime i recognize mr. >> thank you. as a chairman next door, i am used to going first. usually most of the good questions have been asked, and this is no exception. i want to run a concept by you because i serve on this committee and a member of the energy and commerce committee that often looks at the other side of the issue in the fcc. so when i say comcast time warner nbc, at&t direct tv, or rise in fox, dish network cbs, sprint, t-mobile, abc and google

and everyone else, are we looking at a future in which in order to be competitive theanies have to find partnerships, the allies, mergers in order to be able to we -- real viable competitors come in this case direct to the at&t to the other hypothetical and not so hypothetical names i mentioned? >> certainly for anyone distributing the paid television cost ishen 60% of your the content you distribute, we are just a distributor, and seven companies control 75% of the content costs, so we are already in the world of dealing with big scale providers of , tough negotiations big and small. in our case we have had our battles with big ones on behalf

of customers. i think as a reality to do the investments we are talking about thebroadband, and to me, exciting thing is not just the commitments we are making today, at the fact of at&t having profitable video business will support them to continue to invest in increasing speeds and broadband which we know where the future is going for the long-term. >> i do not know where future and whatmoves go consolidation expires, but we view this as very different. this is not comcast time warner. >> you do not have a major content element? some of the other names and hypothetical names i mentioned do have. we're putting his tv product was our broadband and wireless product and creating a new --

unique value proposition but there is not a content play per se. in your opening statement you were very concerned, but i would presume you had been equally or more concerned when major cable companies and content providers joined, correct? >> mr. lieberman, same thing? >> definitely a concern. not only content providers buting with distributors also distributors getting larger. when they get larger, they get more influence over programmers. that drives them to get larger as well. as a small provider, does not have the resources to get larger themselves. they suffer. areas consumers in rural and do not have options and that maybe the market we're going to look at. of the rayburn

office building, we deal with the antitrust question. antitrust since the dawn of antitrust has been about recognizing companies naturally not for a trust situation that gives them an unfair advantage. do you all agree? the opportunity for real competition. so now i go back to the basic question, which is not just for your merger but in my mind for how this committee deals with the promoting of competition. in fact, do we not have a problem that we create certain large energies -- entities that compete in my household to make sure i have multiple choices to my household where ever i admit that in fact we will not have competition either for delivery wecontent or quite frankly

have a problem with delivery of content being at a good value. we think it is certainly true and we think this merger creates a greater opportunity to combine with a broad and capability. for us, every satellite cost $400 million. ,andall is spending $10 billion 20 billion dollars in capital spending. it is expensive to pre-wire america. that is what we are about collectively. >> the good news is those launches tend to cost a similar amount, although spacek is reducing the cost of the launch. -- spacex. i am competition that competition from space becomes a competition that hopefully this committee realizes needs to be viable to maintain antitrust

environment. >> i will yield you 15 seconds. want to make a statement about government investment in infrastructure. the space program. hundreds of millions of dollars that the federal government through taxpayer money spent to prepare, to turn that industry over to the private sector, which mr. issa is so proud and justifiably is a tribute to government spending. that, i will yield back. >> the gentleman from north carolina recognize for five minutes. >> we want to know in real terms what it means to them in north carolina. we have had lots of good conversations at this hearing. i would like for you all through

boil it don't end answer this question. three years from now, what are the top two things you think that my constituents, your customers, will appreciate or dislike about the merger, and i will ask mr. stevenson, mr. then to hit the top two points. 50 million more rural americans will have internet service that do not have high-speed internet tonight. i think up to 70 million homes out of 115 million will have a much better bundle offer to compete with cable companies. >> as that plays itself out, what the model will show and firmly believe is there will be downward pricing pressure in the industry as we become a more viable competitor, program costs

climb at a lower rate. we think it is beneficial to consumers from a pricing standpoint. we think also more broadband is very good for the over-the-top content distribution models. more broadband will help excel -- accelerate. think they will not appreciate in three years? things they will not appreciate in three years. >> the rising price. i think number two, concerned that they would have is the increasing pressures -- decreasing cap petition that smaller providers can provide as a result of the increasing consolidation in the marketplace, not only due to at&t and directv but comcast time warner cable. >> if i was a rural resident i would wonder whether i was resigned to only having wireless

choices or whether i had some future prospects of getting the same sorts of fiber and high-speed options available to people in more densely populated areas. i agree over-the-top video is a consumer to consumers. future hope in the customers are not driven towards using the one or another over-the-top video provider. that it does not discriminate in favor of the service and discourage people from using competing services. for example, only its own service from data cast but not that of its competitors. >> thank you. i yield back. >> at this time recognizing the gentleman from missouri, mr. spent. -- mr. smith. lex thank you. my first question is for mr.

white. the american cable industry estimates the cost that at&t and directv may receive as a result of the proposed merger, which may lead to higher programming cost for their members. how do you respond to that? >> first of all, the reduction in programming cost is a reduction in the cost that currently at&t pays. it is all related to the cost of content that at&t pays today. our believe is that as we look at that, frankly all of us bottled in the negotiations every day. there is significant amount of leverage.

