yesterday marked the fcc's 83rd anniversary. and while much has changed since 1934, our responsibility went it comes to protecting consumers, advancing competition, and insuring the reliability and resiliency of public safety communications remains unchanged. to achieve these goals, the fcc needs a fully staffed workforce. however, the agency finds itself with the fewer number of fte's in more than 30 years. and in some cases, this has created much neededficiencies. in others, it's required employees to double up on responsibilities with little or no pay increase. this not only puts at risk the quality of the final work product, it also has a direct impact on work-life balance. to put this assertion into perspective, each year the federal employee viewpoint survey asks fcc employees whether they agree or disagree they have sufficient resources to get their job done. in 2011, just over 30% of fcc employees disagreed with this statement. by 2016, that figure had risen to nearly 38%. so additional budget and staffing cuts will like

it fcc could have said what the previous fcc did is null and void as a matter of law and moving ahead. but it is important to us to make sure we had the process that is prescribed by the administration procedure act. that is why we had a full 90 days of public comment in addition to the three weeks before the fcc's vote to allow for that robust public comment. once the public comment period closes in the middle of august, august 16th i believe we will take stock of the fcc's terrific staff and try to figure out whether the fcc should move ahead and if so how. we will be guided of course by the principles of substantial evidence by the d.c. circuit, by the facts in the record, and of course by the motivation to figure out what is in the public interest at the end of the day. >> i would be interested commission cylburn on either of those two issues and then i have one last issue i want to recognize. >> i find myself wondering who is the referee on the field when it comes to broadband access now. with the passage of the cra and i am not on attorney but i don't think anybody is directing

the fcc could've chosen to proceed to what's known as declared terror ruling saying with a previous fcc did is no and void and move it but it was important to us to make sure we had notice and comment for the process that is prescribed by the administered procedure agreed that one had a full 90 days the public, in addition to the three weeks for the fcc vote to allow for that robust public comment. once the public comment period closes in the middle of august, august 16 i believe, we will take stock and fcc's terrific staff and try to figure out whether the fcc should move ahead and if so how. we will be guided by the principles of substantial evidence as enunciated by the d.c. circuit, either fax that are in the record and, of course, by the motivation to figure out what's in the public interest at the end of the day. >> i'd be interested commissioner clyburn and your comment on either of those two issues, ned kelly, consumer privacy and then one less a shelf wanted to briefly raise. >> i find myself wondering who is the referee on the field and the cop on the beat when it comes to bro

you had taxi radios allocated by the fcc. signaling allocated by the fcc. firefighters, forest firefighters had their walkie-talkies regulated by the fcc. in fact, at one time it was commonplace to see unused firefighting frequencies in manhattan while there were unused taxi radio frequencies in wyoming. that is what we learned to live with. these are the inefficiencies of the system. it was abused. the system limited competition. it subjected them to political interference, as hard as it is to believe. in the fair use doctrine. today the system has been freed from this frankly soviet-like system. it is largely -- put that in largely allowed to be in markets direct. it has been the largest and most successful privatization in u.s. history. think about that. when i first came to the heritage foundation, i was working on transportation issues. the sale of conrail was a big privatization item on the agenda. that raised about $1.7 billion, i think. that is nothing compared to what was achieved in spectrum. and remarkably, this revolution in public policy, which

circuit evaluated the fcc's net neutrality rules. in response to an argument from the dissent that the imposition of common carriage on isps for foreclose the isps first amendment right to mandatory or control. the responded and think interestingly that yes, isps have first amendment right of control but when they are holding themselves out to consumers as offering access to all internet into points, then the d.c. circuits it is a carefully fcc to impose net neutrality rules in order to make sure they're fulfilling the promise they made to consumers. that sounds to me an awful lot like what the ftc's consumer protection office does. whatever you put in your terms of service, we will hold you to it and make sure you do it. that's why section five authority has always done. not just enforcing terms of service but promises made in advertisements and also evaluating for inherit unfair practices. given the ftc authority to regulate unfair practices of isps sounds a lot like the general conduct standard but there's a huge difference. the d

