just as pernicious as the fcc's new internet conduct standard, a vague standard that gives the fcc ang mandate to review business models and upend pricing plans that benefit consumers, usage-based pricing plans and sponsored data plans are the current targets. so if a company doesn't want to offer an expensive, unlimited data plan, it could find itself in the fcc's crosshair. if you like your current service plan, you should be able to keep your current service plan. the fcc shouldn't take it away from you. diverse service plans would just hurt consumers, especially the middle class and low-income americans who are the biggest beneficiaryies beneficiaries. in all, the fcc will have almost unfettered discretion to decide what business practices clear the bureaucratic bar. these won't be the last plans targeted by the agency. as the electronic frontier foundation wrote just two days ago, this open-ended rule will quote, be anything but clear and suggest that the fcc believes it has broad authority to pursue any number of practices. the eff went on, and a multifactor test gives the fcc

what does the fcc proposed to do? >> guest: so this is more or less what a lot of the activists have been calling for for for long time time and with for for longtime and what president obama is called forwards is essentially the strongest rule the fcc could come out with. the basic idea of net neutrality is that internet providers shouldn't be able to control what you can access on line that all traffic should be treated equally. the rules would say that providers like comcast or verizon couldn't block the web sites you access, couldn't slow down traffic or prioritize certain traffic based on which web companies pay for it. a lot of the debate over the past year has been actually sort of technical debate about the fcc's authority so the original rules that the fcc chairman tom wheeler proposed in may got a lot of backlash because people believe he wasn't using the proper legal authority so now what he would do is to invoke what is called title ii communications act which means he will essentially treat the internet l

the fcc's own preferences clear. the order argues taxing broadband potentially could spread the base of contributions and could add to the stability of the universal service fund. for those not familiar, let me translate. taxing broadband would make it easier to spend more money with minimal public oversight. we have seen this gameplay before during reform of the eu rate program in july of 2014 the fcc to lobbyists it would raise the taxes after the election to pay for promises being made, and sure enough in december of 2014 the agency did just that. public reports indicated the federal government is eager to tap this knew revenue stream to spend more of consumers hard earned dollars. when it comes to broadband read my lips, more knew taxes are coming. it is just a matter of when. second, affect on consumers slower broadband. internet regulations will work as serious harm on consumers. the record is replete with records that it will slow innovation. let's remember that broadband networks don't have to be built capito

so even if this fcc doesn't chose to use it have you made it easier for future fcc's to regulate this? >> guest: that is a scare tactic tactic. they are telling investors this is going to lead to rate regulation. the mobile industry is a good example of this. there is no rate regulations since cable regulations 22-23 years ago. i think the fear is unfounded. the chairman has said we will not rate regulation. and i don't think the next fcc chairman. he may try to throw out the whole regime and do something that is less regulatory. so i don't buy the next chairman argument because the rules are only as good as the guy or gal on the eighth floor enforcing them. so we have to do our best to set-up infrastructure that pro protects consumers. >> there has been a lot of talk about the net neutrality process and preserving the internet the way it is. but the way it is today a large amount of americans don't have access to high speed broadband ad home. that is the question of rate regulations. isn't there a case of a program in order to make broadband available to a greater reer percentage of

so even if this fcc does not choose to use it, have you guys made it easier for a future fcc if they should so choose to regulate broadband pricing? >> guest: yeah, that's a scare tactic, and i know some of the folks that work for the isps are up on wall street right now you know, telling investors and others that, oh, my god, this is going to lead to rate regulation. i think the perfect example again is the mobile industry. it's been under title ii, including 201, for over 20 years, and there hasn't been rate regulation. there's been no rate regulation of a retail service really since cable regulation, you know, 22, 23 years ago. so i think the fear is unfounded. the chairman has said we are not going to rate regulate and, hey, i don't know who the fcc chairman is. the next fcc chairman may try to throw out this whole regime and do something that's more free market oriented or less regulatory. so i don't really buy the next chairman argument because, you know, the rules are only as good as the guy or the gal on the eighth floor enforcing them. so we've got to do our best to set up a