>> do you think the merger will increase the cost of the competitor by any means? >> this is nothing to do with our capability. 20s is about servicing the five percent of customers because they cannot get a bundle right now. furthermore, i think the faller -- smaller operators are very powerful. they negotiate very tough and i do not expect them to see prices increase any higher than they already are. ruralave a very congressional district in southeast missouri engine unserved population. at&t and many other providers have made sick netiquette reduction to reach constituents. many struggle to get dial-up.

can you explain how this will result in increased advance services for rural communities missouri, the fixed wireless local loop this will accommodate. this makes the economics for deploying broadband very attractive. we will use wireless technology, which will get 15-20 megabits, build 13 million in rural america. 330 households with this technology. this one we are most enthusiastic about. we have been looking at this for a long time trying to get the economics to work and it works when you put a profitable video product with the technology. that is what missouri should see. >> thank you. overallting

congressional district with your statements there i want to point out the only way i can get internet service at my house, 13 miles from a community of 25,000 people is through wireless. or satellite. it is extremely important for burrell america. lieberman, larger size competitors typically have an advantage relative to their small rivals as a result of the economies of scale. smaller sized competitors can outperform large rivals from service and product quality. what other competitive advantages, aside from size, will the combined entity of at&t you.irectv have? >> thank consumers do benefit from having independent distributors in the market. they are important in a

communities and often in areas where larger players do not want to invest and do not want to serve. with regards to your question, first and foremost, i cannot discount the importance of being large when you are negotiating for programming cost. even direct tv and at&t have said 60% go to programming. that is to deliver the video service. the same for smaller operators as well. being large has other advantages like more financial resources whether or not it is marketing to your customers for instance. these things give great advantage to directv and a lot of their competition with smaller operators. >> will the members present throughout my district, will they be able to compete with the combined entity of at&t and direct to the on the basis of conductervice entire

quality? >> they will compete. they will do what they can to overcome the significant disadvantage they face. ist competitive ability getting more and more difficult over time. if your customers enjoy having a competitive choice between two satellite providers of the local cable provider that i think they need to look at the underlying rules that are driving consolidation to answer consumers can benefit from that in the future. >> thank you. we are going to have a second round for members who are here if they desire. johnson, do you have follow-up questions? >> let me mr. stevenson mentioned net neutrality and ,hey were committed to the fcc

some of their guidance. in general i am not sure what the fcc position on net neutrality is. seems to me they're backing away from what was originally conceived as net neutrality. >> as i understand that at&t has follow the rules. part of her merger condition. the my promise to abide by role even though they are no longer enforced for some of the industry. users, while they provide less, they do not provide no protection. one of the providers is for .ervices the provider offers some cases where it cannot discriminate against competing

services. if at&t does offer a new over-the-top video service, those provisions of the rules might taken. >> you are subject as a common carrier. we have seen reports of fast lane, slow lane. >> we are working at the fcc now for strong net neutrality rules

that would apply to the entire industry. i question whether it makes sense to have rules that applied to one company and not others. i prefer them to be industrywide. if they go beyond, presumably at&t would be subject to that. if they go not as far as 2010 thes we would hold onto 2010 rules. >> i know there is discussion about a common carrier. i will not get into that. something the committee should have a look at. discriminatory pricing obviously is a concern. preserve what we have. you talked about a differential of 30% in your testimony.

the use of the proposed transaction will increase directv affiliate programmers and send it to charge higher prices to at&t, directv rivals. then you say regulators with -- should adopt a remedy to eliminate the ability of directv affiliated programmers to charge higher prices. thing wouldsame apply to comcast, nbc, and obviously others. it would not be just direct tv. i know there was arbitration that expired. had to submit to arbitration. i think comcast still does. i think you said in your statement that you did not feel like that was sufficient. or discriminatory pricing. >> let me start with the issue that is most directly tied to the deal, which is the intent --

the incentive to charge the rivals higher prices for programming, which will get greater as a result of the deal. currently and not enough protections to avoid the problem. arewhite has explained they subject to them currently. however, those rules themselves are not enough. even directv has suggested in cases where program access r&d exist, but there should be-protections. fcc has asked for that same condition. baseball style arbitration based on coming up with a rate based on fair market value for the programming. that has expired. we believe a similar condition should be adopted to address that, but the one previously

adopted had some flaws. they remain too expensive for smaller operators to use. if you have a remedy too expensive for the cable operator, you pretty much have no remedy. we need to be looked at this type of from it he, but some modifications to it to make sure it works for all providers. >> just to eliminate the ability altogether? >> yes. what we should do is eliminate the incentive to increase prices for rivals more than the price they would charge to non-rifle -- and non-rivals. >> it will be interesting as you go forward their. , one oflose by saying

