vimarsana.com

Well try to go through the agenda, i know therell be other press conferences afterwards as well. The blue ahearts alerts, Public Safety, any questions on that . Monty, Public Safety are you ere . Monty taylor, i wonder quickly if the bureau had any response to the issue raised by the commissioner about the cost benefit analysis and weighing the cost of Police Officers life and money being disrespectful. Do you have any response to that . Well im not going to respond to her comment, especially since i havent seen her entire statement but what i will say is, you know, we certainly and i think everyone can agree that the life of a Police Officer is, you know, highly valuable and one of the reasons thats one of the reasons that we took, that the commission took the action it took today. The idea being we have to do our part to protect those that are going out and facing danger every day to protect us. Thank you so much. Youre welcome. Anything further on this one . Any questions on the Rural Health Care item . Ok, so i think what well do then is actually, why dont we do, any questions on the wireless item for twilight towers . Howard. Wireless, why dont you come up. This seems like kind of a production, i just had a question or two. I was curious, theres been some talk to the item might change some over the draft. Can you tell us whether there were any changes of note over what had been approved, over what had been proposed by chairman pai . I think commissioner karr made some general references to some changes but i think youre also going to see the item itself probably later today. Ok. Ok. At least, im i hope im not promising more than my staff is ready for, but i think itll be out very soon. Then i guess i wanted to ask about the tribal aspect. It seemed like that was where there was a lot of discussion and it looked like clyburn and rosemore both said different things. Can you explain what it does in terms of the tribes . Part of the Historic Preservation process is coordination with tribal nations that might have an interest in the area where the facilities are going. We have had as i think you heard in the meeting a lot of conversations with interested parties including tribes over a number of years try to figure out what to do with these twilight towers. What we did today is really kind of the equivalent of notice of proposed rule making. We are putting it out for toshe comment and that includes the tribal nations who may have an interest in this. Theres a group called the National Association of tribal historic presser vation officers, theyve been involved in the proceedings and the infrastructure proceeding generally. I expect well be hearing from and working with them as we move forward to the next stage. To be clear, theres no connection between the twilight movies and these towers . Not to my knowledge. While wireless is here, any questions on the cmrs item . If not, lets move ahead to restoring Internet Freedom to wireline. Come up and join the wireless folks standing here for estoring Internet Freedom. Emso who has a question . Go ahead. One when will the when will f the it take place . The Effective Date of the item as a whole, the three parts of it, will take effect soon after approval by the office of management and budget of the the new transparency rule needs to be aproved by o. M. B. For a smoother, well do everything at once. Thank you. Sthrnt a 30 or 60day period between the time it gets published in the federal register that it takes effect . The first step will be, we will publish the order itself in the federal register, summary of the order, the entire order. We also have to seek approval by o. M. B. Of the trans the new transparency rule. Well actually have o. M. Once we have o. M. B. Approval well publish again in the federal register, a notice of the o. M. B. Approval, plus announce the Effective Date of the entire item. So that would be, is that 3 or 60 days beyond . 30 or 60. I think what youre thinking of is the public draft stated he item would take effect 60 days after publication in the register. It will take effect shortly after the approval of the office of management and budget. Theres no specific time period . Zaff approval by the office of management and budget. As soon as that happens it takes effect immediately . Shortly thereafter. And we will publish notice in the federal register of the Effective Date. Is there any estimate how long this will take for o. M. B. To approve it . That can take months. Only the transparency rules will require o. M. B. Rules, correct . Thats right. Any other questions . The identity of the speaker is sorry. [inaudible] thank you. Thank you very much. Finally, next would be two media items. Are there any on the cable question . Only. We have one on the cable tv. Why dont you just come up . Matt. Communications daily. My one question is between the draft item and item approved today, any substantial changes made . Can you describe how different, where different . I think commissioner clyburn discussed her office requested we ask some questions about opt in rather than an opt out proposal with respect to the paper notices and