Thank you very much. The floor is yours. Thank you. All right. All right. Today was an exciting day for technological innovation at the f. C. C. As we took significant steps to unleash the next generation of wireless connectivityy and Broadband Networks and broadcasting. To advance the next generation 5g Wireless Services we voted to make another 1700 megahertz available for flexible wireless use. We also streamlined the rules for Wireless Infrastructure deployment which will help pave the way for 5g networks and services. To advance next generation broadbands we voted to expedite and transition from legacy Copper Networks to modern fiber networks. Billions of dollars spent to maintain the Copper Networks of yesterday will be freed up to build the High Speed Networks of tomorrow. That will help bridge the digital divide. To advance next generation broadcasting we authorized a new television standard on a voluntary, Market Driven basis to open the door to a substantially improved free over the air Television Broadcast service and fiercer competition in the video market place. Of course much more than that. One last thing i cant help but note. The College Basketball season has started and kansas which is number four beats number seven kentucky. I will certainly improve my mood now that the chiefs have started to tail off. With that ill open up to any questions you might have. I have a question about media ownership. It seems like a big part of the pitch at least on cross ownership is the idea that this could allow some synergy. Maybe stations could buy up newspapers that are struggling but it seems like the market has been moving in the opposite direction. A lot of divestitures and split offs between publishing and broadcasting advocates. What is going to change . Well, i think were simply making a decision as i said at the outset to ensure that our media ownership regulations match the market place in which we find ourselves and that market place is dramatically different than 197b5 when the cross ownership restriction was put in place. Notably as you will find in the order there is record evidence that the grandfather combinations dating back to 1975, those grandfather combinations produced ignificantly more local news than do noncross owned newspapers and stations and Going Forward especially in mid sized markets these combinations can create more local news that will be of interest to readers Going Forward. Nd to viewers as well. Once a estion is, merger is approved how would competitors voice complaints, antitrust complaints if they feel the need to do so . What is the procedure . If there is an antitrust complaint those would be typically fielded by either the department of justice or the federal trade commission, which share concurrent jurisdiction depending on which of the two entities previously approved the merger i would anticipate that agency would take the lead. Ok. There have been some reports about a final order on restoring internet freedom. Would you like to comment on those reports and do you still intend to finish the proceeding by the end of the year and also more specifically actively reviewing the record if you think there is a need for three brightline rules . Im not going to make any announcements today on that front. Sorry. This were a couple requests from the hill for an investigation have you turned over all the information that you think members of Congress Want . Can you address generally the idea that you have been specifically channeling decisions to benefit . Elected officials can say literally anything and some do. In this particular case, my record is very clear. Going back to my time as commissioner in 2012 and since ive had a consistent view on media ownership and other media policies. That view is very simple. It starts with the proposition that i outlined in the opening of my media ownership statement which is that the proposition that is the media ownership regulations of 2017 should match the market place of 2017. Every single one of our decisions is simply based on that. What is the law . What are the snacts apply the law to the facts and make the proment judgment in the public interest. Completely reject any suggestions along the lines youve suggested. It is some concern that all customers have to buy a new Television Set in five years. Do you agree with that . Should Congress Take any action to help people buy those new sets or converter boxes . I mean after five years you have to buy new sets . In five years obviously that is a long time left to see how the standard develops. All were talking about right now is whether to approve the technical standard. We are so far away from the point that to suggest perhaps hypothetically in five years people might have to get a new device, like i said, this is a standard no one would ever apply to any other segment of communication, certainly not Technology Companies that dont have to abide by the mother may i approach in washington. Hi, mr. Chairman. Two things. Wanted to clarify the coppertofiber items. The idea behind eliminating the notification requirement is services that run over the formerly Copper Networks that are transitioning would still work just fine, correct . Correct. Basically they can go into more detail on this. There are two different categories i guess you might say that are in play here. Category one is if there is a change to your service. Category two is if the carrier is discontinuing that service. Now, if its in that first category, then we are talking about notice. Under section 251. In the second category its the section 214 process. That is the basic bifurcation we are talking about. Thank you so much. My second thing was just to point out that since you mentioned College Basketball, go tar heels. Thought you were going to say blue devils. Dean smith. Exactly. You criticized apple for not including enabling fm rated chips in