the proponents of the merger is directv continuing relationship with the nfl. what can you share with us regarding that relationship and your customers ability to get a package. imagine, nfl content, all of the customers are excited when we kick off the new season. we have a 20 year relationship with the nfl. the relationship is excellent. the current deal is a multiyear deal and expires at the end of the coming season. we are in active discussions about renewing the nfl sunday ticket product. we're very hopeful and optimistic that will happen. i am confident based on the discussions we will get that

done before the end of the year. >> esther johnson will close the hearing with this question. >> as part of the merger with nbc universal, comcast pledged to partner with schools to teach and encouragecy adoption among low income families. comcast, likewise, committed to adopting -- offering low income families broadband internet access at an affordable rate. result of the program, nearly 1.2 million americans who joined the program, 86% of whom now use the internet daily. 21,000 in my home state of just over 17,000 families in the city of atlanta alone. will at&t commit to a similar public to advance the interest through affordable broadband access and digital learning -- diageo literacy

training? >> i am not intimately familiar with it but i will commit to you that we will look at it. i think it is probably not only the communities interested in something like that but probably our own self interest. we are doing a lot in terms of nano degrees, helping with low-cost education to help people get degrees that would help book with them in the digital world and are excited about it. we have made a number of investments to ensure the customers at that end of the market are getting robust broadband capability. in terms of good penetration of broadband to lower income communities is not but thess to broadband access to computers. what is happening is happening at a very quick pace. these are very low-cost

computers that are connected and giving low-cost for people of lower income communities to gain access to the internet and digital economy. glad to look at the areas you addressed and evaluating. includes a free monthly service with basic internet service for consumers taking a one-time construction fee to connect their home to the network. does at&t offer a similar service for its fiber networks? google did some very creative things in kansas city. i take my hat off to them. they then modify the approach and took it to austin. what they received in terms of permitting to build out a fiber was verynd austin interesting. as soon as they announced that

we told the austin community that if you will make the same concessions to us, we will build a fiber network as well. we watched back in november. it is a good indication of competition and the robustness of fiber deployment. >> for over 35 years, c-span brings public affairs events from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings and conferences and offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house. by the cable tv industry 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. up, speeches for

candidates after tuesday's primary election and live at 7:00 eastern, looking at unaccompanied children at the u.s. border. u.s. military options in iraq, and funding for autism research. today david cameron appears before members of the british house of commons. palace ofage from the westminster at 7:00 eastern on our companion network, c-span2. seven states held elections tuesday. in oklahoma, james lankford. in mississippi, republican senator sam cochran won a close race against the tea party challenger chris mcdaniel. -- senator thad cochran. next, we hear from both candidates.

>> thank you, wow. thank you very much. thank you. thank you very much thank you congressman gregory hopp -- harper, thank you for being here to celebrate a great victory. this is your victory. [applause] it has been a real pleasure working closely with so many of in townsg appearances all across mississippi, being in church services with gregory .arper attending meetings that were important to talk about the future of our state and what we have tonight is the reflect this

more andrences for better jobs for mississippi workers. force and capacity to defend the security interest of the united states of america. [applause] those were our principal links in the platform for the campaign. make sure we knew they were important to the election because it is a group effort, not a solo. so we all have a right to be proud of our state tonight. thank you very much. thank you for the wonderful honor and challenge that lies ahead. thank you very much.

[applause] [applause] our great lieutenant governor. a wonderful friend.

>> all right. this, we had a dream. the dream is still with us. [applause]

we have watched strange things happen. you are that was. i joined when i was 13 mans old the party of a named ronald reagan. [applause] it was one afternoon my father called me into the room and said you have to watch this, you have to see what the man is saying. thisre in the tv was former actor from california, and he looks right at me, right but was really speaking to an entire nation. things to us that intuitively made sense. he talked about liberty and freedom.

he talked about balanced budgets. he talked about traditional values. personal responsibilities. my father looked at me and said son, we must be republicans. indeed, we were and are. that is the party i joined. that is the party i have always been a part of. a party of principle at one point. a party of courage at one point. reagan that said we will be a party of bold colors, not pastels. and yet there are millions of people that feel like strangers in their own party. [applause] appears the different wings have not yet come to a conclusion. there is nothing dangerous or

extreme about wanting to balance a budget. [applause] there was nothing dangerous or extreme about defending the constitution and civil liberties there in. nothing strange at all about standing as people of faith for country we built, that we believe in. there is something a bit strange , a bit unusual about a republican primary that is decided by the parole democrats. [applause]

so much for bold colors. .o much for principal i guess they can take some consolation in the fact that they did something tonight by once again compromising, by once again reaching across the aisle and a conservative number. [applause] which parte to know of that strategy today the republican friends endorse. i would like to know which part of the strategy today our statewide officials endorsed. this is not the party of reagan. but we are not done fighting.