the other commissioners agreed. Beyond that there was nothing . Nothing significant. Any other questions for either item . Monty. Yeah, michelle. Monty. Comp daily. I would like to ask the math question. Was there any lobbying on ownership . Didnt see any ex parte there was no activity in the docket. Ok. Any change at all . No. Ok. Thank you. Anything further . We have several commissioners waiting in the wing. I think commissioner clyburn is here, we go in seniority order. Commissioner orielly, if you are here, go ahead. Ok. Thats fine. Howdy, yall. Hows everybody. Any questions for me or commissioner carr . Sorry. Question over here. Question for commissioner orielly. I guess i have a hard time last ing, say, in the commission you saying the f. C. C. Didnt have authority to act but voting anyway, can you square that sorry, this is on media ownership, revising cap in the discount. If you dont think full stop that f. C. C. Can do this, why not just say, look, you know, congress, we really need you guys to step in and change this but our hands are tied . Commissioner orielly i said that in my statement. I said there are a lot of good lawyers in town including the Third Circuit court of appeals in philadelphia said i was wrong. I accept the fate that i may be wrong. I dont blike that belief. I testified i think im right. Commissioner congressman doyle, congressman Ranking Member doyle asked if i was right. In this case im guaranteed by the parties that i know are going to challenge the situation if we ever get to final order which is unclear at this moment. Well see what the record brings. But if we get to that point it will be challenged as all media ownership issues have been challenged since the 1996 act that im aware of. I dont know we left any pieces out and said in that time period. So it will be challenged and well got finality. Id like to see finality to that irnue. I havent called on congress and talked about those things. Its either courts or congress to resolve this issue. Yes, sir. Matt. Communications daley. I guess the question for both. Given disney, fox, can you give us your thoughts on media consolidation and the f. C. C. Having a review in this proposed transaction . And cat fancy . Commissioner orielly i was not part of the cat fancy part so i dont it was funny and i laughed but i wasnt part of it. How it came about. But to your point, i make it a practice never to talk about pending perspective, any mergers in any capacity. I have to pass on your question regarding the specific merger you say. In the issue of consolidation in general, the idea of the media landscape, i made the argument that we need a better analysis and definition of the marketplace. The marketplace is no longer one radio station, a. M. Fighting as a. M. s and f. M. Is fighting as f. M. s. Its everybody fighting for eyeballs or listeners and that includes all the technology companies. That marketplace is much more broad than before. When i see conversations for many months now in terms of why companies would do x, why or z and not mentioning this particular information but people talking about streaming and things that go in that universe, we need a better measurement, a better analysis, definition of the marketplace to reflect today and not the past. So thats my viewpoint. Nothing specific to offer on any particular deal. And media regulation, i put a couple statements so far. Id refer you to those. Generally my view is we need po make sure our views are reflecting the marketplace and where theres competition. Reporter ill ask two questions. One on Net Neutrality and the other on wireless infrastructure. First, Net Neutrality. There was just a big hullabaloo outside you talk to people like at the health club or whatever and everybody is thinking about Net Neutrality [inaudible] reporter church, anyplace. People talk and they think they understand. I think there might be a lot from your perspective, is there a lot of confusion out there and how does the commission sort of turn the corner on that in terms of really getting the word out in terms of from your perspective, this is all we did here . Commissioner orielly i think the amount of Public Engagement is welcomed. Its commissioner carr that should get people passionate. To your question weve seen a lot of misinformation out there. The sky is not falling. How do we know that . Think back to 2015. Thats the regulatory framework, the title 1 regulatory framework. I think a lot of people are looking at title 2, there is a thin line between where we are and some balkanized version of the internet. Thats not the case. Title 2 does not do the things that people are attributing to it. There are reasons why we have a free and open internet that predated title 2 and title 2 rules. Those reasons are staying in place. There are strong protections here. This isnt an experiment with some sort of radical laissez faire approach to the internet. I think there is a lot of hyperbole out there. Thats fine. Well see it plays out. Im confident in the decisions were making. It doesnt give me any pause theres that much in it. I dont think there should be. Commissioner orielly i agree with