rulemaking also requires the federal communications commission to adopt deadlines for action on several types of filings before the agency. as i know all too well from my own experience, having been regulated by the federal communications commission when my wife arnede in the radio industry, -- and i were in the radio industry, items can sit at the agencies for literally years without any action and then they're acted upon and the person bringing the action may have 30 days, on something that's sat there for 10 years. now, the second proceeding is an inquiry that deals with more complex issues. giving the federal communications commission flexibility in deciding whether and how to implement those reforms. now, by giving the f.c.c. flexibility when setting procedures and deadlines, we're not constraining the agency. rather we're providing them with goals to meet and allowing them the, the professionals there at the f.c.c., to determine the best way to meet those goals. many of the reforms in the bill are things that the commission itself already has the authority to do under existing law

the bill does just that, prohibits the federal communications commission from unnecessarily regulating broadband rates. this legislation ensures that not only the current commission but future commissions do not have the option to regulate broadband internet rates. protecting the free market and encouraging competition and promoting jobs. that's what we need to be all about. plain and simple, un-elected washington bureaucrats at the f.c.c. have set out with another solution in search of a problem. by shifting the classification of broadband internet to be a title 2 common carrier, the f.c.c. is simply reclassifying broadband internet to fall under their rule making purview. this is nothing more than another power grab by the administration to regulate and control yet another strifment it is i--- industry. it is estimated that if rules regulating broadband services are carried out, it could cost over 43,000 jobs. i think we could all agree, it is not time to gamble with american jobs. when bureaucrats in washington play the regulation game, no one wins. i'm a proud co-sponsor of h.r. 26

court-tested legal precedent and can be administered by the federal trade commission at the same speed or lack thereof as the federal communications commission other state and federal statutes in common law offer powerful consumer protections such as those cover ing breach of contract, tort interference with contract, deceptive trade practices, fraud and much more. for instance, if isps were to breach their terms of swfs their customers the plaintiff's bar would have a field day launching an unaccountable number of class action lawsuits. additionally, having in part of official u.s. diplomatic delegations to negotiate treaties and the communication space as well as being an international blue ribbon panel on internet governance i can personally attest to the influence of the net neutrality debate to regulate all corners of the internet. the ongoing prospect of new net neutrality rules has generated thinking throughout the world that more regulation in the internet ecosystem should be the norm some internet regulation appears to be a one way ratchet. lastly, today i offer a warning. some technology companies that are pushing for cl

issued its decision in the net neutrality case striking down di the rules ordered by the federal communications commission. orded by the federal communications commission. i, for one, was pleased to see the court remove the government from the business of making management judgments and give providers the freedom to make decisions that are pro-competitive and pro-consumer. while this decision benefits consumers and providers alike by keepings internet free from government interference, the rationale highlights the ongoing confusion regarding regulation of different services. this is yet another example of why it's vital that we take a hard look at the laws in this space and reconcile them with the realities of technology. the answer is not to subject new technology to outdated regulations, but rather to craft laws appropriate to innovative services and platforms. as we embark on this effort it should come as no surprise that i'm focused on ensuring that we engage in a transparent and collaborative process, our colleagues here in the congress but also with the many stake holders outside in these halls. wha

robert mcdonald is former commissioner of the federal communication's commission.e was appointed by president's bush in 2006 and obama in 2009. unanimously confirmed both times. during his tenure at the fcc, commissioner mcdowell worked continuously to forge bipartisan concensus in adopting policies to promote commission expansion, and consumer choice. the washington post called him an independent force at the fcc while broadcasting and cable magazine described his tenure as states man like. prior to joining the fcc, commissioner mcdowel worked in a senior position in the mill aacommunications industry for 16 years. he graduated from duke university and received his law degree from the college of william mary school of law. professor bruce owens is a morris m. doil centennial professor at stanford university and a senior fellow for economic research. professor owens was the chief economist in the office of telecommunications policy at the white house under press nixon as well as the chief economist in the antitrust division under president carter. following his pub

