more baseball homerun king arriving for tonight's gridiron club dinner. here on c-span the communicators is coming up next with mignon clyburn talking about the commission's rules for governing the internet. then former governor martin o'malley discusses data-driven decision-making. and then scott walker at a grassroots workshop in concord new hampshire. like c-span, created by america's cable companies 35 years ago and brought to as a public service. host: one of the few people who has read the fcc's net neutrality order. mignon clyburn.

when are we going to be able to read this report? what is next? mignon: thank you for allowing me to join you today. what is next is a series of exchanges taking place at the fcc. we are quasijudicial body. when we vote on an item, and when that happens we have the opportunity to weigh in even after-the-fact meaning there are two defenses, and we will respond to that. those defenses came in monday. and last monday, what we are doing, and in the coming days we will respond to that. and soon the public will be able to see the finished product. guest: did you have any

--host: did you have any qualms? mignon: i did not. i was for title ii. i had no reservations in moving in this direction because i felt it was the strongest legal sample framework in which we knew to have a certainty what we have come a custom two. host: joining us is brendan sasso for the national journal. brendan: i understand you push for some changes can you talk about why you one of those changes and whether you are disappointed you didn't get everything you asked for? mignon: you learned you never get everything you want. you keep trying anyway. one of the things i was concerned about is small carriers.

they said to us that some of these things may be burdensome. for those who have fewer than 100,000 customers, we would weigh in c. we will have exchanges with you and see how this will impact you in terms of the transparency compliance issues. there are other issues, there was an exchange with state regulators,, when it comes to their universal service fund. one of the things that was troubling to me is that we took a posture that i thought maybe was too aggressive, that could jeopardize the relationship we have with this stage. those are the noteworthy things. there were a few more. the things that come to mind, that we need to have our roles tailored to needs of all sizes

and all players in the space. those are two of the many things that we asked for. brendan: are you concerned there is this general conduct standards, the fcc adopted a catchall provision. are you worried that is too broad or vague? mignon: one of the things we have to do is make sure that we are number one for what we don't know, what is to come. over the past four years since the rules in 2010 went tamerlan were adopted, we have seen tremendous changes. there were people using those devices, now it is over 125 million. things have changed in such a small time that i believe what some may classify as a catchall would give us the dexterity we need to change and evolve with the times. host: some of the companies that

were advocating for title to, or this order, are very successful companies. why do they need this regulation when they haven't to this point? mignon: one of the things, and you say to this point, i have to take a friendly liberty here to remind everyone that in 2010 we adopted an order, earlier this year at the court we remain the majority of that. it goes back further than that. we had things adopted in the mid to thousands that set the tone for this and other nation and investment. it set the stage of principles to be followed. we codified those in 2010. we got a love letter from the court. we responded last month to answer those.

we have been governed for a number of years that principles that has been fueling the innovation. that is the part of the debate that you rarely hear rising to the surface. the reason why it is so important with those companies that might have, that may be successful, they are part of the ecosystem that is fueling all of this innovation and investment. there will be no bill if there were no demand. these companies are content providers, application providers , and what they are doing is hoping to feel this economy hoping to meet critical needs in a manner in which all of these entities are interwoven. it is important rules take all of these entities, particularly the consumer into account. brendan: it seems that congress is interested in getting involved in the net neutrality

issue. do you think -- is it an issue where congress should have a voice are the fcc is an active the gold standard and we don't need further action? mignon: we have a hearing coming up. what i will say is i respect the role of congress. i think they have a duty and obligation to look from their perch as to how things are evolving, in terms of the ecosystem. we are the expert agency when it comes to communications and technology. i continue to believe that a strong rules, clear roles from us and congressional guidance is the best course. we are the envy of the world because you have that inner exchange. you have an independent body that is applying congressional mandate. you have the dexterity that you need to feel all of this. we are the envy of the world because we have an interactive system. 4 million people wait -- weighed