new rules from the fcc. peter cook thank you very much. more through the hour on this big issue. we will be right back. ♪ >> all right, fcc chairman tom wheeler speaking right now. carried the day with the votes. let's listen in. >> we saw some graphic illustrations of the citizens today, talking about the challenges we are trying to address. the open internet order puts in line bright line rules that ban blocking, ban throttling and dan paid prioritization fast lanes -- vbban paid prioritization fast lanes. for the first time, open internet will be fully available to mobile. consumers now know that content online will not cannot be blocked or their service throttled. today's action ensures the rights of internet users to say what they want and go where they want when they want, no matter how or where they access the internet, whether it is on their desktop computer or smartphone. internet innovators now know they will have open access to consumers without worrying for paid for preference fast lanes or gatek

the fcc ruling is relevant. connect people to government services and give them the experience -- is almost like shopping on amazon or hailing a cab via uber. you want to be engaged with those processes. that is really what this funding is all about. >> you guys have raised a bunch of money in the last year or two. >> in the past 15 months we raised $200 million. >> talk to me about what the opportunity looks like. is it going into the city of los angeles, the state of florida and selling those big deals? or is it thousands of small local governments that are much more plentiful? >> it's both. when you think about what the cloud brings to government, it levels the playing field. the big cities and counties, it's easy for them to fund these types of projects where they were traditionally very expensive. the cloud levels the playing field and makes it so that the small cities and counties here in the bay area and around the u.s. can use the same products in san francisco, l.a., and new york and washington, d.c. >>

what does fcc chairman wheeler want to do their? guest: the fcc had neutrality rules in 2010. those did not apply to mobile in the same way. those that struck down and they had to rewrite them and this time, they said that so many people now rely on their smart phone or tablet to access internet, and some people don't even have a home connection on a computer. the rules would protect consumers who are on their smart phones and would restrict the ability of at&t, verizon sprint, t-mobile to speed up certain content, or exempt certain content from data cap. host: speaking of people using mobile phones, if they make a phone call, that is already regulated under title ii. guest: it gets confusing. title ii applies to landline phones already come and also the voice services on your mobile phone. what wheeler has been saying is, well, that hasn't stifled investments or innovation for the cell phone industry. if they can deal with it for the voice service, they can deal with it for the data service. when you download an app or browse the web on the phone, that is treated under a diff

and asked the fcc to implement it.he document in front of us today differs dramatically from the proposal the fcc put out for comments last may, and it differs so dramatically that even zealous net neutrality advocates frantically rushed in to make last-minute filings registering their concerns that the fcc might be going too far. if the american people to this day have not been allowed to see -- yet the american people to this day have not been allowed to see president obama's plan. senate commerce committee chairman john thune and house committee -- house of representatives committee chairman john upton did the same. 79% of the american people favor making the document public. but still, the fcc has insisted on keeping it behind closed doors. we have to pass president obama's 317 page plan so the american people can find out what is in it. this is not how the fcc should operate. we should be an independent agency, making decisions in a transparent manner based on the law and the facts and the record. we should not be

>> guest: in terms of the day to day merger with the fcc i am involved in that. we have made it -- we still have one more stage of public comment that will be completed shortly. currently i don't know if you are aware but the fcc has a what they call a shock clock that they use to evaluate mergers like this. i think we are look at late march for when the shock clock comes up. not a strict thing. you know it could go on beyond that. i would say at this time we are looking forward to the fcc completing its evaluation of the acquisition by some time toward the end of the 1st quarter and the beginning of the 2nd quarter of this year. >> host: what is your message to consumers, and consumer grants what is the benefit of the merger? >> guest: i think the benefits are tremendous in a sense that these are companies, directv and at&t, that are in complimentary businesses today. video, which is directv expertise, and broadband which is our mission these are products that increasingly consumers are buying and use together. so bringing together these complimentary assets we