the fcc has ro butt deals. they know how tosette whether you are in the internet ecosystem is one that could race questions. they have a legal standard that can evaluate these vertical agreements, and standard that has been developed over time that recognizes some vertical foreclosures are anti-com searer and some can be pro. the earlier panel discussed the fact that we have a consensus developing around a no blocking and no throttling rule and no unreasonable discrimination rule, where the rubber it hits the road was on the question about paid prioritization. which can be good, can have anti-competitive effects. the ftc is able to evaluate on a case-by-case basis. whether one might harm consumers. using robust law that's developed from a number of cases elsewhere in the economy so they have a broader scope formed by a lot more history than the federal communications commission can. i agree that the flexibility is a lot better in a -- a dynamic market place than more rich id rule making. on the consumer protect

we had several fcc commissioners. other notables do this conversation, but never the chairman of the fcc. so i'm really honored to have you here. >> thank you for having me. >> i do want to say just for the record, really, that each year that tom weir was chair of the commission, i did invite him to come and do the same thing or really do whatever he wanted to, and he, with a lot of advance notice, and he always declined. but i made a point of letting him know that he would be welcome. and that i would, of course, be my usual polite self. but he didn't come. but i'm really pleased that you're here as well. >> we'll see how this goes. i don't want to be too hasty here. >> you're not making any promises about next time? >> well, you never know. might get demoted to c-span8, the ocho, as it's often known. we'll see. >> right now, we're on c-span2. >> the dos. >> for those of you who want to watch the reruns. okay, so again, a lot of us are familiar with your bio. i'm just going to ask four questions. and we're going to d

fcc. how soon after the inauguration? was that two days later? >> it was on a monday, january 23rd. so about three days after. >> about three days he was appointed by president trump to be chair of the fcc. what i will say about chairman pai is this, without going over each of the particular offices, which you can read about, and i pointed this out before but i think it's important. he's actually served in all three branches of government, spent a lot of time in senior positions on the hill and of course in the agencies, over at the justice department. i think all of those experiences are of course important and provide insights that are useful, i think. >> that's a charitable explanati explanation. evidence of the peter principle, keep failing the every job and keep getting promoted and the next thing you know i'm in the corner office. >> i think my explanation was really the correct one. i appreciate that. as i said, we ha've actually do this before, chairman pai and myself. and really t

i'm not going to use that phrase, make the fcc great again. i have a lot of confidence that fccr your leadership the will do a lot of good things for the american public. agree, but ialways have confidence that at the end of the day whatever that is, the american public will be well served for what you are trying to do. i thank you for that. i thank you for being here with us today. i asked the others to join me in thanking you. [applause] ajit pai: thanks so much. i really appreciate it. >> washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. deang up this morning, scott will be on to discuss reports of the trump administration withdrawing from the paris climate accord. eric lipton of the new york times will talk about how the pharmaceutical industry is responding to pressure to lower prescription drug prices. we will discuss the investigation into russia and the elections. we will talk about challenges to u.s. retailers. be sure to watch washington journal live at 7:00 eastern this morning. join the discussion. >> i

fcc. what i will say about chairman pai is this, without going over each of the particular offices which you can read about, and i pointed this out before but i think it's important, he's actually serve in all three branches of government, spent a lot of time in senior positions on the hill and, of course, in the agencies over at the justice department, and i think all of those experiences are of course important and provide insights that are useful, i think. >> that's a charitable explanation. >> i think my explanation was really the correct one, but i appreciate that. so as i said, we've actually done this before. chairman pai and myself. and really the only difference today is i have a bigger chair here for you, because of your new office. by the way, i was looking directly at it didn't see, did you bring your weed wacker with you? >> i did not. i had a feeling it wouldn't travel well so i just left it at home. >> okay. i mentioned that because the free state foundation stiff anniversar