commissioner carr. I love that the public is engaged. I lamented in the past that some of our items didnt have a lot of commentary. There was a question to me many months ago should we put some kind of fee before someone should be allowed to comment . I thought that was terrible. I think we run a process to allow as many people comment on the issue. I commented regarding some of the false comments and some of the fake comments that were submitted in my statement. Youll see you can have that. So im glad that people are engaged. It doesnt cause me heartburn. I think its healthy overall for that purpose. Now to your second part, i think commissioner carr hits it on the hits the nail on the head. The second part which we talked about today, every day Going Forward when the internet isnt broken, were going to its going to reaffirm our point. I know there was a publication, i any it was represented here today, the end of the internet as we know it. The front story. I thought that was just er in extending the hyperbole. Take a deep breath. People my friends my family do the same thing. Whats happening on this issue . And im like, everyone take a deep breath. It is going to work out. The internet is going to function exactly as it did exactly is a strong word. Work as well as it is today. As well as it will work tomorrow. I dont have any issues with that. To the second part of the question i will get to, what if bad things happen, right . My question my point has been, i dont see the authority in the statute. We talk about 706. I talked about that at length for multiple years on the topic. Thats a prerogative for congress to change the statute. People say, well, the courts have blast title 2. No. They said is we have deference to that. We are disagreeing, if you read the item, we are disagreeing with nair analysis and have stronger logical reasons for our definitions and our approach and this item is the right reading. Deference is different than the court saying you are right, we agree with you, you have picked the right outcome. Thats a difference saying basically, well, were not exactly going to throw it out. I guess you can sneak by. Thats how that last item, in y opinion, went through. Reporter and the infrastructure question. Twilight towers, i know youve been talking about this for a long time. Are there other items like that are sort of hanging out . Are there other things that are sort of a nobrainer thing . Commissioner orielly i have to defer to my reporter that the commission could do in a relatively quick time frame that i just dont know if thats unique, thats a problem that was are there similar things like that . Commissioner orielly they are big ticket items on. I will spend time now that the Net Neutrality rule is behind us. Commissioner carr how do we package that. Thats how i will spend the next couple weeks. Moved one this month, twilight towers. Whether we can move some of these smaller ones or move to a bigger one, thats something i will work through the next couple weeks. Commissioner orielly i thank commissioner carr for his leadership on this issue. I think we are all waiting for the meeting in january and see what the recommendations are and be able to influence our decision and take recommendations and see what we like and dont like and go from there. Reporter dave from reuters. As you know the n. P. R. , the title 2 order, the question is should you retain any of the bright line rules. Was there much debate about that issue . Did you quickly come about that decision . How did you get to where you ended up . Commissioner orielly as i will speak for myself, the chair the three didnt sit down and violate any statutory prohibition. I think our views are very wellknown on this topic. Im pretty outspoken on the topic. Its not shocking i disagree with the bright line rules. I mentioned today they fall i dont think theyre needed in terms of the examples that people highlight. I dont have any doubt i have i have no doubt that companies are not going to block and not going to throttle except for reasonable network management. I dont i think they are risking an up Team Public Relations pummeling that would not be they have said as much publicly and have done ads to that effect as well. Thats why im pretty confident between the internet you have today is the internet you have tomorrow Going Forward. What were working really hard on, more deployment and better speeds and removing some of the arriers to that to happen. Reporter i have a question i wanted to ask which is totally different. Do either of you how do both i you feel about the am too close . About the request from small carriers that operate under the acam that are looking to see that increase at the end of the year, any thoughts on how the f. C. C. Should deal with those requests . Commissioner carr i spent a lot of time on reform. I testified in front of congress that i thought there was an opportunity to use some of our reserves. Commissioner orielly to build out. And that happened on the acam side. I dont think you can do one without the other. There is an opportunity in some of those reserves for that purpose. Thats something the commission will have to look at Going Forward. I realize its tied to the bigger budgetary 4. 