Opening remarks and take questions afterwards. So glad to see 70 people here interested see so many people here interested. Let me begin by welcoming any thet time guests to commission. I have a few brief remarks i would like to offer. Today the fcc decided to restore the light touch that govern the itsrnet for most of existence. This is designed to provide infrastructure and innovation. Consumers will be free to go where they want and do what they want online. By removing heavyhanded regulations that stand in the infrastructure, im confident more consumers will enjoy better, faster and cheaper Internet Access. Acquisition was important and caps off an important year at the fcc. We have been working hard to update our rules to match the modern Communications Marketplace and to promote public safety. E stockd to briefly tak of the steps we have taken. Fundve put in mobility phase two that will connect Rural Communities and bridge the digital divide. We gave carriers more rules to block robocalls. We authorize a new television standard for next Generation Broadcast Television that will open the door to a free over the air broadcast service. We started approving the next generation of satellite constellations that aim to provide Internet Access to remote and tribal areas. We want to increase accessibility to disabled americans. We modernize rules to make it easier for carriers to move to next generation fiber networks. We made available 1700 megahertz of highfrequency sp ectrum to pave the way for services. Million in 77 advance funding to carriers in puerto rico and the u. S. Virgin islands. We updated media ownership rules to update reality of the digital age. The realities of the digital age. Protect our code to nations one course and officers and we restored Law Enforcement officers and we restored Internet Freedom. I want to thank the fcc staff that made this freedom possible. I understand the sacrifice they make for the public interest. It has been my great honor to lead this remarkable team of public service. They deserve very welldeserved i hope they take some welldeserved time off during the Holiday Season and i look towards working with them in 2018. I was hoping you could tell us some more about why we got evacuated. Im not at liberty to say. It was on the orders of the federal protective service. Ownership, a lot of people i have talked to in the broadcast industry say they do to anyect it to lead action. To act the fcc going on it before it does the review . We just adopted the rulemakings so i cannot forecast if and when we will take action. Decisions are going to be guided on the facts that are on the record. Until that record develops, i cannot talk about that. I was wondering. It seems like the majority is thinking flexibility is seeking flexibility on things like zero rating. Why was it important to end the bans on walking and throttling. He said the circuit give you followroadmap, why not it . We all favor a free and open internet. The question is what is the Regulatory Framework to preserve values of a free and open internet. Is expert says the question between enforcement using the sledgehammer of title ii, using the scaffold they have that is unfair and taking action on any uncompetitive conduct and the like. His position is that the framework we had for many years is the best way to make sure that those cases do not materialize and to preserve that Infrastructure Investment incentive. To follow up on the question telecomro ratingm. Advocates have framed those practices as things that Consumers Want such as not counting certain streamings and toa cap this seems contradict or undermine the Market Forces idea around removing bans on blocking and throttling, which consumers theoretically do not want. Therefore the isp will not engage in that behavior. What specific Market Forces ispsjkeep telecoms and from taking part in paid prioritization that consumers do not want. Chairman pai there is a great example of government regulators standing in the way of providers who want to distinguish themselves in a competitive marketplace. It is telling that the first investigation that the fcc kicked off after adopting these heavyhanded rules was taking action to investigate free data offerings. Thats the wrong thing for the government to be doing. They said we are going to deny consumers the benefit of these offerings. The second part of your question, Market Forces. Look at the wireless marketplace. Havemajor carriers unlimited data plans. They are competing each other, not just on the basis of price, but also on the basis of Service Offerings like free data and unlimited data plans. That is a terrific check that serves consumers well and make sure we have a marketplace consistent with a free and open internet. Writes one from the sloanngton post ryan post. E washington what gives you the confidence a future fcc will not reverse of that finding and comment on the back and forth weve had on Net Neutrality for the past decade. Chairman pai we released the order. It has been released three weeks in advance. You can see our legal analysis. Not and706 is infirmities an affirmative grant of regulatory authority. I would argue the 2015 decision is the real break. We had a bipartisan touchnsus on light operation. In 2015, they decided to adopt heavyhanded rules because of pressure from the white house. I think this bipartisan consensus we are returning is going to win the day both in the court of Public Opinion and in congress