you had a ninth sir cut reversing the fcc and since that time, the fcc has seshltly struggled to try figure out how to operate in the space. >> there is a process an old process, for putting a tentive decision out for further public notice and comment. and that was used in computer 2 in the early '780s. >> to me the biggest problem really is, you have, for kmampl wheeler saying today's open internet order is a shining example of american democracy at work. now, i understand the importance of public comment e comment in fcc decision-making for a long time. but it is afterall, an expert agency that it's supposed to be we think to justify its kpisz tense because it has a particular ablt to collect, assess highly technical sort of information. what i would say about the idea, for example, opening up the dock et to more comment is from what i can tell, from the way chairman wheeler would have responded to that it wouldn't have mattered anything from the other side. there's actually enormous amount of that in the docket. and, yet, he says, you know, we listened, we learned, we adjusted our

and then the fcc will decide each fcc, which one they will for bear against or not. it is a very couple get a -- it is a very couple get a process -- complicated process that may take a lot of time. it will leave a lot of uncertainty. if you are a small startup, what is the role that you will follow today? i waited 10 years for the fcc to approve it something at my radio station. if they are bogged down, which by the way, they gave me 30 days to perfect them but you know, that is what you will see creeping in as they take on the internet as their own. they think they will be in charge and micromanaging. you can get a very dysfunctional commission. i just don't think it was needed to go down this path. >> i think you saw in the new york times, it was said that republicans were decided -- decided to punt. >> we have not decided to do that whatsoever. one of the issues, it was if we will use the review act, with a privileged motion in the senate. we might, it is a tool in the tool chest. but it requires the president to sign it. what do you think the odds are that he wi

went to the courts and went back to the fcc. so it was on remand. the fcc had only lost once. and kevin martin had ten studies produced on the issue. so it wasn't just a dock et. there was a huge docket and there were ten studies. such a proposal may pass the muster of a federal court that's why kevin martin put that out for additional comment. >> so, was senator obama wrong? >> well, again i think you have to go all the way back to the palette deregulatory proceedings, that these are essentially the progeny of what was started ten years ago. so, in some ways, this has happened, right? koechb martin had a number of proceedings on this, three or four at different places. and the chairman had rule makings on this. and we've had interveebing court cases. so i don't think you can look at just the last seven months and say this is the snapshot of how the fcc operated here. >> you're a lawyer. i mean, you deal with administrative law. you get public comment and you put out a new notice of proposal. so you're documenting what you're going to do. as michael described earlier, his plo

and high rates were charged at various facilities to make phone calls and for the first time the fcc contemplated regulation of enter state rates they announced in july an intent to raise the rates but not the direction to at that time we paused our rfp process to make sure our rfp was responsible responsive to federal regulation in october of 2014 the fcc indicated through lob a ceiling at $0.21 for prepaid and 20 important collect calls they'll lloyd like to eliminate the surcharge fees the intent behind this to lower the fees to the inmates can have a lower amount and reduce the recidivism so in that 3 month enter eloquently process that was on hold we issued in december and our rfp district attorney meet the requirements of fcc in light intervening period the sheriff's went to washington, d.c. to mediate meet with the commissioners and talk about his position regarding inmate calling rates as you recall we drastically increased the call rates and reduce the inmate calling rates by 20 percent under the sheriff's discretion kind of opened by the indication of the fcc they were will

you're a commissioner of the fcc.hat can you do about this now that the horse is already out the barn door? >> it is incumbent on a fcc to do a full and thorough investigation into these particular applications. the integrity of the designated entity program is at stake. if it turns out that the scandal is what is legal under our rules, it is incumbent upon the agency to reform the rules to close these loopholes. i would note that i dissented last year from a number of proposals to loosen the rules even further. i predicted almost exactly this result, corporate interests would find ways to arbitrage the system and game it at the expense of the american taxpayer. my only regret is i turned out to be right. >> why do you think the other fcc commissioners went for this? they support some of the same goals. is this about maximizing revenue and letting the biggest bidders win in the interests of competitive entrants, women and minorities be damned? >> you would need to speak to them. we seem to share the same goals of havi

