. >> host: well, let's bring brian fung of "the washington post" into our conversation as well. >> thanks, peter. just to drill down a little bit more on that opening question, companies like at&t have proposed sort of net neutrality for tech companies, you know? i'm kind of curious how you're, you know, what your position is on that. >> guest: well, one of the things that i realize is at the opening question when we talked about how things have converged, and so the lines are a bit more blurred as it relates to who does where, who does what and who owns what. so i always think that we should always take fresh approaches when it comes to, you know, our regulatory oversight, our legislative oversight. we've got to be forward thinking as it relates to that. now, if you're trying to get me to weigh in a particular area as to what that should be, you will not get that out of me today. but i think the conversation is ripe because, again, it really is about enhancing the consumer experience, enabling innovation and opportunities. and the way we did that back in 1960, 1980 and 2018 is different,

she's interviewed by brian fung, technology reporter for "politico." brian: you brought up the court decision regarding the f.t.c.'s authority regarding they can sue at&t for its alleged misrepresentation to consumers about unlimited data. what lessons do you draw from that court ruling and particularly through the loophole involving the common carrier exemption commissioner clyburn: so i'll try to start things out positive. on the positive side there's one less loophole, meaning the court gave some clarity as it relates to whether or not there is authority under the -- whether there is a mix of common carrier or not. there was some clarity given there. but what is also clear is what is still troubling to me, that the f.t.c. is still not the expert agency. it still is not the agency that has any background when it comes to common carrier or net neutrality regulation. the f.c.c. is still the agency that does not answer or come into play unless a harm is done and unless you can prove unfair or deceptive practices. hose are very high hurdles for mignon cly

she's interviewed by brian fung, technology reporter for politico. >> this week there was a big court decision involving the f.t.c.'s authority whether or not it can sue at&t for its alleged misrepresentation to consumers about unlimited day tafment whatlesssons do you draw from that court ruling, particularly the loophole involving the common carrier exemption? >> i try to start things out positively. on a positive side there's one less loophole, meaning that the court gai some clarity as to whether or not there is a mix of under the, common carrier or not. what is also clear is what is still troubling to me that the f.t.c. is still not the expert agency, it still is not the agency that has any background of when it comes to common carrier or net neutrality regulations. it's still the agency that does not answer or come into play unless harm is done and until you can prove unfair or deceptive practices. those are high hurdles to be able to realize or be able to bring to the f.t.c. >> watch "the communicators" tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span2. >> tonight on c-span's "land mark cases

she is interviewed by brian fung. earlier you brought up the federal trade commission, and this week there was a big court decision involving the ftc's authority and whether not a -- and whether or not it can sue at&t. draw fromns do you that court ruling, it and particularly about this loophole? >> i try to start things out on a positive side. there is one must loophole, claritythe court gave as it relates to whether or not there is authority, whether there is a mix of common carrier or not. there was clarity there. what isalso clear is still troubling to me, that the ftc is still not the expert agency. it still is not the agency that has any background of when it comes to a common carrier or net neutrality regulation. the agency still does not answer or come into play unless a harm is done and unless you can prove unfair or deceptive practices. .hose are very high furloughs communicators, monday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span two. >> behind me and the shawnee milling company. it is one of two locally owned business

. >> host: brian fung is with "the washington post", and mignon clyburn is lead democratic commissioner on the federal communications commission, and she's been our guest on "the communicators." >> guest: thank you. >> we are live this morning for the annual conference of the american israel public affairs committee here in washington d.c. minnesota democratic senator amy klobuchar and arkansas republican senator tom cotton expected to speak at the event this morning. live coverage here on c-span2. [inaudible conversations] ♪ ♪ >> please welcome from aipac's department of policy and government affairs, brad gordon, esther -- [inaudible] and marvin foyer. [applause] ♪ ♪ >> good morning. policy conference is all about learning, leading and lobbying. so on tuesday morning, thousands of us will take action on capitol hill to stand united with israel. we will come together to urge members of congress to cosponsor legislation which will enhance the u.s./israel relationship and to insure that israel maintains its strength in the face of growing threats of war. >> aipac's lobbying agenda this y

fung: aye commissioner lazarus? >> commissioner lazarus: aye. >> commissioner swig: commissioner swig? >> commissioner swig: aye. >> commissioner wilson: aye. >> subject property 473 haight street, brian brooks asking that the board take jurisdiction over an amendment to a medical cannabis dispensary permit. the permit holder is miparc doing business as sparc. it temporary amends the operator's medical cannabis dispensary permit by authorizing the permit holder to sell adult seuss cannabis and cannabis products to individuals 21 years of age and over at the permitted site. we'll start with the requester. >> good evening. and -- >> just to remind you, there are 3 minutes. >> i understand. can i get the overhead? good evening, commissioners. i've been here a few times about this issue. sadly, i'm hear again. i received this notice to my residence stating that the operation at 473 haight street was able to sell recreational marijuana, moving away from selling just m.c.d. or medical cannabis. once i was given this letter, i did my research and tried to find what exactly was issued. in the letter, it stated that they have the proper permits, and, again, i don't want to necessarily reread t