as well. Regarding customer choice, specifically when it comes to the Net Neutrality regulations, could you talk to us about how customers will have the additional choice . When it comes to legacy carriers and other carries like spectrum tobaccoast that have monopoly de facto monopolies in most of the country,. What will todays action due to increase customer options . Chairman pai it will increase investment in infrastructure. I have talked to Small Companies and they say on the record that these rules stand in the way of them building out their network. Or providing an alternative to the bigger incumbents in other parts of the country. By taking these heavyhanded rules off the table and establishing the light touch approach, we will see more competition. This proceeding operate in conjunction with the other initiatives i talked about. The 2 billion connect america program. The satellite constellation that can serve as an alternative to terrestrial providers. Taking action on lowering the cost and time frame in terms of getting pole attachments. Making sure we do not have federal agencies standing in the way by delaying. Steps are in the time thesever initiatives will deliver a boost to consumers because of competitive choice and Infrastructure Investment is going to go up. How long will the commission take to review the broadcast ownership caps and if you should decide to eliminate them, how long after that . Chairman pai i cannot give a forecast of the item. I cannot remember off the top of my head. Closed, wecord is will take a look at the facts and the record. H forward wea pat will take action. Ahead of todays vote on Net Neutrality, there were several republican lawmakers who called on you to delay the vote on the proposal. Others cannot publicly to say they disagree with your approach. Did they express his concerns to you before going public and did they express it todays decision would impact their reelection process . Have you heard anything from republicans on the hill griping about how much this deal will cause in trouble at the ballot box. Chairman pai absolutely not. I respect members of congress on both sides of the aisle, but those kinds of electoral calculations have never been a part of our conversation. Aboutanted to quickly ask fcc authority. There has been a lot of confidence that they are able to take up the mantle of protecting the open internet after this. There has been critics who pointed to the at t mobility case at court. If there are already issues with fcc, if the court looks at that and they have any struggle, with there be any scenario where the fcc would look into reestablishing Net Neutrality regulations . Trouble,c ran into what would happen . Chairman pai i do not answer hypotheticals. You operate on the basis of the law. Land not the law of the nintht the law of the circuit. Be way forward is going to the current law. The fcc does have jurisdiction. Placen will this take after he gets published in the federal register . Chairman pai you have heard all the litany of harms your democratic colleagues in Congress Might come from this. If those harms came to pass, and Market Forces did not prevent this happening, would you reconsider your decision today or would you be confident the fcc would be able to handle those harms . Chairman pai the critical part of your question was the word might. All of these harms you are talking about our hypothetical. They are not shown in the record. We took the approach of post enforcement instead of preemptive regulation from the fcc. You might not see what the costs in terms of feature innovation from these regulations are. But if harms materialized, the fcc will take action against misconduct by any Internet Service provider. Nations premier protection cop on the beat. We are confident the wellestablished tradition of Consumer Protection will carry Going Forward. Something i wrote about today. I was talking to some economists and one thing they were saying was they had a concern the Economic Analysis that rather than doing objective analysis, theh is those who wrote order look at this from the results they wanted to pick up. They were mostly citing things that spoke to their conclusion. That could be an institutional problem in places like the fcc and could you give us an update on your efforts . Chairman pai i respectfully disagree with you ever made made that whoever , observation. If you look at the draft order we made a careful assessment of the facts as it appeared on the economic aspect of our decision. I am confident that on any judicial tribunal, reasonable people will see we can try to evaluate the various impacts of these rules. Analysis, we are still studying that issue. I do not have a particular timeframe backing to me, but it will remain under active study. Today there was a big media merger that was announced. During the campaign, donald trump said that he had concerns over media concentration. Do you have those concerns as well . Chairman pai i just heard about that i just literally heard the headline about that field being announced. Being announced. The comments i made going back to when i was a nominee for this position, we review every transaction through the lens of the public interest. Be applied within the agencys authority to ameliorate any harms,. As it exists, there are problems with. Chairman pai ill not make comments about the marketplace that could be misinterpreted. There has been a lot impaction about economic of the 2015 