chairman richard wiley who was nominated by president nixon and served as chairman of the federal communications commission from 1970 to 1977. as chairman for most of the '70s chierm wiley's tenure at the commission predates many of the major changes in the communications sector. chairman we're glad to have you here today. pull that microphone up close. thank you for being here. you'll need to push the button on the microphone there. one time. >> thank you very much chairman walden. ranking member eshoo and other subcommittee members thank you for the invitation to testify today. while i know it's not going to be self-evident, due to my youthful appearance, i've been involved for nearly 45 years in federal telecommunications policy. and from my own standpoint what has occurred during that period is simply amazing. when i was at the fcc in the 1970s, the average american enjoyed just three broadcast television stations. and one local and long-distance telephone provider, and the department of defense had just begun to explore a revolutionary computer project known as arpinet. but today our citizens have acc

tom, as you know, is the chairman of the federal communications commission. for over three decades he's been involved with telecommunications and technology. as a entrepreneur, he started a number of different companies offering innovative cable, wireless and video communications services. prior to joining the fcc chairman wheeler was a managing director of core capital partners investing in early stage ip-based companies. he's author of a new book we highly recommend on abraham lincoln and the tell graphic one of the norg nall technologies that helped power new areas of communication and commerce. mr. wheeler will differ a keynote speech that will be followed by a discussion moderated by blair levin. blair is a non-resident senior fell lowe in the metropolitan policy program at brookings and currently serves as the executive of director of gig-you. that's a consortium of leading universities connecting through next generation networks. blair also served as an adviser to a variety of non-profit organizations. many of you know he was one of the major architect

of cops on the beat, we'll now go to michael copps, served as acting chairman of the federal communications commission from january to june of 2009, and served as commissioner from 2001 to 2011. prior to joining the commission, commissioner copps worked right here on capitol hill, and the u.s. department of commerce. commissioner copps, chairman copps, thank you for being with us, and we look forward to your comments to round out our panel. >> thank you chairman walden, chairman upton, miss eshoo and mr. waxman, vice chairman, former chairman, all the members of the committee, i'm delighted to be here. we're here today to review whether the communications act needs to be updated or otherwise reformed. i've heard some say that simply because the act is old it must be obsolete. that no matter how well it has served us an act written 18 years ago cannot have relevance in today's altered world. as someone only a little younger than the original act of 19 34r, i would raise a caution flag or two. the declaration of independence and the constitution were written long ago, too, yet we still find them critica

federal communications commission had an historic week last week. you're tackling some of the most complex and pressing issues in the communications sector today. in 2012, congress gave the fcc a big job to create the world's first incentive auction to ensure that beach front low band spectrum is put to its highest economic value. you established the ground rules for this crucial auction last week. you had a hard job because you needed to balance four potential potentially conflicting objectives. one maximizing the amount of spectrum made available, promote competition and create bans of unlicensed spectrum and raise money. it appears you hit this one out of the ballpark. want to commend you to your advance of unlicensed spectrum. a vision of new super wi-fi can now become a reality. i want to commend you for promoting competition. it will be an enormous setback for consumers. it would turn into a duopoly dominated by verizon and at&t. this is the best and possibly last chance the fcc has to invigorate competition. i would have preferred if you reser

communications act of 1996. he went on to serve with the distinction as a commission of the federal communications commission. over the years he's been a thoughtful adviser to me on many issues. i also want to thank the hudson institute and the exceptional scholars at work including my friend and predecessor former fcc commissioner. as previously mentioned, i am the newest fcc commissioner. i was fortune enough to be confirmed alongside our new chairman tom wheeler. in our short tenures, we both have come to be known for certain tagline that prompted further questioning. is this competition? mine has been freedom. i would like to explain the work what i mean by mine. i bring to my position the core belief that the most enduring value of america is freedom. our nation began with a desire to be free from the paternalist monarchy in britain. our forefather embedded in the constitution certain protection to ensure that the government does not abuse the power or harmfully restrict individual liberty. these principle of a free society such as freedom of speech, religion, and assembly and so forth are also inherit i

as we all know, the federal communications commission voted unanimously in september to eliminate sports blackout. i think as a general matter, the federal government shouldn't be in the business of mandating policies or parties that otherwise negotiate. at the same time i think we need to be mindful of the flip side. more specifically as a general rule, the federal government shouldn't be in the business of mandating which provisions should and shouldn't be in public contracts. any time such a step is proposed, we should tread carefully. the chairman just said he's beginning discussions on this and consideration of this. i'm happy to join in that dialogue. i thank the witnesses once again and look forward to the hearing of the start of that dialogue. >> thanks senator grassly and for your excellent remarks. we are going to apologize, take a recess now. i want to thank the witnesses the for your patience. we'll be back literally as soon as we can. we'll take the second panel at that time. again, my thank and apologies. we'll be right back. thank you. >>> we're back in stegs. i'll recogni