the fcc decided no. we're going to move this over the simplest suggestions and expert testimony of many government experts. the federal communications existingn ripped the allocation out of the fm radio broadcasting, rendering every single one of those radio receivers obsolete. all the towers, all the technology. is they placed fm where it today, 88-108 megahertz. edwin harrell armstrong bought this. he was depressed, despondent. he fought it. to a large extent, the reason he committed suicide in 1954 was over the exclusion of his technology. murder of his technology by the federal communications commission allocation system. sadly or happily, however you want to look at it in the 1960's, fo was finally unleashed from regulation to really take a fair shot with a.m. head-to-head. within just a few years, fm eclipses a.m.. the quality is outstanding by comparison. it does further, better. the next time you are in a hotel when you can get a.m., fm, check the a.m. stations to see how static gain they are com

you have the chairman of the fcc and a member of the fcc at a hearing, greatly disagreeing with one anotherll us the politics of this. this is tom witter and ajit pye. tom witter was chairman then, democrat, and pye is chairman now, a republican. they have very strong disagreements over policy. let's watch. [begin video clip] >> there is no accident the regulatory framework we have built is depressing broadband investment. >> we are not seeing a decline in broadband infrastructure investment. you can say it, but it does not make it a fact. >> facts speak for themselves. i would be happy to cement sworn declarations. >> i would be happy to submit the information that the companies provide under penalty of sec to their investors about their investments. >> what is striking is that ceos with pending mergers will say about the top priorities. >> i'm talking about at&t and comcast, companies like that. >> who are typically repeat players before an agency that regulates highly. [end video clip] brian: what are we seeing there? tom: that is great. usually it is the other way around, that people in

the fcc is requesting about 15 merse higher than fy 2017. the fcc budget has grown from $370 million to now $1.6 billion. the over sight on the commission's budget is critical. although those fees come from public committees and exchanges, they're borne by investors. helps markets operate efficiently and spurs economic growth for all americans. the cftc is requesting $285 million. in comparison the cftc was founded and the budget has now reached to $250 million. however, access to more funding doesn't necessarily mean they'll spend that funding responsible. you both have challenges as you have taken the helm of your agencies. fcc has also had similar issues related to its leasing practices, which is of concern given the proposed budget increase. all agencies have to make decisions on how to best allocate requests. as we review your budget requests, i am most interested to hear your decisions within current funding levels. i'm concerned when regulations fragment the market needlessly raising the cost of business and pushing trading overseas.

that's exactly what the fcc ordered it. the fcc order declared web browsing information to be sensitive data. they declared it to be sensitive data, and required us to get opt in. her bill in essence, applies it. -- her bill, in essence, codifies it. my main concern with everything was always that we have to be treated the same. we have to have the same set of rules. we should be regulated from a privacy perspective by the same regulator that's regulating over-the-top surfaces. we are getting into the world where we are competing with the google's and apple's of the world. look at text messaging. if we have to operate under a different business model with a different set of rules, and can't operate with the same types of business models these guys have, it's a problem. we supported what chairman blackburn put out there, because what she's doing is she is enunciating a policy that is designed to create the level playing field that is our primary thing, and it's the first draft of the bill. we will see where it all goes. but

that's three weeks before the fcc's sunshine meeting. the issue came to a head and first came up, basically, during the last round of the net neutrality proceeding when -- when many congress people and others were asking to see the draft order. and it was considered at the time, and still may be by many, to be fairly controversial because it hadn't been done. but now it's been done. i'm going to ask him about it during our lunch conversation and probe a bit. but you two have had so much experience with the agencies. what's your reaction to this new way of doing business at the fcc in terms of making public these draft rule making proposals? someone go first, if you -- if you wish. >> look, i think we have to see how it pans out. there are possible pros and there are possible cons. to the extent that a chair of a commission is releasing a draft order that comes out of the chairman's office that other commissioners have not had a chance to weigh in on or perhaps only a subset of commissioners have had a subset to weigh in, there is the pot