their phones. Will you be urging verizon to there are that reports they purposely blocked radio chips . The report that just came out, i havent seen im asking for someone else. Wireless isnt my thing. Id be happy to take a look. I wasnt sure if there was a story that just came out this week. I havent seen anything this week on that issue but generally speaking you know my overall philosophy which is that the f. C. C. Cant require these phones to be, or the chips to be activated. You cant require a Service Provider . Here, too, id have to look at the limits of our Legal Authority as applicable to a Service Provider so if you dont mind sending the report over that you have in mind id be happy to take a look. Back when the fhc voted to reinstate the discount there was some talk you would look at it again but it would go hand in hand with looking at the National Ownership i think there may have been mention that would happen by the end of the year. Is that still in the works or still planned to revisit that . Here again i cant make any announcements on what is going to be on the next or subsequent open meetings but i will say that we are obviously continuing to abide by that approach which is that the two go hand in hand. The f. C. C. Needs to take a look at it holistically as opposed to piece meal. But it is still in consideration . It is still in consideration. Correct. My editor is asking a question. Always pin it on the editors. Ok. I dont want to identify him. He says that, you know, we eliminated the eight voice rule. Eight seems to him a rather high number. So did that include uhf and vhf station ness a community and then basically there would have to be eight stations independently owned until there would be an approval of two station ness that community . That was the previous rule that you could not own two stations in a market if there were not eight independently owned tv stations. That included uhf, vhf . That is my understanding, yes. I had one quick one. It was called a budget control cap. Inc. You called it a budget mechanism in your proposal and i believe she said it was 823 million. I dont know whether that was accurate. She said it would cut the funding by more than half. It raises the question what the current level of funding is. Youll see. In the final product which should come out soon there is no specific number included. We simply see comments on what that budget cap should be. Again, i would revert back to my previous comments that the other universal Service Fund Programs do have an account that promotes fiscal responsibility and ensures integrity of those programs and they are just as important in many ways so we hope that Going Forward we can try to reach a onsensus on this point, too. Chairman pai, commissioner clyburn said that doing this order now wastes the efforts of the Diversity Committee and she lso was upset there is no Data Collection, that these orders arent based on the data question that she thinks they should be. Can you explain why youre taking this action now without collecting that kind of Demographic Data . I think you talked a lot about basic rules on Data Collection and things like that. Sure. Two different points. First, i am somewhat amused because commissioner clyburn and the previous majority generally rejected my idea for an Incubator Program several years ago so it is remarkable the complaints about process suddenly emerge now with different chair in control. Secondly, all we decided to do as youve seen since it was publicly released, the original draft is publicly released, is to decide to establish an Incubator Program. We seek comments on what the con tours of that program should be. Now, there is no reason i can think of why the Advisory Committee would, number one have to study the issue and decide on recommendations before we decide on the incubator or number two why it would be necessarily precluded from working in tandem as the public gives us input on what they think it should be so too should the Diversity Committee. That is one thing we tapped the committee for doing. I spoke to various members and said this is important to me. Unwhere i stand on an incubator in particular and broadcast diversity generally. That is why we have a working group on this issue. We want you to get to work. Please do. Give us your ideas as soon as you can and as thoroughly as you can. [question indiscernible] i thought she was referring solely to the Incubator Program. I could be wrong. [question indiscernible] on the general ownership rules, all reasonable people, those who studied this will acknowledge the record is clear and it is well established. The Third Circuit itself as the commissioner pointed out has a firm affirmed for example the impropriety of the newspaper broadcast cross ownership rule for years. And so all were simply doing is recognizing the fact that he record at this point is full and that evidence that we based our decision on is valid and the time is to take action, not a time for further delay for the sake of delay. Next question . Thank you, mr. Chairman. You talked frequently about how your travels around the country inform the policy making you do back here in washington. How many conversations have you had since you became chairman roughly speaking with lifeline subscribers . Gosh, im trying to think. I mean, several obviously didnt ask them when i met with them are you a lifeline subscriber. We had that conversation in places like mission, south dakota, and flagstaff on the and a great eno, number. How do they inform the item you voted on today . It underscores it. ll give you a good example. I recently met with a member of a tribe from new mexico who came to my office and said, look. We need infrastructure. We are lucky if we can get 2 g in parts of our reservation. A lot of our younger members are simply left on the wrong side of the divide. We need deployment