rules. I would like to ask you about a question thats a comment you made in 2014 about how each commissioner would be able to to overviewnomists the impact. Way thist you take the time . We saw how that fared in the last administration. You are in charge now. Chairman pai we grappled with the facts and record and im confident once again that reasonable people will see that we conducted analysis of those facts. Immediately after the vote, there are announcements of lawsuits plans including from the new York Attorney general who plans a multistate lawsuit to reinstate the rules. There have been called for challenging your position in court. What is your strongest Legal Defense Going Forward . Chairman pai im shocked people are going to challenge this decision in court. I do not want to prejudge the legal issues, which are very complex. Im sure our general counsels office will handle that. In terms of substances law, the courtiave law, said that the fcc has the right. Opinion of at the judge tatel, they say the fcc has the discretion to decide how Broadband Internet classification should be cited. You abided by the procedures specified. We abided by the substantial iidence rule as and believe i said we are going to follow that substantial evidence test. That quantum of evidence is sufficient to justify conclusions reached by the agency. Im confident our decision will be upheld. Good afternoon. Greg wallace from cnn. Following on legal challenges, im sure you are aware of criticism of the Internet Freedom Net Neutrality decision from businesses to consumer groups. You think you and your allies have done a great job explaining how this can help consumers . Chairman pai we consistently said that the repeal of these heavyhanded rules would be good for entrepreneurs across the country. Spoke about the fact that a lot of consumers, their number one concern is about Getting Better access. Regulations take us in the opposite direction of that. We need to make sure we focus the Agency Attention on the number one Consumer Preference which is Getting Better, faster and cheaper Internet Access. The decision we made today in conjunction with all the decisions we made this year fit together for a much more competitive marketplace. Where there is massive incentive to invest in infrastructure. You were in a video last night promoting Net Neutrality. In that video, one of the extras or whatever was a video producer hased martina marcota, she advocated the pizza gate conspiracy theory. Is it ok for you to promote Net Neutrality with someone who . Romotes baseless lies chairman pai im not familiar with those facts. You identified. Fcc identifies most homes no choice for a competitive broadband provider. Does that undermine the logic for your rules that competition will solve any problems we see . Chairman pai the solution of a lack of competition is more competition. It is not preemptive regulation that ultimately deters investment. The companies that most people have never heard of and the once critical to providing a more competitive marketplace, those are the companies that tell us these rules stand in the way of them raising capital and Offering Services to their customers. These are companies that are nonprofit and owned by city governments. They have told us that these rules prevent them from developing their networks further. I visited both the spencer municipal utilities and the lorenz useful utilities. Those companies told me they would love to be able to network further and make more Service Offerings but they do not feel these title ii regulations enable them to do that. If we return to our old framework, we will see much more competition. The question i had was, i was hoping if you could walk us through how, based on the Net Neutrality order, it will make it easier for smaller Broadband Companies to enter the competition . On abstract level, that makes sense, but if that were true, we wouldve had more competition prior to 2015. Chairman pai Going Forward, the license approach is the one best calibrated to preserve the freedom of the internet and get Smaller Companies a better incentive to invest in infrastructure. I spoke to some of these small providers. What is the providers is in minnesota. He said he had a Bank Increases Interest Rates specifically because of the regulatory certainty created by these rules. Another provider told me these rules required him to hire a lawyer to figure out how these regulations apply to his business. These are the companies least able to withstand the Regulatory Compliance burdens. If you want more competition, it is incumbent upon the legacy to have a light touch framework that gives them a Business Case for deployment. Smaller companies are deploying moreral areas and the heavily regulate something in that environment, the less likely you are going to get that something. Out of wondering if you might be able to tell us what are the the 9thnding before change how might that things . Chairman pai the Panel Decision in that case has been vacated. The status quo is the law of the land and that is the Legal Foundation upon which we are operating. Ftcf you can go back to the and the memorandum of agreement. Can you talk about implementation of that now that the order has been approved. What is the schedule that mou of that mou . Chairman pai now that the order has passed, the fcc and ftc will execute that memorandum of understanding. Collaborateble to to make sure the Consumer Protection competitions