it is very hard to look at any fcc decision or action, any fcc within the window of a news s k cycle or two within a year or two. but in the end the legacy of the last five years of the obama administration will be an unexplained, unnecessary retrenchment on a policy that indisputably was working when it moved to reclassify broadband under title 2 and absolutely undercut the united states' advantage for innovation and investment. and i think it is why our number one priority is to support the chairman of the fcc in unraveling that reclassification of broadband. not in unraveling net neutrality rules. no matter how many times the opponents of his actions say it, it doesn't make it true. getting rid of title 2 does not mean getting rid of net neutrality. the claire man couldn't have been clearer. our industries couldn't have been clearer, and i'm not going to be any clearer today than to say you can support net neutrality rules, but you don't have to do that under title 2 with all of the baggage that comes with title 2. which brings me to my second overall priority, which is once we ha

, as the current fcc charm prefers. by whatever name you want to call it, it is an important proceeding for the fcc. aside from the conversation that i am going to have with fcc chairman at lunchtime, we have a stelar line-up for today's program. the first program will feature howard shelanski and boyden gray here. then we are going to follow this session with an all-panel lineup. and then immediately following the panel session, we are going to break for a short time for a very nice buffet lunch. i guarantee you, it is going to be nice but i hope most of you are here for the program and not just the lunch. we are honored to have the two acting directors of the trade commission for the after lunch session. they will be featured at that session and then winding up, michelle konl michelle conelly who is a professor at duke university, will offer some final thoughts. now, remember to tweet if you are a tweeter, the handle i think we have the twitter handle on each table. but it is #fsfconf 9. which should call to mind fsf

the fcc hasadership recently begun to take a different tact. the fcc stated privacy and data security broadband rules after which congress used the congressional review act validate them. the fcc also issued a notice of proposed rulemaking in which it proposes to no longer classify broadband service as a carrier service. as we heard today, this proceeding is ongoing. if they were to make the proposed change final. the ftc would then likely be able to use its enforcement, rulemaking, and other activities to once again address broadband security and privacy. i would like to talk about what that would look like if that were to come to pass. to protect their security and privacy of broadband subscribers. be the continues to federal government's leading agency on data security and privacy issues. of consumeralth protection and experience and expertise, which we would bring to bear on security and privacy laws. and security standards, all companies can compete in the mind space regardless of where the companies provide broadband services, data analyt

come up and it should because it's been important proceeding for the fcc. aside from the conversation that i'm going to have with sec chairman pai at lunchtime we have a stellar lineup for today's program. a the first program will feature howard sharansky and boyden gray , here. again i have in your program the titles and bios we are going to follow this session with an all-star panel lineup and then immediately following the panel session we will break a short time for a very nice buffet lunch. i guarantee you it will be nice, but i hope most of you are here for the program and not just for the lunch. then, we will have a conversation with chairman pai and then we are honored to have the two acting directors of the federal trade commission with us for the after lunch session. tadd lipsky and todd paul will tom paul will be featured at that session and winding up michelle connelly who is a professor at duke university and a member of free state foundation's board of academic advisors will offer some final thoughts. now, remember to tweet if you are tweeter.

it, i'm sure will come up and it should because it's an important proceeding for the fcc. aside from the conversation that i'm going to have with fcc chairman at lunchtime, we have a stellar line-up for today's program. the first program will feature howard gelanski and boyden gray. in your program you see the titles and bios. then we're going to follow this session with an all star panel line-up. and then immediately following the panel session, we're going to break a short time for a very nice buffet lunch. i guarantee you it's going to be nice, but i hope most of you are here for the program and not just for the lunch. then we're going to have a conversation with chairman pie. we're honored to have the two acting directors of the federal trade commission with us for the after lunch session. it's ted libski and tom paul will be featured at that session. and then winding up, michelle connolly, who is a professor at duke university and a member of the free state foundation's board of academic advisoradvisol offer some final thoughts. now, remember to tweet if you're a twee