at&t and direct have submitted a public interest statement to the federal communication's commission arguing that this merger will allow the combined company to offer a bunned el product that would enhance consume r choice by increasing competition in the market. in addition they contend that the cost savings resulting from the merge would allow additional resources to be deployed to expanding broad band access, particularly in rual communities. we have the chairman of both at&t and direct tv today to answer questions from the public filing. with that i look forward to the asteamed panelists of the proposed merger. i now turn to ranking member mr. johnson for his opening statement. >> thank you mr. chairman. today's hearing concerns the proposed merger of at&t, a global telecommunication's company with 11 million broad band subscribers and 262700 employees serving approximately 50 million customers. the core question at the heart of this merger is whether creating an integrated bundle of at and t's broad band services and infrastructure with direct tv's popular video programming woul

. >> the federal communications commission approved a proposal to let consumers a rate of cable boxes and purchase third-party devices. the fcc adopted a proposal to improve the quality of closed captioning and agreed to inquiry into video programming diversity. fcc chair tom wheeler opens the meeting. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> the most important person of the moment has arrived. good morning, madam secretary. and when we say good morning, we really mean good morning to you this morning. >> thank you. thank you so much. >> welcome everybody to the february morning meeting of the federal communications commission. thank you, mr. chairman. good morning to you. good morning, commissioner. today you hear three items for consideration. first, you will consider a notice of inquiry that seeks comment on the current state of programming diversity and the principal obstacles that independent programmers face in obtaining video distribution platforms. i can't, you will consider a notice of proposed rulemaking that seeks comment on a framework for providing innovator

tom wheeler as of two of the federal communications commission.echnology issues for the "washington pos post." >> c-span, created by america's cable companies 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. >> tonight on c-span a conversation about allowing women in combat. >> as a recruiter and as battalion officer, you know that these standards and usage were not a good shot into last year. what stopped you from being a good shot? >> i was convinced that it wasn't a good shot. and when i told us of us could hold my recruit to a higher standard of ice that had to start with me. so i forced my so to go to the electronic pistol range or a bath before going to qualify as i could become more confident with my weapon come into work. for the first time i shot expert. so it can be done. >> twenty years of service and it took you that long? the basic school, you know, we all qualified right then and there and there's nobody telling you at the time you couldn't shoot. >> clearly you're not only with language

yesterday's court decisions vacating the anti-discrimination and anti-blocking rules of the federal communications commission open internet order is proof that congress needs to bring our communication laws into the 21st century. only clear direction from congress will strengthen consumer protections, promote competition and give industry the regulatory certainty it needs to innovate in the future. as we go about this important work, i caution that we do so with great care. on the benefit of a carefully collected and substantial body of evidence. this is going to require rigorous oversight by the committee and considerable work to get the information that we have need of so that we can legislate properly. i hope that the undertaking will be bipartisan in order so that any final product that we complete here moves through the senate and to the president's desk for signature. we have to resolve a number of very important hard questions to form our work as we move forward. i respectfully suggest that these questions include but are not limited to the following. first, how do we improve and protect americans acc

[applause] [inaudible conversations] next, commissioners from the federal communications commission and the federal trade commission discussed net neutrality and whether the fcc's ruling on the issue an encroachs on the ftc's enforcement authority. this night even if it was hosted in the federalist society. >> hello? is this -- check, check. good afternoon, everyone. thanks so much to everyone for them to today's panel. welcome, great to see so many people here. today's panel is entitled tale of two agencies, the overlapping jurisdiction of the fcc and ftc. my name is kelly donahue. i am a member of the federalist society's telecommunications and electronic media practice group. i would like to thank the federalist society for hosting today's events and to protect ours like to thank william gortney and dean reuter for facilitating. they were get started i'd like to make some brief introductio introductions. on the federal communications commission we have commissioner ajit pai. commissioner pai was sworn in in 2012. and during his tenure has focused on creating regulatory environment th