you wonder whether the administration and fcc go down that path.hat is one example of the pandora's box that has been open thanks to title ii. cory: sit with us over the commercial break, and i want to talk about municipal broadband another important thing the fcc does. be right back. ♪ cory: i want to get two more minutes with the fcc commissioner. you guys ruled yesterday that state laws, at least in two places, should be overturned, or they should get an exemption, in chattanooga and wilson, north carolina, to offer local broadband. is there actual competition in the world of broadband? ajit: i think there isn't enough competition. one of the reasons for this exemption is strictly a legal one. i do not take a particular view on any given municipal broadband project. some people say they are useful, injecting competition into an uncompetitive marketplace. i step away from that entire debate. focusing solely on the question before the fcc, under the constitution and the laws of the united states, does the fcc have a legal power to block state law

he still has to get the vote at the fcc. -- the votes at the fcc. >> he also is to outline the legal framework. i was listening to the call on the background of the fcc, really going through in great detail the legal framework under which the proposal is framed to try to protect them from those who might throw it out from the antiregulation crowd. >> i think we know for certain there will be lawsuit. there were lawyers per carry for the lawsuits before he announced it. the fcc does feel confident in decision moving over. i can tell you for the cable companies and some of the big telecom firms, they feel just as strongly they have an opportunity as they have passed with the fcc rulemaking in this area, as they have an opportunity to shoot this down in some form or fashion. >> peter cook, thank you for your help on this story. an instant impact on internet and cable companies in the stock market. scarlet fu, chief market correspondent, the line sent the cable stocks on fire. >> investors look past the idea that wheeler is employing the use of utility, even though he says there will be

if the fcc moves to classified internet services, i guess, a couple of things happened. one of them is that it creates uncertainty because this is a very complicated and regulatory apparatus and there's a lot of talk about how the fcc could focus on components of it. because it was really designed for monopoly network and that can happen, but i think it will create uncertainty and that will lead to litigation and that will take time. going back to my point earlier which is ultimately the legislative body of government that has to wait in upon what the appropriate regulatory structure is for the internet. and as long as the fcc tries to put a round peg into a square hole, we are probably going to continue to talk about net neutrality. >> host: at&t has a public policy blog which has a lot of information on it. could he write that for? you write that for regulators? you write that for people that are interested in communication? >> guest: i think that you will find some extremely technical and even wonky pieces that i think are written for very sophisticated but i think th

the fcc is an independent agency and ultimately, this decision is theirs alone. but the public has commented nearly 4 million times. >> after much anticipation the chair of the federal communications commission has unveiled what he calls "the strongest open internet protections ever proposed to the agency." we will look at this victory for net neutrality. into the case of sami al-arian. >> i was confined 23 hours a day, and sometimes for weeks, 24 hours a day. i wasn't allowed to call my family for six months. i wasn't allowed to make a single phone call. >> a prominent palestinian activist in florida professor sami al-arian was deported from the united states this week. in one of the most controversial prosecutions of the post-9/11 era, laila al-arian al-arian was accused, but a jury failed to convict him. since 2003, al-arian has been 5.5 years in jail and many more under house arrest. he will join us from turkey in a broadcast exclusive. and we will speak to his daughter laila. all of that and more coming up. welcome to democracy now!, democracynow.org, the wa

it is in front of the fcc's integrity.ish claiming $3 billion worth of discounts makes a mockery of the entire program. >> yeah, what was the purpose of that sp -- that program? what was it intended to do? >> originally congress directed the fcc to set up a program to help small entrepreneurs get a foothold in the wireless industry, and engage in what is called facilities-based competition, using spectrum that they get at auction, building a network, and providing end user service. but what has happened now is the fcc has loosened the rules over the years so much that we get a situation in which the big, sophisticated corporate interest can gain the system and use these shell corporations in order to get multibillion-dollar discounts. i think that is wrong, as a commissioner and taxpayer. >> the notion was to help small businesses to help competition to help women and minorities. dish is none of that. >> our policy should be facilitating market entry, and we are always glad to see new small business, new, diverse female ow