we're very hopeful, working with the fcc, working with congress, with the administration, that we canrovide a better balance and encourages company's investment into their plant rare that into the cost of regulatory compliance, we think we have the opportunity to achieve that over the next four years but it's not going to be easy. >> tom larsen, the fcc chair spoke at your summit. what did you hear that you agreed with and what made you concerned. >> i think clearly he is a deregulatoriy. there was a lot of mast-minute regulation that occurred can he end of chairman wheeler's regime, and i thing what i think i heard was, expect less government in your business. now in some ways i think he is city not going to address issues that are really important. retransmission consent. the cost of carrying broadcast signal is is the fastest growing cost of our business. i don't expect him to do anything about it short of some major event in the marketplace. >> how regulated are those or is that just an agreement between you and the broadcaster? >> it's just a negotiation between us and the broadc

that the fcc squash this attempt. there's still aggressive attempts to get more robocalls into our homes. >> bill is not a dinosaur, because i have a landline as well. but does it work the same way, or is there an advantage if you are only a wireless consumer versus one with a landline? >> if you're a wireless consumer, you have a few more options. t-mobile, at&t, all the major wireless carriers have programs in place. some of them are all, some of them you have to opt in, that automatically detect some of these robocalls. but they obviously don't do enough to catch all of them. i know my wife, a majority of her calls now are robocalls, they're from telemarketers. the best advice is to not pick them up. she's pretty smart about it, if she doesn't recognize the number, she'll just hang up really quickly. >> i guess that is the best advice. roger, thank you. we appreciate it. roger chang with cnet. >> i solved it, i don't answer the phone even if i recognize the number. if it's important, they'll leave a message. >> tha

matt polka, can you mentioned the ftc as opposed to the fcc.you see maybe a move over to the ftc to be more of the regulator? >> guest: that's really, when we're talking about privacy, that's who regulates privacy today. and the ftc, for many years, has done a wonderful job. they've had hundreds of enforcement action against web providers, against isps when there was cause for concern on a case by case basis. so that regime has worked. i do not at all think the fcc's going to shiring its duty when it comes to isps, working with private networks, being forthright about the fact that there is an ecosystem of sorts between government that has a very specific purpose in insuring that there are proper regulations to protect the public interest but also recognizing -- and i think this is fundamentally different from the last eight years -- recognizing that all of the good things that we want to give to consumers and we want to insure that they have will be provided by private networks. and we have to recognize that private networks are an important p

did and fcc have to have their own rules although wheeler said he didn't need them and created them. then suspended and never enforced so we repeal them and then we got blamed by different entities including bill boards in districts. saying that we're selling people's privacy. all of which none of which was accurate. other laws that supersede but it really opened the door to this debate u now on privacy. and she's a very thoughtful and capable legislator, and determined one. so i would advise you to be in regular contact and communication with chairman blackburn. >> okay. >> i'm a voter in your district as well as an organizer we have met before. >> climate action. >> yes. [laughter] so i know my family has been in district two for four generations, and number of years ago i melt with you about climate change making life pretty much uninhabitable in my hometown by the kids, my age, and i -- i've heard your line about hybrid and i know about your interest in biopass as well as innovation but fact is that you have a 5% score of league of conservation voters last year. and you support t

what the fcc is considering right now. >>> a spectacular start to the weekend. bright and breeleezy who are these people? the energy conscious people among us say small actions can add up to something... humongous. a little thing here. a little thing there. starts to feel like a badge maybe millions can wear. who are all these caretakers, advocates too? turns out, it's californians it's me and it's you. don't stop now, it's easy to add to the routine. join energy upgrade california and do your thing. >>> drone delivers could play a role in fighting climate change, as they greatly reduce the carbon footprint. can use a lot less fuel than ups or postal service trucks. trucks are better for bigger roads but packages to rural locations drones provide a great option. >>> fcc is considering rules to allow tele marketers to send you voice mails arguing by not interrupting consumers lines by ringing phones are not violating the tele phone consumer protection act of 1991. the fcc has not set a date on a decision. >>> pride month kicks off today in the castro. led by seve