mignon clyburn serves on the federal communications commission. e federal communications commission has a very important role. they oversee many emerging technology companies, television stations, radio stations, telephone companies, internet companies. and commissioner clyburn has been steadfast in pushing equity issues inside of those industries. so we are very proud that she is with us today. ladies and gentlemen, what an honor it is to recognize and present to you federal communications commissioner mignon clyburn ♪ ♪ [applause] >> good morning urban leaguers. what an honor it is for me to take part in this year's annual convention. save our cities, education, jobs and justice. what a fitting theme that so boldly encapsulates the events of the past year. but he would please allow me to speak about the progress we've actually made over the last 12 months, because two rarely as you know we focus on the good. we knew db -- we need to do better by the. we are seeing improvement when it comes to education. the high school dropout rate is falling. we

to order the communications, and it is a delight to welcome all five members of the federal communications commission, fully installed, bright shiny faces, ready to go today. we especially welcome you and look forward to working with you to set the communications agenda for the united states. the fcc is the harm of our government tasked with fostering some of the most important parts of our national economy, among them the telecommunications industry, media distribution and the internet. given the economic significance of these industries, the changes from congress, the charge of congress to encourage competition, license the national spectrum assets, and facilitate technological advances is one that must be discharged with transparency, accountability and a long view of the technological landscape. it is with this in mind that this subcommittee has worked over the last three years on efforts to improve the processes. as a subcommittee with jurisdiction over the sec, we take this task very seriously and with great care to ensure the commission not only remain a vital institution but one that serves a

not only of the specific merger but to make sure that we understand the issues and the federal communications commission and the justice department is carrying out the law. every year we are seeing new and exciting innovations in technology and communications. when i first came to congress i didn't carry a phone around in my pocket like to do now. i never knew that one day there would even be such a thing as twitter and have 75,000 followers. innovations like these have radically changed how we communicate and how we interact with each other, how we learn, how we get they need the internet to stay in touch not only with family and friends, but probably very much a part of their economic lifeline. and particularly when they have access to their choice and what a wide range of choice now. right now we're experiencing a bit of revolution in internet technology. just examples, product like verizon fios and google fiber. are changing the internet's infrastructure by delivering faster access through fiber optic cables. and on the content site companies like netflix and hulu are allowing people to cut the cord

and finally the federal communications commission's approval process for renewed telecommunication poles was not set up to handle the tens of thousands pulled needed to deploy ptc. looking forward to hearing today the witnesses for the implementation stand and your testimony will help us consider how we move forward today with the mandate and an appropriate appropriate fashion. without any of that. >> now mr. defazio for an opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. are you sure your microphone is open? couldn't hear you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> we are going to focus on the extension of the deadline. it is clear the class once will meet the deadline and some passenger rail will not make the deadline. but this was not a knee-jerk reaction and that is a very long time in the making. 45 years since ntsb first recommended in the idea of positive train control. they had on their most wanted list temporarily removed after the passage of the legislation in 2008 but it was put back on when it was clear that the deadlines were going to be mad. bush is revisited by wicked death. it was

i was very disappointed with what the federal communication commission did subsequent to the passage of the act. i think much of legislative intent was lost and so my encouragement is going to be that those who do the rewrite be as prescriptive as they can so there is you no, a small chance the federal communication commission will come in and add their own content to it. >> host: what is an example of the legislative intent they lost? >> guest: we came up with a checklist of what the telephone companies had to do to enter long distance and open the same day to long-distance companies to offer local telephone service and in my opinion that interpretation went far too long. i think it went outside of what was an originally intended and so again when it comes to writing the bill this time i think legislators need to be as prescriptive as possible to direct to the federal communication commission and anyone else that has to review the acts the justice department etc. so it's narrow so that we preserve what lawmakers intended when they pass the bill. >> host: rick boucher because congres

there will be a regulatory review at the department of justice and at the federal communications commission. if i just may provide my personal view, i would rather it all took place at the antitrust division. i -- the statutory authority for the commission to have a separate antitrust review and just the good government position of having due duplicative government reviews of the exact same transaction, i think is very troubling. and yet the fcc insists that it's going to do this. the fcc has a very different standard of information. they have a public record. everything that comes from the fcc is supposed to be visible from the public it's supposed to be a very transparent organization. department of justice is very different. they collect information and it's known it's going to be confidential. the public can't go to the department of justice and say i want to see everything there is about charter or time warner and so i personally am very troubled about the coordination that goes on. specifically about chairman wheeler i think chairman wheeler is a great guy. i think he's a wonderful pu