in on the open internet proceeding. unprecedented. you have not heard about that type of engagement anywhere else in the world. it is because we have an interactive process. either the white house, to the hill, to the fcc, to the people. that is what we should be celebrating. host: the vote was political. 3-2. did damage or in -- didn't damage relationship? mignon: i don't think it damage relationships. we want the same things. we want a vibrant economy. we want clear rules of the road. we have a different pathway in philosophy in terms of getting that. i don't think it damages. it reinforces what we already know about each other. that some of us think that clear rules that are codified are the best signal to send to the

consumers, as relates to contact, and others have a more relaxed approach and do not see where there is a problem. i counter earlier, one of the reasons why things have been so successful is we did have a pathway that included a framework for clear rules. host: what about any potential lawsuits? could this hold up the order? mignon: my joke, which is not so funny, there is a 99.9% chance that this will be challenge. that is the nature of the space. i wish it would not be. what we saw in 2010 was the innovative growth that brought them as a result of clear rules. i think i feel confident that

with this framework we will see more growth. i would hope it would not be challenge, but i think my hopes will be dashed on that. brendan: we could talk longer about net neutrality but figuring now that the fcc has voted on it you may be moving on to other issues. i want to ask you about lifeline, the subsidy program. you talked about wanting to update that. can you talk about what you want to see done and when you think that may happen now that net neutrality is out the door? mignon: it is interesting. none of these things are divorced from the other. the lifeline program is one of 4 universal service programs designed to be competitive, to meet critical communications needs. it has been stuck in the mid-80's. it has strictly been supportive of voice only services. you and i know the way we communicate is totally

different. we now are moving from land, wired infrastructure to over 320 million people in this nation with a mobile structure. that program, which is designed to meet the affordability needs for individuals, most of those persons eligible, 56% of those qualified are wireless only customers. this program that has been stuck in the 1980's for a long time needs to meet the critical need of our nation, of that population. that is why i was so concerned and fought for us not forbearing from that when it came to the open internet items. health care needs, how we communicate with government.

all of those things are important. if we are in this needs to -- me too system, in terms of data services in terms of e-mails and the like, if we are stuck in the text message cap, you are not going to be will to communicate with your doctor. i've had people say to me i can tell my it is the middle of the month and people run out of minutes, i don't hear from my patients. that is something we have to address. number one, what i am proposing we do as overhaul the lifeline program, make it concurrent and in sync with the current information age. challenge providers to give more to their consumers. the prices and opportunities have been more expensive for the rest of us. it should be for our lifeline consumers. get those providers out of the certification business.

that has been the number one problem we have been seeing with not so positive headlines. it is a vulnerability that we need to plug. a lot of these consumers use other types of services. let's leverage those to help with certifications, to help with privacy and security. all of these things we are pushing to do because this program is literally what it says. it is a lifeline, an opportunity for those who have significant financial challenges to be able to keep in touch with doctors, educators, with their communities. it is vital that we reform that to meet the current means. i am hoping that by the summer we will have something circulating for my colleagues to consider doing just that. brendan: i gather you are saying it should cover broadband as well as the voice services that

it does now. mignon: when you talk about citizens of african-american and latino citizens, when you talk about their access to the internet, the majority of it is mobile. it was important for me going back to the open internet to have mobile parity. we used to not have a second-class engagement regardless of if you access either in a wired or mobile. that is why we fought for that. it is important for that one devise. it may be their only communications devise, to be broadband enabled. if that is their only pathway on their we need to make sure they have a robe a robust experience. host: you talk about big ideas on the internet horizon. in the area of health care, what are you for seeing? mignon: what i am for seeing more telemedicine engagement. you are talking about, when you

look at the stats, the three of us may not have to worry about this getting an appoint with our doctors but so many others, we've got one million physicians in the nation. fewer than 5 million rns lt ns. we have a health care disconnect that can only be addressed through technology. when you talk about having a more robust lifeline of products, when you talk about making sure there is mobile parity, when you talk about ensuring that we have the infrastructure needed in particularly in areas or unserved areas of broadband, that is going to be the key to bridge those communications divides when it comes to health care delivery.