>> if you look at the fcc today, the issue we are describing here is not going on with the fcc or the ftc or the scc or the nrb and you can go down the list. why is that coursework is because the way congress has historically structured these independent agencies, multimember, it's all the studies, all the academics have shown, there's quick turnover at a new administration. this one will not. in fact, after 2020, after this next appointment it will go to the third year of the next president. if there's an appointment in 2230 go to the fourth year of the next president. with that president who might have run on the pleasant on consumer protection and having to live with president trump's appointee as consumer. >> that's precisely the point. >> here's the question, does that matter? does the dead hand of the past president controlling the agency which we don't have with fcc or ftc, does it matter? >> is both here and now. it does matter. the diminishment of the presence power and the diminishment of the power in the future. the point to make here are absolutely correct -- what the cour

or the fcc? >> guest: yeah. we have so many issues, but i think from a corporate perspective one of the most important issues for us is the tax reform agenda. and i think as a company we play, my boss, randall stephenson, the ceo of the company, plays a significant role at the business round table. and i think corporate tax reform is a critical business issue for the company. we have all of our regulatory issues that we deal with from day-to-day, and they're very, very important. but i think in terms of getting the economy growing, in terms of, you know, creating jobs in the united states there's nothing that would be more significant than finding a way to lower our very non-competitive federal corporate tax rate which stands at 35% and get more into the competitive areas of where other countries are. i know the trump administration and the republican leadership on the hill wanted to lead the world, but just -- it would take a significant effort just to make us more competitive with europe and other countries in

and is so my plan was, you know, we could have a big fight about the trump fcc versus the obama fcc and this particular ruling and that particular ruling and this kind of pat tent policy and that -- this kind of patent policy and this law from congress and that law from congress, and they go back and forth. there's a sort of d.c. whiplash. and then we have commercialization of the web. and, in my opinion, overreach, commercial overreach. i am a capitalist. i have no problem with people making money off of it, i just think there's been overreach. i think we have a lot of lousy ads, there are way too many of them, they're way too invasive. they disturb the viewing experience on a web site, and they slow down the loading of the web site, and they track your every move. and we need a way to deal with that. so i propose that we start over, that we basically don't -- we don't have the structures. the antitrust laws, the fcc's laws under which it operates, the ftc's laws under which it operates aren't, don't fit this situation. this is not, you know, the steel industry which is a super importa

what the fcc is considering right now. >>> a spectacular start to the weekend. bright and breeleezy out t >>> drone delivers could play a role in fighting climate change, as they greatly reduce the carbon footprint. can use a lot less fuel than ups or postal service trucks. trucks are better for bigger roads but packages to rural locations drones provide a great option. >>> fcc is considering rules to allow tele marketers to send you voice mails arguing by not interrupting consumers lines by ringing phones are not violating the tele phone consumer protection act of 1991. the fcc has not set a date on a decision. >>> pride month kicks off today in the castro. led by several lgbt leaders. >>> and it's going to be breezy this weekend but could end with a bit of rain. next, the accuweather forecast. >>> looking forward to game two between the doves and the cavs, [ light music playing ] you've wished upon it all year, and now it's finally here. the mercedes-benz summer event is back, with incredible offers on the mercedes-benz you've always longed for. but hurry, the

my plan was we could have a big fight about the trump fcc versus the obama fcc, this particular groaning and that particular ruling and this patent policy of not patent policy. this law from congress and that law from congress and they go back and forth triggers a gc whiplash and then we have commercialization of the web and in my opinion, commercial overreached. i'm a capitalist. i have no problem with people making money off of it. they had lousy ads, way too many of them, way too invasive. they disturb the viewing experience on a website and a slowdown to loading up the website and track your every move. so i propose that we start over and we basically don't have the structures. the antitrust laws, sec thoughts on which it operates aren't -- don't get this situation. this is not the steel industry, which is a super important industry. don't get me wrong. but all these other industries have to depend on it to live. and so, i said we should give it like yosemite park or the gettysburg battlefield with the interstate highway system with a man on the moon program, which went bipartisan in