the last time the fcc went down this pathway, a court did force the fcc to reconsider its rulemaking.oth sides expressing confidence in their legal position. we know this is going to court. >> peter, thank you. more on net neutrality and the fcc vote coming up. minnesota democratic senator al franken will speak live with my colleague, cory johnson. that interview is coming up at about 2:45 p.m. new york time. andrew cuomo announced today he will be the first u.s. governor to make a trade mission to cuba. the april 29 trip will focus on potential opportunities in an untapped market of 90 million consumers. anyone who can successfully connect america's capitalists with cuba's communists could make major money as a middleman. villa marks reports. >> at the u.s. ambassador's residence in havana last month journalists from around the world gathered to hear the latest on the diplomatic talks with cuba. among them was a cuban-american businessman, hugo with a vested interest in the outcome. >> for cubans living abroad, we have a legitimate desire to come back and to help and participate in t

the fcc, right?cc now has to apply their same standards to content, don't they, that they do to television content because that's where it is and there's going to be certain citizens who think well now, all content is delivered over the internet because all bits are bits and it's a fair and open internet decency standards. remember the fcc is the same agency that fought nipple gate for eight years over a wardrobe malfunction. >> yeah. >> we're not done yet. >> we're not done yet. there's more. >> i think it is the only thing that has surpassed nipple gate in garnering as many public comments. a lot of people are watching this. many share your logic. the fcc in 2010 tried to regulate the internet and the court system struck it down. >> exactly. >> that's expected to happen this time, not necessarily the court outcome, but that it will go to court. >> yep. >> and the courts back then found that fcc didn't have the enforcement authority to regulate the internet. what is different now? the fact that the

of the fcc a lot of people are wondering whether fcc chairman tom wheeler was kind of pressured intog this position, a position he hadn't taken before. what do you think? >> well you know the fcc is an independent commission for a reason. its members do not serve at the pleasure of the president. they're much like judges. they're appointed for terms of years. the purpose of that is their role is to execute faithfully the delegated laws of congress and not be influenced by political aspects or undue uninfluence by the white house. i think for those of us who have been around the fcc the president's intervention was unprecedented. i have never seen such a directive come from the white house to specifically state what the outcome should be. there is no question that it influenced direction of the proceeding that will culminate on thursday. david: by the way just to give folks an idea how sacred the fcc's independence has been in the past, way back in the 1980s when president reagan said something about television reruns to his fcc chairman, daniel patrick moynihan a democrat at the time

the fcc is going to tfa proposal . and we delete providers are going to see their state and property and other taxes go up. those are going to be proposed on consumers as well. the wallet will feel the pinch first. >> the tax bill is a separate thing from title ii. >> the regulations themselves are going to be very far-reaching if and when the fcc releases the plan. some of the media -- immediate effects are going to be severe as well. >> you have been carting around the proposal. what is it that is really worry some? >> the extent to which they are inserting themselves into every aspect of how the internet works. net neutrality was meant to encompass the relationship between internet service provider and a customer, the last mile connectivity. this document through a narrow majority approved yesterday goes before -- goes far beyond that, relegating the nuts and bolts of the internet. even service plans that wireless broadband providers may offer. there is still a lot of uncertainty about how these rules will be applie