here. Thats why is notable that various tribes from alaska to minnesota to Washington State to oregon to new mexico, you name it, have voiced support for some of the proposals that we put on the table. Proposals i might add, the facilities based requirements on rural tribal land that the previous f. C. C. Adopted in 2015. This is the 2015 order we simply ratified today. So i think the only thing here, too, unfortunately that has changed is the identity of the person who is leading the commission not so much the validity of the idea itself. Hi, chairman. Can you tell us if youve had any contact with the Inspector Generals Office about sinclair or any of the media ownership rules . No. Ok. Have a great day. Now well transition to the bureau press conference. As usual well go in order of items on the agenda and kind of see if the questions the first item was the role call item. Any other question . Ok. If c. G. B. Is here, please come p. The draft item that was released three weeks ago was just a report and order but the commissioner in the press release today mentions the report, commissioner clyburn mentioned another proposal that included some questions that she had about what kind of effect youre having and what Service Providers are doing. Could you elaborate a little bit . Was that the total extent of the fncrm . Yeah. The further notice will have questions on two topics. One is on how we can ensure that our rules are effective and what information we should gather to gauge the effectiveness of the rules. Issue er part of the oncerns how we can ensure that any erroneous blocking of calls can be easily corrected. Weve already encouraged carriers to who choose to block to implement a simple process that makes it easy to make those kinds of corrections and were also asking questions in the further notice about how that process could be made more effective. Anything further on this one . Ok. Same editor. He wants to know how many communities have more than eight stations and again, we are counting. This is a Consumer Bureau so that will be here a little later, a media issue. Lifeline, do you cover lifeline . Not this group. Not yet. Well go through the agenda this is the robo call issue. We will get to that question later. Ok. Thanks. The other questions on spectrum frontiers. Yes. I think were waiting to see what the question will be. Im sorry. That. s fine. Go ahead and answer. Or ask your question. For a colleague who would like to know, satellite operators asked the fcc to make changes to the item as it was circulated on draft. Particularly to exclude grandfathered stations from coming toward the population limits and to, you know, define the transient population limits and to remove the miracle stations or cap free license stations and not apply it to the 38 gigahertz and 47 gigahertz ban and would like to know how the final changes were made in the final version of the item and if only some which ones . Well, i think maybe the best way to answer it is that there were some adjustments made to provide greater flexibility to satellite providers but some of the other cases you mentioned those did not change. And can you specific at this point which ones . I think probably better just for it to come out in the item. Thank you. Anything else . Ok. The next item wireless, dont go away. This would be the accelerating wireless broadband. Any questions on that . Ok. The next one is the wire line infrastructure for the wire line competition bureau. Ny questions on that item . Ok. The next one is the life line item. Any questions on life line . Ok. Finally, or not finally, sixth is the media ownership item. The media bureau please. There are three media items. Proceed on any of those. Could you explain exactly what the final version does to embedded markets . Its not in the hand out and i got a little mixed up over what all the commissioners were saying. Right. That was a change from the item released and as you heard at he meeting to republican offices, asked that the commission adopt the presumptive wafer approach. Ok. Presumptive waiver. Commissioner clyburn mentioned a couple changes to the item. One, she talked about a change mentioning privacy like late this morning. Could you guys explain what that was . There as foot note added to he item regarding privacy. It doesnt create a privacy rule . Its not substantive. Ok. She also mentioned an exception to the simulcast rules i thought or maybe to the simulcast substantially similar requirement . Youll see when the item comes out that again there was another, an exception made regarding getting access to programming rates. That are necessary for implementing the simulcast requirement. So if you cant get access to the rights for both of your streams you dont have to follow the simulcast requirement . Is that . It provides some flexibility to the extent you can get programming access to programming rights to both of the streams. But that is exactly how its phrased. Ok. Thats all i have. [question indiscernible] thats right. On the eight voices rule does anybody know how many communities have more than eight independent stations . You can shake your head. Nobody knows off hand. Ok. And just to make sure im right on that, when we were counting under the old rule that included uhf and vhs stations right . Yes. All right. Hanks. Anything further . All right. Thank you very much. So, commissioner oriley hears two press conference and other commissioners. Thank you. Just want to let you know i am cold and hungry. People were worried about that. Any questions . Anything we can answer . We answered everything in our amazing statement . Oh, a question. There we go. Commissioner, you mentioned on media ownership that there is likely going to be a sequel and its going back to court. What do you think has changed not necessarily in the media landscape but specifically to address some of the concerns that t