we could have a big fight about the trump fcc versus the obama fcc, this particular ruling and that particular ruling. they go back-and-forth. there is a d.c. whiplash. then we have commercialization of the web. and overreach. i'm a capitalist. i have no problem with people making money. i think there has been overreach. we have a loud of -- a lot of lousy advertisements. discover -- disturbed the viewing experience on a website. they slow down the loading of the website and the track your every move. we need a way to deal with that. i propose we start over. we basically don't have the structures. laws, the fcc, the ftc laws. they don't fit this situation. industryot the steel which is a super important industry. the internet is air. all of these other industries have to do tend on it to live. so, i said we should think of it like you 70 park or the gettysburg battlefield or the interstate highway system, which were bipartisan and their support, which most people are glad we did and have protected. economic allow for benefits to flow from that. i talked about sending up a special kind of agenc

recently about robocalls in general. >> this is the number one source of consumer complaints to the fcc anything else that we get. >> reporter: well, you can give the fcc your comments, but tomorrow is the last day for public comment, so you can find a link to their comment page and instructions on how to do it at cbsnews.com. anthony? >> anna werner. maybe you can leave a voicemail for them. thanks. >>> coming up, a landslide turns a scenic highway into a road to nowhere. ♪ lysol max cover kills 99.9% of bacteria, even on soft surfaces. one more way you've got what it takes to protect. thanks for tnorfolk!around and i just wanted to say, geico is proud to have served the military for over 75 years! roger that. captain's waiting to give you a tour of the wisconsin now. could've parked a little bit closer... it's gonna be dark by the time i get there. geico®. proudly serving the military for over 75 years. ialmost everything. you know, ke 1 i n 10 houses could get hit by an expensive septic disaster. but for only $7 a month, rid-x helps break down waste. avoid a septic disaster with rid-

fcc chair larsen, the spoke at your summit. what did hear from him that you agreed with and what made you concerned? tom: clearly he's a -- he's de regulatory. so there was a lot of last- minute regulation that occurred at the end of chairman regime.s heard was, you know, expect less government in your business. now, in some ways i think he's still not going to address some are reallyes that important. the cost of carrying broadcast tonals is hugely important us and our companies. it's the fastest growing cost of our business. him to dopect anything about it short of some major event in the marketplace. regulate ready those or is that just an agreement between you and the broadcasters a negotiationly between us and the broadcasters. although they pretty much have the leverage because they can stations.ck out their and as you've seen this year already there's been 143 black outs which the most ever in a year before was 2015, 192. we're a little over three months in and already at 143. recordoing to smash that by a long way this

drop is a non-intrusive alternative to this robocall. >> reporter: the companies are arguing to the fcct since the phone never actually rings that their ringless voicemails should not be regulated by the 1991 telephone consumer protection act, a move supported by the republican national committee, which said regulating the practice might affect political outreach campaigns. >> that's even more invasive, more time-consuming, and more annoying in some ways than a standard phone call. >> reporter: consumer advocates say not regulating would be the wrong call. margot saunders is with the national consumer law center. >> they want to be able to reach us without consent, and they want to be able to reach us without our telling them "stop." >> reporter: the fcc does not comment on open petitions, but chairman ajit pai told us recently about robocalls in general. >> this is the number one source of consumer complaints to the fcc. it dwarfs anything else that we get. >> reporter: well, you can give the fcc your comments, but tomorrow is the last day for public comment, so you can find a link to

