. >> host: well, it was in 1982 that judge harold green issued a decision which led to the breakup of the at&t corporation, and that's our topic this week on "the communicators," the impact of that decision 30 years later on telecommunications. joining us in a round table discussion is professor roger noll of stanford, as well as professor jerry hausman of mit. both of these gentlemen were involved at various levels in the breakup or the decision to break up at&t. joining us here in our washington studio is paul barbagallo of bloomberg. professor noll, first of all, what was your role or activity during the breakup of at&t, and what led to that decision? >> guest: well, the roots of the antitrust case were in a presidential task force that was formed during the johnson administration in the late 1960s called the telecommunications policy task force. it had concluded that the telecommunications industry, at least the part of it that was in the federal jurisdiction, could be competitive and made recommendations both to the -- mainly to the federal communications commission about how to

. >> it was in 1982 that judge harold greene issued a decision which led to the breakup of the at&t corp.. that is our topic this week on the "communicators," the impact of that decision 30 years later on the telecommunications. joining us is professor roger noll of stanford, as well as professor jerry hausman of mit, both of whom were involved at various levels in the breakup or the decision to break up at&t. joining us in the washington studio is paul. professor noll, first of all, what with your activity during the breakup of at&t and what led to that decision? >> the antitrust case was formed during the johnson administration the late 1960's and a presidential task force called the telecommunications policy task force. it concluded the telecommunications industry, the part in federal jurisdiction, should be competitive and made recommendations both -- mainly to the fcc about how to cause that to happen. then when the knicks and the administration can along, the holdover staff of the antitrust division decided to pursue it antitrust rather than it fcc regulation as the means to introd

what is the relationship between a 1982 decision by harold green and is there a relationship between not matt and in 1996 telecommunications act? >> yes, by 1996, it was well recognize that things had gotten out of hand. you know, technology had changed. in 1996, a deal was made in large part. that was a competition was introduced and became sufficient, then the consent decree would be illuminated. even by 1996, i actually made a prediction that within 10 years the old at&t would be gone and i was off by one week. it took 10 years and one week for them to be gone. it was certainly an improvement and it had its heart in the right place. but again, it was somewhat behind technology. as i said. the regulations favored the new entrants and invested in a lot of money and they all failed, and now it is completely irrelevant. two years later, 17 years later, it is completely irrelevant. but that is due to the technology, more than anything else in my view. >> host: professor noll? >> guest: at the time it passed, i thought it was very complex. it was not a good piece of legislation. we comp