he was at ntia for a number of years, but i think this was a surprise for folks. >> host: now, were there any conflicts of interest in the last couple of months that people should be aware of? >> caller: well, four months ago, she did, in fact, vote for comcast, $13.5 billion deal to acquire nbc universal so that raises eyebrows around town,

not only as a commissioner, but helping us complete the dtv transition while serving as head of the ntia. it was no small undertaking, and she has done good service to the country, and i wish her well in her new role. turning to today's topic. it is our responsibility to review how independent agencies to whom we dell delegated authority and over which we have jurisdiction conduct the public's business. at times, the fcc succumbed to practices to jeopardize public confidence. while some have taken steps to improve processes, we witnessed how process and procedures from one chairman can change dramatically under another. one is open and transparent, the next is closed and dysfunction gnat. the time is right to codify best practices to ensure consistency from issue to issue and commission to commission. many colleagues have worked on reform ideas in the past, and some have proposed changes in bill form today. we will consider those as well. now, to kick things off here, here's seven items to think about. first, the fcc could be required to start new rule making proceedings with a notice of

although she had been at ntia for a number of years. but i think this was his prize. >> host: whether any conflicts of interest in the last couple of months that people should be aware of? >> caller: four months ago she did, in fact, vote for comcast $13.75 billion deal to acquire nbc universal. so that is something that is raising eyebrows around town. although, it's not illegal for her to go there and obviously lobbying rules would be in pla place. this kind of revolving door happens in d.c. a lot. this is another example of it. >> host: so a former head of the ncta is the chief of the comcast washington bureau, correct, and not have meredith atwell baker. to that any strong democrats as well on their staff in washington? >> caller: they do. comcast has hired a variety of folks on both parties but it's a very bipartisan office. they do have a number of democrats. they're brought over from agency, former staffers for commissioners and others. so it's actually one of the offices in 10 which is really is known for being very bipartisan.

essentially, the point of the -- >> [inaudible]ntia >> sure. essentially, the point of the paper was to see where it might be possible to bridge some of the division on immigration inoi the country by looking at five of the main arguments used against having some type of comprehensive immigration reform legislation.nsiv so i'm going the get right into what some of those arguments are and what some of the responses m are.an um, first, that immigration reform will harm taxpayers.ll h the argument is, essentially, that by let anything people or allowing to stay here people why maybe have less skills be a big drain on taxpayers. what we need to look at is to compare the status quo to what a change in policy would be, not some type of ideal world as if we were starting from scratch. what we have now is roughly 11 million people in the country illegally. past research has shown, particularly when we looked at the 1986 amnesty, is that when people were legalized, they had pretty sharp increases in their income and their salaries. by being legal, it ga