the fcc rules had not been enacted.been passed but not enacted, so it just made sense that you would preserve the status quo, keep everything in place, get those rules that have not been activated off the books, and then move forward with having one set of regulations with one regulator. and that is exactly what we have done. emily: if the follow-up bill does not pass, you have less privacy protections than you did in the first place? >> no, what you would have to is the way privacy has been. bear in mind the fcc rules had not been put in place. what we do know is consumers are saying we would really like to have the opportunity to opt in and decide if we want to have our information shared. if you were to go out and ask consumers, do you want more or less privacy in the virtual space, they are going to tell you they want more privacy protections. and they want more tools in the toolbox to keep themselves and their children safe when they are online. i think it is an important discussion for us to have. it is important

the fcc is proposing a record fine of $120 million. nbc's tom costello has details. >> reporter: at first, the robocall sounds like good news. >> you have been selected to receive 2,600 travel dollars towards your next trip. >> reporter: but the fcc says it's all a scam and one of the biggest scammers so far is adrian abramovich of miami who allegedly made 96 million robocalls over a three-month period masquerading as legitimate businesses then transferring the calls to mexico where smooth-talking operators convince victims into handing over credit card information. among the customers inundated with calls frequent traveler kim wilson. >> they stated that they were from tripadvisor trying to sell vacations and, you know, cruises, that type of thing. and these calls would come three, four, five, sometimes ten times a day. >> reporter: wilson complained to tripadvisor who then alerted federal authorities. >> we know that individual travelers lost anywhere from hundreds to thousands of dollars apiece that show chose to transact with these

be up for it >>> unwanted robo calls are already the number onesu fcc, and as more people put themselvesthe do in the call list, more and more telemarketers figured out a way around it by filling up your voice mail instead and jo ling kent tells us there is a way around it. >> reporter: it's a robo call that sneaks into your phone. >> you're a finalest in the drawing. >> reporter: they are ringless voice mails, the cousin of the robo call. >> i've received at least 100 of these voice mails. >> reporter: sue says they often come from area codes where she has important contacts. >> i'm a cancer survivor. i get calls from my hospital in boston. when a 617 area code comes up, i feel compelled to deal with that right away. >> reporter: the messages go straight to voice mail filling up your inbox. businesses and political groups are sending the ringless voice mails and now the fcc is considering this petition to allow them exempting them from do not call rules. >> reporter: stratics provides for hospitals and churches. >> they are a no alternative to robo calls and it really does put the power

can i complain to the fcc that something like that actually works? >> you should tell the fcc and tell your member of congress that you don't want robo calls from known or unknown robo callers. >> we saw the ctia, the wireless coalition is opposed to loosening some of th i would imagine big carriers like an at&t and verizon are, too. frankly, with all the calls come into my house now, almost every one of them is one of these robo callers. i'm tempted to yank the cords out of my house. you would think that's something they want to do to fight this, too. are there things they can do? >> yes, there are things. but you put your finger on a critical distinction. there are fewer protections against robo calls against land lines than there are for robo calls on cell phones. and we are seeing far more to land lines, so much that many people have done just what you're thinking about doing, dropping their land line. >> the bottom line is speak up, speak loudly, tell people on the phone, tell your congressman, complain to these government offices and do it very

so my plan was we could have a big fight about the trumps fcc about the chart obama's fcc in this ruling in that rally -- and that patent policy in this patent policy and this law from congress and that law from congress. then we have commercialization of the web and in my opinion commercial overreach. i am a capitalist. i have no problem with people making money off it. i just think there has been overreach. i think we have a lot of loud, they are way too invasive. they disturb the viewing experience on a web site and they slow down the loading of the web site and they track your every move. we need a way to deal with that so i proposed a start over. it would basically -- we don't have the structures through the antitrust law, the up cc laws under which it operates, the ftc under which it operates don't fit the situation. this is not the steel industry. it's a super important industry, don't get me wrong but it's not like the internet. all these other industries have to depend on it to live and so we should think of it like yosemite park or the gettysburg battlefield, the interstate hig