i think and know, and we have seen with veterans and the mississippi delta, where i just visited, you have positive outcomes with those who have been hyper tentative. they are not running into the doctor every five minutes or going to the emergency room to have casual care. they are dealing -- they have a laptop that is assigned to them. health care costs are going down. there outcomes are getting more -- they have increased tremendously. all of this is made possible through connectivity. that is why on the mobile front, on the wireless front, and the legacy wire front, we need to commit -- connect. that is a national priority that is unmet. host: is this an expansion of the fcc's traditional role? mignon: we have been in the broadband business for a while. i don't know if you know that.

one of the parts of the universal service program is designed to help connect rural health care facilities. it is not new. it is evolving as we evolve. brendan: all these programs -- they are funded through fees on phone bills. so people are paying into this. is it possible to expand the lifeline program, without increasing the fees on phone bills? host:mignon: if we gain efficiencies in terms of layering the certification on existing programs demanding more from consumers, as well as from providers, i am hopeful that we will take efficiencies as we go along and except efficiencies along the program hopefully we

make this more inviting, it will be more competitive. other providers will offer new and novel services. what i am hoping is through reforms, we will create a more competitive landscape that will realize the efficiencies and attract or attempt others to get into other types of partnerships that we haven't thought of today. >> one of these partnerships comcast internet essentials programs it was part of the nbc universal deal, do you think that has been working, or should they be doing better? >> what i know is that over the course of this inception, it has evolved tremendously. one of the things they will tell you i have been pushing for is eligibility not just for those who were qualified for free and reduced lunch, but those who were a step above and barely

making it. they didn't think they could handled it. -- they could handle it. within a few months they handled it. can there be improvement, yes. there are entities pushing to improve their product. i will be among them. i think that it was a good first step. it was a template that nobody else was following. it is providing affordable broadband under $10 a month for people who may not have signed up before. what i continue to be hopeful of is more in this space that will provide an incentivize others to do better. i think we will continue to see that. host: do you first see expanding to broadband? mignon: it is. what is happening -- well.

for that part of it, the previous chairman laid a framework that said we would have to be within the budget. the program has gotten a boost also, as you know. i really think that this is a part. this is why we need to have more dialogue about what we truly want. what we truly expect when it comes to infrastructure needs. infrastructure now is not just roads, and water. infrastructure now is technology. it includes technology. if we want to grow and evolved, if we want to meet critical priorities, the technology side of the house has to be a part of it. think about it as a critical infrastructure. the reason why i say it is something about broadband, with the legacy -- before we reformed the connect america fund,

because you are using the same platforms, they were providing broadband using that same infrastructure anyway. we were -- we were subsidizing broadband before we made it explicit. this is the next national evolution of things we need to keep in mind when we have policies. that is why it is important for us to have the dexterity that we need to grow and evolve. we have to be in 10 with how things are evolving from a regulatory standpoint to say here is where things are trending, how do we ensure that everybody regardless of income, or where they live, if they are in a hyper rule area, or an incredibly dense urban area, a lot of times they have the same types of needs when it comes to our challenges economically, connectivity, and we need to figure out how policies would be in line and benefit them all. host: as you know the day of the

net neutrality vote, there was another vote on municipal rod band. do you first see other cities -- broadband. you foresee other cities wanted to petition the fcc for clearance? mignon: one of the things i did this week was speak before the national league of cities. they were in town. when we talked about that, from the podium, i did hear some audible claps. i did see some tweets talking about just that. what we did there for those who don't know, we looked at two cases. we had to applicants. both have gigabit services. both have then asked by their neighbors to serve me because there is a technology bad land.