federal communications commission is required by statute to review the entire set of media ownership laws every four years. it has consistently failed to follow the law. if a licensee of the s.e.c. failed to follow the law, it would lose its license or be subject to penalty. chairman wheeler is forging ared to regulate g.s.a.'s while leaving the legal obligations for another day. this is why we included in this draft a clear directive from the congress to the f.c.c. that it should do its job and finish the quadrennial media ownership review before it tinkers with j.s.a.'s. but in the meantime, we bring fairness to the marketplace when it comes to the misuse of j.s.a.'s for retransition consent negotiations. our draft finds the right balance. our work here is set against the ackdrop of our larger effort and bring our communications aws in dine minimum of the marketplace. we hope consumer stakeholders in this discussion will engage in the comprehensive discussion of the update. this will be a time consuming process, however, and as my colleague, mr. shimkus explained to politico last w

and i was very disappointed with what the federal communication commission did, you know, subsequent to the passage of the act. i think much of legislative intent was lost. and so my encouragement is going to be that those who do the rewrite be as prescriptive as they can so there is, you know, a small chance that the federal communications commission will come in and add their own intent to it. >> host: what's an example of the legislative intent being lost? >> guest: well, we came up with a checklist of what the telephone companies had to do to be able to enter long distance and, of course, open same gate to the long distance companies to offer local telephone service. and in my opinion, that interpretation went far too long. i think it went outside of what was originally intended. and so, again, when it comes to writing the bill this time, i think the legislators need to be as prescriptive as possible to direct to the federal communications commission and anyone else that has to review the act, justice department, etc., so it's narrow. so that we preserve, you know, what lawmakers

as we all know, the federal communications commission voted unanimously in september to eliminate thesports blackouts. as a general matter, the federal government shouldn't be in the business of mandating policies that parties are otherwise free to negotiate privately. at the same time however, i think we need to be mindful of the flipside of the same coin. more specifically, as a general rule, the federal government should be in the business of mandating which provision should not be included in private contracts. at a time such a step is proposed, we should tread carefully. so the chairman just said we are beginning discussions on this in consideration of it and i'm happy to join in the dialogue. i think the witnesses once again and look forward to the hearing as a start of the dialogue. >> thanks, senator grassley for your excellent remarks. we are growing -- i apologize, take a recess now. i want to thank the witnesses for your patience. we will be back literally as soon as we can and will take the second panel at that time again. my thanks and apologies. we will be right back. th

the federal communications commission and the justice department are responsible for determining whether there are any issues with this transaction, but no doubt, a hearing like this as we've had in this committee on other merge ers is a very important part of the process because it does give the committee an opportunity to hear and to conduct proper oversight not only of this specific merger but to make sure that we understand the issues, and that the federal communications commission, and the justice department, is carrying out the law. every year we're seeing a new and exciting innovations in technology and communicationses. when i first came to congress, i didn't carry a phone around in my pocket like we do now. i never knew that one day there would even be such a thing as twitter and have 75,000 followers. innovations like these have addically changed how we communicate and how we interact with each other how we learn, how we get news, how we conduct business and access entertainment. access to the internet is quickly becoming an absolute necessity. americans need to compete in this

so, the federal communications commission is expected to vote soon on an expanded definition of the traditional multichannel video programming distributors that would include certain types of over the top videos, online video streaming services. what is your take on how a change definition could impact consumers, the industry, how investors look on that change? >> guest: truth be told it's probably not a huge issue. what the reclassification of the obd -- what that reclassification does is gives the companies that are delivering over the top, means they have -- they have fair access to programming that is owned by virtually integrated distributors. the list of vertically integrated distributors are comcast, comcast, and comcast. comcast was already bound by rules, something like that, as par oft the consent decree associated with the nbc merger so it's not a huge issue. people talked as if it might be a lifeline for companies like aereo because it gives them a step in the direction of being able to relicense content for broadcasters about it doesn't really give them all that much negotiating le

the federal aviation administration and federal communications commission. both of these agencies have developed regulations specific to the creation of orbital debris and i'm eager to hear from them today. the faa is responsible for the mitigation as it pertains to the launch and transportation vehicles. the transportation policy released in november of 2013 directed at the department of transportation to execute exclusive authority over these activities. while this was not a change in the status quo, doctor george neil for the commercial space transportation at the faa testified before the subcommittee that his agency was ready to start in expansion on the orbit activities. it is unclear what specific authority the faa is asking for and how it would anticipate working with other agencies to implement this before the regardless of the plans the congress will need to carefully weigh the cost and benefit of increased authority for the faa against a possible overregulation of a still very young industry. in 2005 the fcc asserted jurisdiction for the orbital de