who knows how the fcc we will pursue its regulatory authority here. they're are parts that will not rise to the level of the full commission. the entire advisory opinion framework is something that is delegated expressly to the enforcement bureau. the decisions they make are made on their own and the decisions we will not even be made available to the commissioners. that is, in effect substantive regulation being done at the bureau level that four of us will never have a chance to see. >> two parts and then the next question. your question in terms of whether we saw changes to the document. my staff at my request did ask a number of fundamental questions on what the bases was once we have a document and soft those answers from the chairman's staff. the answers we got back were not only not sufficient, they did not answer the questions we wanted. and they were not actionable. we were so frustrated. it was not an opening to submit pages and pages. there is such a fundamental disagreement with the direction of this item that it is problematic to see how

erik:>> today at the fcc, it is nothing but net. regulators prepare for a landmark vote on net neutrality. the incredibly shrinking retailer sears is not losing as much money as it was. the undocumented immigrant who became a star at goldman sachs in the u.s.. welcome to market makers. i seem to have misplaced stephanie ruhle. i'm terrified all by myself. i'm going to kick it off with the top business stories of the morning. sears is getting smaller and so are its losses. the retailer cut its losses by more than half in the fourth quarter. it has now lost money 11 quarters in a row. eddie lampert has been shrinking the store base and separating units to generate cash. they want to form a real estate investment trust to leaseback the stores. first-time jobless claims rose by the most in more than a year last week. it was well above the estimate. inflation at the consumer level took a dive last month. prices fell zero point 7%, probably due to falling energy prices. the cpi actually rose. the fcc is headed toward a landmark vote on re

tell us what you think, did the fcc get it right.d us a message on facebook or tweet us @fbnatb. coming up. there's nothing more romantic than a spontaneous moment. so why pause to take a pill? and why stop what you're doing to find a bathroom? with cialis for daily use, you don't have to plan around either. it's the only daily tablet approved to treat erectile dysfunction so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. plus cialis treats the frustrating urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any symptoms of a

the fcc has had this authority. question is going to reassert the authority for the communications infrastructure of the 21st century. it's not rocket science. >> i wonder, the isp argument aside, we understand they have a vested interest, the argument is that title ii is not the best way to do it. are there problems with title ii? why is title ii the best way to pursue this? >> title ii is the best way because it is the only solid legal foundation. the courts have told us that. if you want to do net neutrality rules, which the courts indicated is something the fcc is authorized to do, you have to do it under the right legal foundation. when the commission in 2002 voted that cable broadband was not a telecommunications service, it wiped out that argument. nobody can predict the outcome of what happens when these decisions go to court. if we are going to court, i want to go with the soundest legal foundation there is. clearly that is title ii. >> we know the lawyers are going to be paid for this. someone is going to

the fcc is going to take its own proponents today. least the american people should be given a chance to see what is in there. more over there's something going around that it's only eight pages regulations, what's the big deal? number one, eight pages if you could see the regulations, they are quite detailed. it's not apparent how they operate without some context. and you heard relative to the answers to your questions, it's unclear how those are going to be applied. there's a number of pages in the documents describing how these rules are going to be enforced. more over those arevk k make ing making that the fcc arrogates to itself that makes this problematic. >> with public meetings that's right. typically the chairman will circulate a document proposal to the commissioners three weeks in advance of the meeting. documents not made public, and i think commissioner has put it well. he's spoken out eloquently about the fact that from the perspective of accountability, it seems odd to most americans that the agency would adopt far rea

it's an affront to the fcc's integrity. his affront to all these wireless entrepreneurs for whom these the business discounts were intended to go. dish claiming $3 billion worth of those discounts makes a mockery of the entire program. >> what was the purpose of that program? what was it intended to do? >> congress directed the fcc to set up a program to help a small entrepreneurs get a foothold in the wireless industry. and engage in what's called facilities-based competition. using spectrum they get it auctions, building out a network, and actually providing end-user service. what's happened now is the sec -- the fcc has loosened these rules so much where we get a situation where the big sophisticated corporate interest can game the system and use the shell corporations in order to get multibillion dollar discounts. i think that's wrong, both as a commissioner and the taxpayer. >> i think the notion was to help small businesses, to help competition, to help women and minorities. dishes none of that. -- dish is none of tha