are discharged appropriately. Thank you, everyone. Were going to transition to the bureau press conference. The bureau will try to go through the agenda and i may combine some. I know there will be some commissioner press conferences right now. The first item on the blue alert, public safety, was there any question on the blue alert item. I wondered if you had any response to the issue raised by the commissioner about the costbenefit analysis and weighing the cost of a Police Officers life and money being respectful. Im not going to respond to their comments. We cant i will say is agree that the life of the of a Police Officer is highly valuable and one of the reasons that is one of the reasons the commission took the action it did today. We have to do our part to protect those going out to face danger every day to protect us. Thank you. Any questions on the Rural Health Care item . Anyhat we will do is questions on the wireless item for twilight powers . Howard, why dont you come up. There had been some talk that the item had changed over the draft. Were there any changes of note over what had been proposed by chairman pai . Carrthink commissioner make some references. Youll probably see the item itself later today. I hope im not promising more than my staff is ready for. I wanted to ask about the travel aspect. Tribal aspects. Ms. Tetreault we have had a lot of conversations with tribes trying to find out what to do with these twilight towers. We are putting it out for everyone to comment and that includes the trouble nations tribal nations that may have a comment. There is an organization that has been involved in the infrastructure proceeding in general. Well be working with them as we move forward. There is no connection between the twilight movies and these towers . Ms. Tetreault not to my knowledge. Are there any more questions on the crms item . Lets move on to restoring Internet Freedom. Of thehe Effective Date item as a whole will take effect approval of the new transparency rule. We will do everything at once. 30 to 60 day period in between the time he gets published and takes effect it gets published in the federal register and when it t akes effect . Once we have omb approval, we will publish in the federal thester a announcement of Effective Date of the entire item. 30 or 60 days beyond. What you are thinking is the public draft stated the item would take effect 60 days after that. It will take effect shortly after approval of the transparency rule of the office of management and budget. There is no specific time period . As soon as it happens it takes effect immediately . Yes. Is there any estimates on how long it will take to approve it . This, only the transparency rules require review . Yes. Finally, next is two media items. Question. Modus the same team for them as tv onership, but just come up. My question is, between the draft item and item approved today, any substantial changes made . The commissioner discussed how with respect to certain notice requirements her office requested we ask questions that tpt in instead of an opt ou proposal. Beyond that there was nothing of note . Nothing significant. Any other questions . I would like to repeat his question only for the media ownership item. Was there any lobbying on the media ownership item . No one came in to meet with us. The docket. Ity in anything further . We have several commissioners waiting in the wing. Commissioner clyburn is here. Commissioner riley, you can go ahead. Hello. You commissioner riley. I have a hard time imagining say , in the last commission, you saying the fcc did not authority to act but voting with the majority anyway. Can you square that a little more . Ownership. Media if you not think. We want why not say ,ou to change this congress, but our hands are tied. Commissioner riley i accept the fate i might be wrong. I said to congress i think i am right. Up the possibility i may be wrong. In this case, i know my party will challenge the situation if we ever get to final order. Aswill be challenged as far media ownership issues have been challenged since the 96 act. It is going to be challenged and it is going to get finality. Called ont congress i have called on congress to resolve this. I was wondering if the two of you could discuss thoughts on consolidation and if you see the fcc having a role on this transition. I was not part of that. But i funny and i laughed was not part of it. To your point, i make it a practice never to talk about pending perspectives or any mergers in any capacity. In the issue of consolidation in general, the idea of the media landscape, i have made the argument that we need better analysis and definition of the marketplace. It is a word where everyone world where everyone is fighting earsnst everyone for and listeners. When i see conversations about why companies do x,y,z and people talk about streaming, i think we need a better analysis and definition of the marketplace to reflect today and not the past. Offer ong specific to any particular deal. More broadly, to media regulation, i put a couple statements out so far. Is we need toiew ules reflecte r the modern marketplace. U couldnt help but be there was a big deal and he talked to people at the health club and everyone is thinking about Net Neutrality. Church. Anyplace you go. They think they understand. Perspective, is there a lots of confusion and how does the commission turned the corner on that in terms of getting the word out . From your