we're not a regulatory agency, that's the province of the federal communications commission. but we do work on internet policy, broadband spectrum, now public safety is a big part of our portfolio. so we cover a wide variety of telecommunications, internet information topics. >> host: well, and i know you're contained within the commerce department, correct? >> guest: that's correct. >> host: let's start with the internet domain, the icann issue. something that you're working on right now is who should control, who should organize the internet domain names. and there seems to be some disagreement between congress and the administration on this. >> guest: well, it's a little more nuanced than the way you described it. in fact, the responsibility for overseeing the domain name system has been icann's responsibility going back to 1998. at that time the administration, the clinton administration determined that they wanted to move the operation, the domain name system out of the federal government and privatize it. so what we announced in march was simply the completion of what s

. >> and this week on "the communicators," a discussion of the federal government's lifeline program which is administered by the federal communications commissionpolicy director at the benton foundation, and daniel lyons is with american enterprise institute's center for internet communications and technology. he's a visiting scholar there from boston college. amina fazlullah, what is this lifeline program? how did it come about? >> guest: so the lifeline program actually came about during the reagan administration in order to provide a subsidy to make sure that low income persons that have access to voice service, telephone service. and, you know, this comes from the notion that having everyone on the network, having access to public safety, having access to each other in commerce is incredibly important. and for low income persons, making sure that they had additional support to do that seemed necessary, and so that's where the program began. >> host: and how many people participate in this program? >> guest: as of this past year, about 13 million. >> host: and what's the cost? >> guest: well, so the cost of the program is, so it's a $9.25 su

in january the court of appeals issued judgments in the federal communications commission, their protocol on a number of the trolley was null and void because it was not under mandate. now the federal communication commission is stuck with how to mandate on network into reality. the telekom and cable companies are saying, we created the pipes. we are using our pipes. if we want to charge different prices, hold back some customers, but some at the front of the line if we have special business relationships we may want to control some of the data to use with third parties, advertising, and it is not just the table -- cable and telecom. now we have to be concerned about and tennant. our favorites. google, facebook, twitter, amazon. i use all of them. i am a big fan of google. abcaeight to every day. it gives me the knowledge of the world, but we are beginning to see that the internet companies which helped create the social, that potentially can get as in to the zero marginal cost, they are now starting to look at ways like the new global monopoly. starting to look like social utilities. mea

you can find his formal biography at the federal communications commission web site. i will give you the informal biography which is that commissioner o'reilly and i were staff members together at the house commerce committee nearly 20 years ago, longer than either of us probably cares to remember. and we both had the great privilege of working on the telecommunications act of 1996 for chairman tom bliley. i've known commissioner o'reilly for many years, and there are two salient characteristics about him. one is integrity. he is an extremely honest fellow and is known more that. and the other is extremely good judgment and discretion. and those characteristics have served him well over the past 18 years as a staff member on capitol hill which, capitol hill is an extraordinarily long career. and his bosses in the house and in the senate have valued both his integrity and his judgment over the years, and i think those are extraordinarily good characteristics to have as a new commissioner of the federal communications commission. i also want to congratulate commissioner

we're joined by gene kimmelman and harold furtchgott-roth former commissioner with the federal communications commission. good afternoon to you gentlemen. also joining us, gautham na good. we're here to talk about a -- what was proposed this week? >> yes so charter communications is propose acquiring time warner cable the second biggest cable operator in the country in terms of subscribers, a deal largely about not just cable but mostly the broadband industry which is the major business for cable operators and chart we're merge with brighthouse. >> mr. fur 'got what is this about and what this potential of being approved. >> this is part of 25 year process of rationalization of the cable industry. we have seen lots of mergers over time, and in an industry that has been very competitive and is increasingly competitive. it is nose a stan-alone market. it's part of a broader market that includes other broadband providers and content provider. >> mr. kimmelman. >> this is the cutting edge part of the economy driven by broadband. cable companies are the largest providers of high-speed internet service. here