5 number. Ive been up to speed on this. Well see what the commission and the chairman would like to do on that topic. I cant get too far ahead. Commissioner carr nothing to add. No news to break on it. Reporter commissioner orielly, first part of the question. Why do you want to throttle my cat videos . Thats really not cool. Second actual part of the question, i talked a little bit to the chairman about rating and where he sees these practices going. You referred to the zero rating witchhunt as you put it, where do you see data cap sort of practices, zero rating practices going under the new policy . Commissioner orielly first, i have no interest throttling your cat videos. Sometimes what they need to do, prioritization of traffic which already happens today. That does highlight prioritization does occur. In terms of paid prioritization or subset of zero rating at least my definition, some people try to keep it separate but i think its indicative of paid prioritization. Without the valuable experiences from zero rating we wouldnt have the unlimited bundles that we have today in wireless space. Its been immensely beneficial. I thought the practices from the Prior Commission on the zero rating investigation incredibly problematic. They can never define for me whats happening until the day after basically the election and then all of a sudden they had a viewpoint. But where i think this is going in a large sense, part of our job and part of our work, at least in my opinion, is to get as much spectrum out in the marketplace, to remove barriers so people can build higher speed, more advanced Wireless Networks so having things like data caps are not necessary. Traffic management becomes less of an issue with a faster network, with a more capable network. Were trying to facilitate that on our side. The networks themselves have to do their part. Any other questions . I dont see mr. Donnelly anywhere. Nope. Ok. Reporter again, for the both of you. Senator blumenthal is talking about d. O. J. Trying to extend conditions on comcast, nbc, past the 2022 expiration. Are there discussions of extension of conditions that were imposed back in 2011 by the f. C. C. Or should there be . Commissioner orielly i havent had any discussions. You can check my ex parte. They have raised that issue. I am debating considering the issue and see if the chairman sends anything my way. Commissioner carr yeah, i have not had any internal deliberations on that issue. I think i also took one external meeting on that. Nothing beyond that. Commissioner orielly if you dont have questions we will go to lunch and leave you to our good colleagues. Good afternoon. The commissioner and i would entertain any questions you will have. I did get one question from someone who could not join us. If you allow me to i normally dont this but they went out of their way. This isly vy from bay area this is levi from bay area newsgroup. Assuming hes male, chairman pai refused to listen to the opposition does ms. Clyburn, me, feel the voices of the public have been heard and my answer is absolutely not. I said very clearly i believe in my statement that it is telling that this item that the majority just passed did not cite a single consumer comment letter, voicemail or message. That to me speaks volumes how the majority values the millions of consumers who took the time to weigh in about keeping the internet Net Neutrality rules in place. So i wanted to tee that up. I dont know if you have any openers other than will we entertain questions . Thank you. Its a little late in the day. Commissioner clyburn i know the other commissioners mentioned lunch but its way past lunch. I am thinking happy hour. Reporter ill dive in. Bloomberg law. In is for either of you on media ownership and altering the cap. I just want to know if you had any thoughts about commissioner rielly joining you in the belief that you alter the cap. I have no special knowledge what hes thinking but i do fundamentally agree this agency lax the authority to adjust lacks the authority to adjust the 39 cap that was put in the appropriations act. Commissioner clyburn i will add i think there was a mention to answer a pre answer a question that might be on your mind that the chairman did make mention of something that he i think qualified or classified in a way that i take issue with. You know, back in 2004, the world looked very different. As i affirmed in my statement, that was five years before the digital transition. I did not see any mention, you know, of u. H. F. When it comes to that. You know, that particular issue. There were not the distinctions that we had today that occurred as a result of the digital transition. So to bring up something that we know that has changed by their own admission is technologically, you know, out of date. That we ruled that it was technologically out of date, i took issue whether or not they are linked. And then we put this back into consideration. You know, we reverse course on at, and now where he have we have the ability for those who wish to further consolidate to do so in