incredible gaps outside of the city limits. they are not being served appropriately. cities, fathers, mothers have been asking and begging those companies that are indigenous there to provide affordable service. in one case they were laughed at. i think when you are laughed at and you have the opportunity to provide service, if you had existing telecommunications infrastructure, if you have the needs to expand, communities that want to heal and serve themselves should be given the opportunity to do so. that is why the other vote is related. it is extremely important and has not gotten enough headlines. this is giving those individuals, these persons responsible for the critical needs of their communities the opportunities to serve with fewer and fewer restrictions.

i'm hopeful others will follow suit. they will see the advantages. and what has been happening, the growth that wilson and chattanooga have realized. if they apply we will given the same consideration we gave the others. brendan: one of the issues you took on when you were acting chairwoman was these high prices prisoners are paying for phone calls to families. that order only affected the calls with across state lines. when you think the commission might address these calls within states, which is a lot of prisoners trying to contact people. mignon: you bring up an issue that is important. 85% of the calls are made within interest dates within each individual state. even though that was a victory for us, it was a critical first step. but we are reviewing now with over 110 comments, with the

further notice that we offered last year, an opportunity for us to ask those questions. what we do about the intrastate? what do we do about these ancillary fees we have been hearing about and going up? what do we do about these commissions, which some providers say have been at the heart of these escalating rates? how do we provide affordable services for a population that is most vulnerable? it is not often times inmates paying for the services. it is the families of these inmates who come from low income communities, and those who are deaf and hard of hearing. it is not uncommon for a call to cost $2.25 a minute plus a four dollar startup charge. plus other services. you've got people who are charged to start up a count

charge to close an account, they are even charge in some cases to get a refund on an account. there are so many charges along the line for people who can least afford it. honestly, this is an issue that is hard for me to contain my emotions. it is exploitation of the most vulnerable. it is punishing families to the degree in which they do not deserve. if i'm above ground, i will see that and in terms of providing the certainty and the justice to those individuals. i'm hopeful to do everything i can to bring in order to the floor this summer, when you don't see me when i go missing a little bit, i'm working behind the scenes to see that happens. host: can you give us a preview of the march 26 meeting? mignon: you probably know one of

the things we're going to have before us, stella reauthorization. we are going to talk about -- the satellite service authorization, as well as there is a local number portability item, which is probably what you are speaking about, we have one of our task forces, one of our support groups that advises that we rely on, something called nancy. national council for local portability. they have made a recommendation for the contracts for the entity that will provide that particular service. that is an item that has gotten press. that is one of the items on the agenda.

you probably have guessed i won't talk about that as much other than to say we have a recommendation and we will vote on that at the march meeting. host: are there concerns that this would go to a foreign company, erickson? mignon: these are the things that have been look that. by not just the fcc. you probably know there are a number of eyes that are on this item. rest assured, all the protocols and all of the input that we would have to consider, those things have been done. we will have the capacity ability to make a decision based on all of that. that has been cleared. that part has been done. we will make a clean decision in a couple of weeks. host: one last question. brendan: the side effect of the

reclassification was broadband was a federal trade commission has lost its authority, and part of the order on privacy regulations. do you think the fcc is able to fill in for the federal trade commission on privacy? are you worried about the ftc losing authority? mignon: i'm not worried. we are not talking but online applications when it comes to the fcc in terms of her cost of vacation. i'm not an a position to say how the fcc should do its job. that part of the engagement that is still in their court. we have complementary functions. it is important no matter where you are along, whether you are signing on or participating, you need to be protective along that plane.

we have complementary functions that will continue. there may be a tug here and there. i think it is healthy because it is our enthusiastic willingness to make sure that the consumers are protected. we will make sure we have plugs >> thank you both. >> c-span, greeted by america 's cable committees 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service. on the next washington journal, former new mexico governor and u.s. ambassador to the u.n. bill richardson talks about congressional involveme