i urge the federal communications commission and the department of justice to view this merger in lightthese public benefits and to strongly hold the merged company to these commitments. provides cities of deployment of its ultra fast fiber network i call on at&t to deploy this advanced service in atlanta, georgia, which encompasses much of the district that i represent. atlanta is swiftly becoming an innovation economy driven to create improve products and design to deploying an all fiber network in atlanta would benefit many existing local startups as well as untold entrepreneurs developers and other innovators still emerging. as a former county commissioner who understands the power of big ideas, i stand ready to work with both at&t and local government to make this happen. i thank the chair for holding this important oversight hearing. and i look forward to today's testimony. with that i would yield back. >> thank you very much. at this time i recognize the chairman of the full committee mr. glat of virginia. good lath of virginia. >> thank you. robert bork famously said the only le

denied this past week. 202 is the area code -- guests are two former members of the federal communications commission and you can begin dialing in. we will begin taking the calls in just a minute. you mention what could occur, what the fcc commission could do. the new fcc chairman tom wheeler book about what the fcc may do, yesterday. [video clip] the court invited the commission to act. and i intended to accept that invitation. -- intend to accept that invitation. using our authority we will readjust the concept of the open internet order, as the court invited, to encourage growth in innovation and enforce against the abuse. we noted with great interest the expressions from many internet service providers to the effect that they will continue to honor the open internet orders concepts even though they may have been remanded to the commission. is the right and responsible thing to do, and we take them up on their commitment. , we accept thee court's invitation to revisit the structure of the rules that it vacated. host: robert mcdowell, what is your reaction? isst: i think tom wheeler the type of lea

the federal communications commission is considering a plan that would allow them to regulate how the traffic flows between content providers and internet service providers in the final rule is expected by the end of the year. at issue is the concept of open internet or net atrocity that was to be give equal access to all content. columbia university professor is credited with inventing the term net neutrality and he took part in a discussion on the subject of florida university -- spinnaker i welcome jacob who's been involved in the internet is for the rest of us knew what it was since 1996 and he is been a pioneer and when we thought about taking on the topic and how we could translate it for an audience including those experts and people that see the net neutrality we got the perfect person to do that in the translation and pull together this panel was jacob. over to you. >> thank you into the national security for sponsoring this event. it's way better. we are going to aim for an active interesting and urgent issue. briefly introducing the panel i'm going to give them a chance to

and most particularly it involves the department of justice and the federal communications commissionrum in which to discuss potential benefits and harms to the american consumer and to competition that could result from a merger between the countries largest cable companies. in doing so the committee will perform an important function for the public that is historically provided for cement to the trust jurisdiction. the transparency that the companies open hearing serves a vital role in any association of the proposed merger's potential impact on consumers. one of the issues in the public examination of the proposed merger is how the size of the combined companies will impact competition and choice in voice video and broadband markets. as separate entities comcast and time warner cable now prospectively reach most of the country, although they do not really compete directly against each other in individual markets. if the companies were to combine the joint venture it would be the largest pay television provider in 37 of the top 40 viewing markets, served nearly a third of all tv aud

federal government and also on the constituents that we represent. we oversee and fund the treasury, the internal revenue service, the securities exchange commission, the federal trade commission, federal communications commission, small business administration, and many other agencies. and i think that while we overall fund this section of the bill, $1 billion less than the president requested, there are some areas where we increase funding that are important that are priorities. like law enforcement. like drug abuse prevention. there's been a lot of discussion about the i.r.s. over the years. quite frankly they have betrayed the trust of the american people and have a long way to go to restore that trust. therefore, they are funded at a flat level. however we give them additional money to try to do a better job of customer service. they complain they can't answer the phone. they can't respond to mail. so they have additional dollars to improve that. we do other things to rein in some of their out-of-control activities. but overall, mr. chairman, this is a good bill. we increase funding for some of the priority items, as i mentioned, like the small business administration. they actually help create

call us, or e-mail us. >> the federal communications commission voted 3-2 that all wireless companies must allow tol phone users to send text 911 by the end of the year. the new regulations will also apply to third party messaging apps like apple's i message. came following a discussion on the matter in their opening meeting. wireless companies have until december 31st to comply with the new rule. this is just over an hour. i will call for the vote. all in favor say aye. no.sed, ayes have it. thank you very much. of yourureau for all activities, the request that you made for editorial privileges is granted. madam secretary, will you lead us to the next act. >> mr. chairman, commissioners, your agendam on will be presented by the public safety and homeland security bureau. entitled facilitating the deployment of text to 911 and generation 911 applications. >> thank you very much. admiral, are you driving this morning? >> yes, sir. i'm actually david is at the helm. helm.e is at the spoken like a true navy guy. okay, david, over to you, sir. you, chairman wheeler and commissioners. send