the fcc can put a stop to the merger. there is a lot for them to do to ensure we have marketplaces full of options and desperate >> what is the take on dish using small business loopholes? what matters is from our perspective on the backend. a clear timeline for using these licenses and entering the market area --. >> i want to read from this letter. we must change course and soon by closing loopholes that allow big as this is to rip off the american people to the tune of billions of dollars. the american people should be outraged about this. what can you do about this now that the horse is out of the barn? >> it's incumbent to do a full and thorough investigation into these applications. the integrity of the program is at stake. if the scandal is what's legal under our rules, we need to reform the rules to close these loopholes. i dissented last year from different proposals to loosen the rules further. i predicted this result, the corporate interests would find ways to arbitrage the system. my only regret was that i was

we have sent requests to the fcc.t, in order to provide documents. oversight committee has a constitutional duty and responsibility to provide oversight and yet the fcc still has not provided all of those documents. so, hard to tell. i'm not trying to jump to conclusions, but the lack of openness and transpair sent when senator obama was a senator he argued this very thing. he's the president and i hear nothing out of the white house helping us on this nothing there i read the obama administration has made more than 200 legal filingings to the fcc on 80 proceedingsen this isn't unusual. didn't both reagan and bush lobby over media ownership rule backs in the day? the idea of an independent committee -- and i'm a guest in the country -- isn't ant independent committee just that the president can't fire commissioners, they're there for fixed terms. that's what an independent committee means, surely. >> absolutely, independent. you're right, back in 2007-2008 the commissioner of the fcc came to congress and testified. th

what the fcc's new rules mean for the future of the world wide web. welcome to "the journal editorial report," i'm paul gigot. tensions between the obama administration and benjamin netanyahu escalated this week, just days before his planned a dr.ess to congress. with national security adviser susan rice calling his visit destructive to the fabric of the relationship between israel and the u.s. speaking outside jerusalem wednesday, netanyahu said it appeared that the west had given up on its commitment to prevent iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. a claim secretary of state john kerry dismissed during testimony on capitol hill while questioning the prime minister's ability to make sound judgments. >> the prime minister as you recall was profoundly forward leaning and outspoken about the importance of invading iraq under george w. bush and we all know what happened with that decision. he may have a judgment that just may not be correct here. >> joining the panel this week, wall street columnist and deputy editor, dan henninger. and global view column

>> i view our role at the fcc as vindicating the public interest.pinion, the public interest is driven fundamentally by what is good for american consumers. the question about commercial reasonableness or not is something we have applied in a great many contexts. i'm sure we could do it here to vindicate the consumer interest. what happened in this case in unprecedented fashion, the president directing the fcc in early november to change course. that is more than any change of mind, what is driving this bus. >> taxes, you mentioned heavy taxes. isn't there already a rule in place, the internet tax freedom act that prevents there from being any taxes on the internet? how could that lead to more taxes? >> the internet tax freedom act only applies to a sales tax on internet access. it does not apply to the fees that would necessarily follow from us reclassifying broadband as a telecommunications service which is what we are on the brink of doing. if you look on the phone bill and see that universal service fee, this order explicitly leaves the door ope

it is not traditional for the fcc to circulate its orders ahead of a vote.y may still be making changes to them. i would like to see the 332 pages that are allegedly in the report we understand we have to wait until the vote. given the magnitude of what is happening, and the size literally of what is coming you can understand why members of congress and others are increasingly agitated about what is coming. >> is the interest over this issue something you think we are going to see since technology is as important in ways it has never been before? >> i think so. is an amazingly fed had 4 million people contact the fcc force mainly arcane is net neutrality, which is not an organizing terminology and going beyond that to title ii. that is because people really understand that what we are talking about is their communications infrastructure. their platform to talk to one another to find jobs, to do jobs, to educate themselves, to take care of their health. it is integral to their lives. this is the infrastructure of the 21st century. of course they have an inter