a manner that tricks the public into believing theyre still compliant with the 39 cap. And then we say, well, maybe well grandfather them in. Those are the questions. We are given a green light without shining light on the fact that companies have the potential right now to have a 70plus percent share and it looks like its 39 and in compliance with the what we think what the current ownership cap is. I find that puzzling. Reporter hi, commissioners. Bloomberg law. I was wondering if either of you have thoughts on the new York State Attorney general Eric Schneiderman saying he will sue over the Net Neutrality move . Commissioner rosenworcel well, last week i had the pleasure of meeting with attorney general schneiderman in new york to talk about what his office had unearthed and that is we had millions of stolen identities in the f. C. C. Record for Net Neutrality. Thats identity theft. Peoples names and addresses were taken and comments were filed under their name. Identity theft is a crime under new york state law and its also a crime under some federal laws. The fact that this agency has refused to investigate, get to the bottom of it is offensive. Public integrity should matter. The viability of our comment process in the digital age is at stake. And i respect that the attorney general wants to take this order and head to court and i suspect there will be other states attorneys general join him. Commissioner clyburn one thing i think is lost in the translation because were hearing a lot of very valid talking points, but the fact of the matter is the f. C. C. Told the states to stay out when it comes, you know, to their authority. If they want to provide levels of protections, they are on the front line. They see their constituents and consumers and their fellow state citizens every day. Now were telling them that if you want to layer on added protections that are uniquely ituated or reflective your state consumer constituent experience, the f. C. C. Basically said, too bad, you cant do so. So i dont blame them. Not only challenged as a basis of something as the commissioner said, so egregious, but now you are saying they cant serve their citizens, the f. C. C. Is saying stay out of way of these level protections or very targeted types of expectations or protections that they would have. I find it problematic on all fronts. Were supposed to have a partnership with our states, but were telling them to stay out and they cant adequately serve their citizens to the best of their ability. I find that problematic. By the way, it was done without notice. So i think that makes this more vulnerable in court. Reporter monty, comp daley. A lot of the other commissioners brought up you folks ordering voting to eliminate the u. H. F. Discount. And f. C. C. Has the authority to mess with the caps. So do you guys have spoons to that . Because i think they all brought it up. Commissioner rosenworcel we voted to update the u. H. F. Discount which we can all agree is technologically obsolete. Moreover, the 2004 appropriations act makes no mention of the u. H. F. Discount. It only references a 39 cap. We continue to believe that its a problem that this agency somehow thinks that it has the authority to rewrite those words from congress. Reporter matt, communication daily. Same question i posed to your republican colleagues. Disney, fox, thoughts on whether the agency will have a role and what do you think of broadly about the notion of media consolidation . Commissioner clyburn we usually dont comment on i learned this morning, i happened to be watching a certain i was waiting for one story and caught another. So that probably tells you what network i was watching this morning. I caught the announcement. But thats all i can say. Theres nothing, as i am aware, that is before us. We will see if theres something that will be before us and then and only then will we be able to have a Better Exchange as it relates to that particular item. Reporter one of your colleagues said that the revised order also bars states from proposing their own transparency requirements in addition to trying to mandate Net Neutrality protections. Are there any other substantive changes in the order from when we saw it three weeks ago . Commissioner rosenworcel i think its substantially the me but you would be better served to ask our colleagues that voted without our participation. Commissioner clyburn and what happens Going Forward . You know, we have a number of objectives when it comes to our universal service programs. We have some options that probably more than likely will be over the horizon. What if someone or party, a participant, what if theyre displeased what the outcome is . I know what we have done today is weaken our ability to stand on our universal Service Principles. We have put ourselves in a more precarious situation when it comes to ensuring that broadband enabled services are able to be deployed. We have weakened ourselves when it comes to the very exciting we mentioned it earlier. Polls and rights of way and all of the other types of infrastructure it means for us to connect these communities. We put ourselves and the nation at