where i have to depend on the intelligence of mr. copps, mr. hundt, mr. wiley or three or four other wise people at the fcc to know what's best for me in the telecommunications policy. i think if we set the ground rules -- i agree you have to have a traffic cop. but i don't agree that you've got to be so prescriptive that the market just flat gets strangled before it even has a chance to get under way. so my question -- and i'll throw it open to the panel -- is there still a need for a title i? i mean for title ii, for common carrier? in the telecommunication marketplace today, could we deregulate the telephone companies in totality because, you know, there really is no such thing as a natural monopoly anymore? >> if we can find a way to assure that some of the qualities that people fought for long and hard in terms of privacy and public safety and consumer protection do not accompany the new tools of broadband and the internet as they accompanied telephone, then i think we're in trouble. i like the market approach, too. and it was decided long ago that t

where i have to depend on the intelligence of mr. copps, mr. hundt, mr. wiley or three or four other wise people at the fcc to know what's best for me in the telecommunications policy. i think if we set the ground rules -- i agree you have to have a traffic cop. but i don't agree that you've got to be so prescriptive that the market just flat gets strangled before it even has a chance to get under way. so my question -- and i'll throw it open to the panel -- is there still a need for a title i? i mean for title ii, for common carrier? in the telecommunication marketplace today, could we deregulate the telephone companies in totality because, you know, there really is no such thing as a natural monopoly anymore? >> if we can find a way to assure that some of the qualities that people fought for long and hard in terms of privacy and public safety and consumer protection do not accompany the new tools of broadband and the internet as they accompanied telephone, then i think we're in trouble. i like the market approach, too. and it was decided long ago that t

i particularly like what mr. copps is saying about the openness of the internet and the freedoms that is allowed because of this new entity, so-called new entity. but i equation for both the gentlemen. it may not be completely related to the internet. we have a local radio talk show that has recently been taken off the air, and i think it was very popular. and i think it was taken off for political reasons, and i think that the fcc, this new rule that the senate has, without the 60 votes you could approve with a simple majority. and i think that you do not have the kind of mainstream political thought now that used to have because of this ruling. and i think that you can pack the fcc with very radical viewpoints. and i think that's one of the things that is detrimental to our free society. i was wondering on your take on some of these appointments. >> host: robert mcdowell, any word for the year, especially comes to the radio issued? >> guest: i'm not familiar with the fact of that particular matter of a show i guess b

is copps is correct everything he has said and mr. mcfaul likes to focus on the consumer experience -- mr. mcdowell likes of focus on the consumer experience but small businesses like ours are being locked out by big internet players. let me give you some detail. we are a small business in upstate new york whose largest customer is the federal government. we were pioneers of the internet and we have been sending personal and business e-mail from our own servers since 1995. ever,not, nor have we been a source of spam. last year, without explanation, yeah. delivering our mail to its yahoo! e-mail customers, including my own brother-in-law. verizonhe same time, aopped answering our server's connection request. so i can't even send e-mail to my sister-in-law, either. nor verizon were responsive to requests to resume delivering e-mail. messages refer me to a nonexistent yahoo! website and verizon simply ignores all communication. host: we will bring this to a close. if you could put a conclusion on that. caller: it has no authority in this

is copps is correct everything he has said and mr. mcfaul likes to focus on the consumer experience -- mr. mcdowell likes of focus on the consumer experience but small businesses like ours are being locked out by big internet players. let me give you some detail. we are a small business in upstate new york whose largest customer is the federal government. we were pioneers of the internet and we have been sending personal and business e-mail from our own servers since 1995. ever,not, nor have we been a source of spam. last year, without explanation, yeah. delivering our mail to its yahoo! e-mail customers, including my own brother-in-law. verizonhe same time, aopped answering our server's connection request. so i can't even send e-mail to my sister-in-law, either. nor verizon were responsive to requests to resume delivering e-mail. messages refer me to a nonexistent yahoo! website and verizon simply ignores all communication. host: we will bring this to a close. if you could put a conclusion on that. caller: it has no authority in this

regulation, which was really based on regulated the railroads, i think, doesn't make any sense. >> mr. copps, real quick? >> yes, i do. the course says we have the authority to do that. whatever we do, we need to do it quickly, promptly and provide some certainty in the marketplace. i have always stressed the importance of that reclassification. people talk about section 706. i've always said that there is authority there to do a lot of things. but what -- we don't need now to get into months of third ways and fourth ways and fifth ways to thread this needle. we need clarity. business needs clarity. consumers need clarity and the commission needs clarity, too. and we have to make sure whatever we do that things like interconnection and those things, consumer protections are provided. >> appreciate that. i thank the indulgence of the committee and turn now to the ranking member miss eshoo for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. to each of our distinguished witnesses, what a rich, rich hearing with your testimony. thank you very, very much. to chairman hundt, thank you for your eloquent