we have fought too long, fought too hard to have a voice in this party. today the conservative movement took a backseat to liberal democrats in the state of mississippi. the most conservative states in the republic, if it can happen here, it can happen anywhere. that is why we will never stop fighting. [applause] the people of the states are the most incredible, loving hospitable people i have ever been around.

traveling the corners of the state for the past couple months has been the honor of my life. this was a fight we needed to have. this was a fight that had to happen for the very reasons you saw tonight. will find a conscious of conservatives again. we will force the party to find a conscious as well. i want to thank you for being there for me. i want to thank you for standing with me. they have called me everything in the book. millions of dollars are -- dollars to care or assassinate one of their own. or so it seemed. ok.that is that is ok. i am still standing. [applause]

we live is a greatest country in the history of the world, no question about that. it is an oasis. we conservatives have a responsibility to keep it that way. stand for the principles. we will stand for our founders and the lessons of reagan, even sometimes when it is difficult, even sometimes when those within our own party shown us or ostracize us or rid of your us. we were right tonight. we were right. [applause] so thank you. as you know, there were literally dozens of irregularities reported all across the state. .nd you know why

you read the stories. familiar with the problems we have. to make sure job the sanctity of the vote is upheld. race ends we have to be absolutely certain that the republican primary was won by the republican voters. [applause] and so we will stand with courage. we will stand with judgment and

integrity and dedication. this is our fight, conservatives. it is necessary for years. alone, but we are not thrown to surrender. [applause] a strong and sturdy people we are, brave people we are. a people that can still leave the resurgence. that is right here in mississippi. god bless you all. this has been a great night. thank you for being here with me. [applause]

thank you all. >> in new york, 22 term congressman charlie rangel beat challenger in a rematch of the 2012 primary. the final result in the race had wrangle at 47.4%.

here are some of his remarks. >> in this contest but he came to support me before his vote wasn't. -- was in. the sandman has one. has one.an -- won. the sandman has won. [applause] the sandman has won. the sandman has won. the sandman has won.

>> thank you, thank you, thank you. thank you all. the lion has roared. you.y, thank where is my wife? i made so many promises to my wife, and i am going to have to start reducing. inc. you. bring up my wife here. i'll. alba. -- alba.

>> this is a very emotional night for me. i want to personally thank all of you for the support you have given through the years. a very emotional night for me. it has been a great journey and

without all your help we would not be able to do it. i want to thank you for the bottom of my heart for supporting us. i want to thank those who gave me the strength, even to consider running for reelection. johnny grains. all the pastors. here because of the lack of sturdiness of the stage. the rabbis who came out for me. caves, the doorman. the twins. there are too many of you for me but i wantdividually each one of you to go home and know that this was your victory.

congressman and and theout you resources. thank you. spanish] thank you so very much. thank you, molly. thank you, my brother. thank you patsy. thank you so much. our ambassador. internationally. thank you so much. the whole congressional staff. jeff eaton, vivian jones. tina mccourt.

let me think the campaign manager. christina james. -- reshina. charlie king, a consultant on this. great job over here. i want to thank all of the people who put this together. george henry who put the pieces together. the invitational star that came from the west side. thank you. so many people. the stage is thinking. thank all of you. god bless you.

>> the house financial services committee hold a hearing today on the reauthorization of the bank./import the official credit agency of the u.s.. you can hear the hearings live starting at 10:00 eastern on c-span three. >> for the second day this week, the hearing on the influx of unaccompanied minors that the u.s./mexico border. today immigration and customs officials testify about the children that have crossed the border since october. but coverage of the house judiciary committee starts at 2:00 eastern on c-span three. >> for over 35 years, c-span brings public affairs in france from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings and

conferences and offering complete gavel to gavel coverage of the u.s. house as a public service of private industry, c-span created by the table -- cable tv industry 35 years ago and brought to you by your local cable and satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. isy, " washington journal" next. 10:00 eastern, the house returns are morning hours speeches. maintenance ofd oil and natural gas lines and maintenance facilities happening later in the day. and in 40 five minutes, congressman henry cuellar at texas on what is driving unaccompanied immigrant children across the u.s. border. options in iraq and defense priorities. of guest is rob wittman virginia, men of the armed

services committee on readiness. and autism speaks cofounder and former ceo of nbc universal for federal and private research funding for autism. >> good morning, everyone. six term incumbent defeated as tea party challenger state senator chris smith daniel in a mississippi gop senate primary runoff tuesday night. he beat make annual 57.7%. than 4800ce of less votes. he failed to succeed or congratulate his opponent tuesday in a speech. let me go to new york where was firstangle elected to the house of repr