a disadvantage by weakening the authority that has been upheld, you know, by the Third Circuit to move in this direction. Again, the headlines of the day and what the talking points, you know, have been, theyre important. They are not not they are very significant. But what communities will ultimately find is they will not have an f. C. C. With the with what is needed to ensure our universal Service Principles are realized. Like i said, it might not be tomorrow, it might not be in the next week but soon we are going to find ourselves challenged. I believe we will be challenged to the point of being vulnerable, and were going to have serious issues when it comes to connecting, particularly our rural communities. Reporter hi. For either or both. Will the agency prevail in court . Commissioner rosenworcel i have no crystal ball to view that outcome, nor can i tell appellate rt our litigation will end up in. The public is angry. I have not during my tenure now or my previous tenure seen anything like the angst and irritation that is pouring into my email inbox and tumbling into our voicemail every day. There are people who have been outside for the last 24 hours clamoring to get this agency to Pay Attention to them. There is something stunning about that because our actions here have awoken this Sleeping Giant to the American People that are angry that a Little Agency in washington is mucking around with the open internet that they know. That i think Going Forward dont only think about litigation, recognize that there is a level of Public Awareness on this issue now thats likely to shape what happens next. Commissioner clyburn if the court agrees that there should be an appropriate amount of regulatory balance, that everyone should win in this ecosystem, that there should be more benefits and less harm, that the consumer should be in the driver seat, not just a handful of Internet Service providers, if they look at it from that perspective, then i think we will prevail. Reporter i wanted to ask a question that also has similar to something i asked the chairman. So there was a lot of Economic Analysis in the order, but people some of the economists i talked to said basically they felt that it was not sophisticated, that they look for certain results and thats what they found and there wasnt enough objective analysis or determination, what are you trying to encourage. Do you agree with that . Then i wanted to ask a followup on that. Commissioner rosenworcel i think the Economic Analysis was woefully deficient. It was ideological and it was designed to achieve an end. Just as an example, our own data demonstrate half the households in this country do not have a competitive choice of broadband provider. Im one of them. I live in the district of columbia, and there is one provider that will serve my house. If i have any difficulty with that provider and the way that it treats my traffic, fails to provide me open access to all websites or censors content, i have no recourse. And i dont understand what kind of Economic Analysis suggests that competition is going to solve the problem for me when half the households in this country do not benefit from competition at home. Reporter and my followup question was, we heard a lot about the chairman wants to form this wants a new office now of economists. So if im just wondering what i dont want to ask this in a way thats too pointed. But does that have are there bad complications if the if you felt that the analysis was so lacking and so nonobjective in this report, whats really going to come out of this if you put all the economists in one office . Commissioner rosenworcel i dont know enough about that effort to respond to it. Commissioner clyburn i have to say i dont either. I think if we approach things point a fee in70ive or of view that skews something in one direction, then any type of econometric that could be more enhanced is beneficial. But what has been shown, particularly through this item, is that you can build any case if you want if you have a certain premise that tilts in one direction or another. I think we would best be best served by taking looking through a business and econometric lens with nonprejudical approach to policymaking. So it will be as good as the parameters and the directives that the leadership will give. Commissioner rosenworcel ok. Its 3 30 and i need some lunch. Reporter thats the deadline. Commissioner clyburn any other quick questions . Commissioner rosenworcel it does feel like 7 00. Ok. Its been a long day. Commissioner clyburn thank you. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Isit ncicap. Org] f. C. C. Commissioners wrapping up a series of news conferences with reporters this afternoon. During a meeting earlier today they voted 32 along party lines to repeal Net Neutrality rules that were put in place during the obama administration. It was instituted to guarantee equal access to the internet. The Associated Press writing today the f. C. C. Got rid of the rules that barred companies ke comcast, at t and verizon from playing favorites with internet

© 2025 Vimarsana

vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.