perspective . I think the amount of Public Engagement and interest in this proceeding is great. This is the intersection of the government and the internet. That should get people past. We have seen a lot of misinformation. The sky is not fallen. Thing back to 2015. Think back to 2015. That was the Regulatory Framework. The thingsoes not do people are attributing to it. Theres a reason we have a free and open internet that predated title ii and title ii rules. This is not an experiment with some kind of radical approach to the internet. There is a lot of hyperbole out there. I am confident in the decision we are making. It does not give me any pause that there is that much interest. I would agree with commissioner carr on that point. I love when the American People are engaged in issues. Some of our items have not gotten much commentary. There was a question of could we put some kind of fee before someone is allowed to comment. That is terrible. We want to allow as many people as possible to comment on the issues. Am glad people are engaged. It is healthy overall. Its theioner carr h nail on the head. From everyday Going Forward, when the internet is not broken, it is going to reaffirm our point. There was a public issue this at the end of the internet as we know it on the front story and they are extending the have personally. Take a deep breath. Issue this a public theing that the end of internet as we know it on the aret story and they extending the hyperbole. Been i cannot see the authority in the statute. Au talk about 706, that is prerogative for congress to change the statue. Title two, blessed they say. Read the analysis, we are disagreeing. Different than the court saying you are right. We agree. It different than saying we are not exactly going to throw it by. And maybe you can sneak about twilight items are there other that are a no brainer. Wouldmmission hopefully a able to do this in relatively quick time frame. Is that unique is a problem . There are bigticket items we are doing thinking on. Im going to spend a lot of time now that the Net Neutrality will moveehind us i some of these smaller ones or bigger ones. Think commissioner i carr onmmissioner for his leadership. I think we will look at the recommendations and go from there. There was the question about retaining some of the rules. One of their debate from the majority about that issue was there debate from the majority about that issue . The three of us did not sit down and violate any statutory prohibitions. Our views are well known on this topic. It is not shocking that i disagree. They fall under not having the authority and they are not needed in terms of the examples that people highlight. I do not have any doubt that companies are not going to block and throttle, especially for reasonable network management. Risk at think they will Public Relations pummeling. That would not be wise. Confident that between the internet you have somethingorrow you are going to get is better speed and were moving that. Do either of you how to both requesteel about the from small carriers that operate they arecam looking at that to increase. Any idea . On ratent a lot of time of return reform. I talked to congress and said this was an opportunity to use some of their reserves. There is an opportunity to use reserves for that purpose. That is something the commission will have to look at Going Forward. I will see what the commission does. I happy to keep looking at the issue but no news to break on it. Oreilly, why do you want to throttle my cat videos . Second actual part of the question, i talked a little bit to the chairman about zero rating and where he sees these practices going. You refer to the zero rating witchhunt, as you put it. Where do you see data cap practices, zero rating practices going under the new policy . I have no interest in throttling your cat videos and i do not think the providers will throttle. Prioritization does occur. Prioritization, some people try to keep it separate, but it is indicative of paid privatization. Without the valuable contributions of fcr rating, we would not have the confidence we have in wireless space. The investigation by the Previous Administration incredibly problematic. They cannot define what was happening until after the election and then they have a viewpoint. Much spectrum as into the marketplace and remove barriers to people can build more higherspeed Wireless Networks so having things like data caps is not necessary. Traffic management becomes less of an issue with a faster network. We are trying to facilitate that on our side. Networks have to do their part. Any other questions . I do not see mr. Donnelly anywhere. Senator blumenthal is talking itut tmj trying to extend past the expiration, have there been any discussion ut extension of conditions boj trying to extend it past expiration. Have there been any discussion about the extension . There have been discussions and i will see if the chairman throws anything my way. I have not had any internal collaboration on the issue. Deliberation on the issue. Will go to lecture meetings. Thank you. Good afternoon. The commissioner and i would like to entertain any questions you will have. I did get one question from someone who could not join us. I do not normally do this but they went out of their way. This is levi from bay area news group. Refused toi has listen to the opposition. Feel the clyburn voices of the public have been heard. And i say absolutely not. It is telling that this item the majority just passed did not cite a single consumer,let ter, boy scout workshare your pigeon message. Message. Rier pigeon the contrast with how many consumers wrote about keeping the Net Neutrality r ules in place. Do we want to entertain questions . Lunch hour. St the for either of you on media ownership and altering the cap. Do you have any thoughts about commissioner oreilly joining you in the view that you lack the authority but still saying you will vote to alter the cap anyway. I have no special knowledge on what he is thinking but i fundamentally agree this agency lacks the authority to adjust the 39 cap put into placed by congress in the appropriations act. A question that might be on your mind that the chairman did make mention of. Something that he qualified in a way that i have issue with. Back in 2004, the world was very different. As i affirmed in my statement. That was five years before the digital transition. I did not see any mention of uhf. That particular issue. There were not the distinctions we have today that occurred as a result of the digital transition. To bring up something that has changed about their own admission and is technologically out of date. We ruled it was technologically out of date. I take issue about whether or not they are linked. We reverse course on that and n ow we have the ability for those who wish to further consolidate to do so in a manner that thinkinge public into they are compliant with the 39 . Light giving a green without shining light that companies have the potential to have a 70 share and it looks like 39 and in compliance with what we think would be a current ownership cap. I find that puzzling. I was wondering if either of you have thoughts on the new York State Attorney general Eric Schneidermans saying he will sue over the Net Neutrality move. Last week i had the privilege of joining attorney general schneiderman in new york to call attention to what his office had unearthed. We have millions of stolen identities in the fcc record for Net Neutrality. Peoples names and addresses were taken and comments were filed under their name. The fact that this agency has refused to investigate and get to the bottom of it is offensive. Public integrity should matter. The viability of our common process in the digital age comment process in the digital age is at stake. I understand the attorney general wants to take this order and head to court and i expect it will be other state attorney general that will join him. One of the things that is lost in the translation were hearing a lot of valid talking points but the fcc told the comes to stay out when it to their authority. These states are on the front line. Now we are telling them if you want to put on added protections that are reflective of your state constituent experience, the fcc said too bad. You cannot do so. I do not blame the challenge but now you are telling them they cannot adequately protect and serve their citizens. I find it problematic on all fronts. We are supposed to have a partnership with our states that we are saying stay out. I find that problematic. It was done without notice. A bunch of the other commissioners brought up you voting for the order to eliminate the discount and that contained a paragraph that the fcc has the authority to mess with that. Do you have a response to that . We voted on the underlying decision, which was to update she ua just discount uh discount, which we can all agree is technologically obsolete. Moreover, the 2004 appropriations act makes no mention of the discounts. Only references a 39 cap. We continue to believe that it is a problem that the agency somehow thinks it has the authority to rewrite those words from congress. Damon, munication. Same question i posed to your republican colleagues. Disney, fox, thoughts if they will have a role. Right. We usually do not comments on i learned this morning, i certain to be happening i wouldve for one story and i caught another. That tells you when our car was watching. I copy announcement but that is all i can say. There is nothing, i am aware of, before us. We will see if there will be something that will be before us, and then, and only then, will we be able to have a Better Exchange on the item. When of your colleagues said the revised order also barred states from proposing their own transparency requirements in addition to trying to mandate protections. Are there any substance chains es in the order from what we saw three weeks ago . I think it is the same but he would be better served asking our colleagues who negotiated on that without her participation. One of the things you made me think of an asking that question was, what happens Going Forward . Objectivesumber of when it comes to our universal service programs. We have some options that y will be open to the horizon. What if there is a participant is displeased with the outcome . I know what we have done today has weakened our ability to stand on the universal Service Principles. We have herself in a more precarious situation when it comes to ensuring broadband and enabled services are able to be deployed. We have weakened ourselves when it comes to the very exciting group. We mentioned earlier polls and rights of ways and all the other infrastructure it means for us to connect to these communities. We put ourselves and the nation at a disadvantage by weakening the authority that has been upheld by the Third Circuit to move in this direction. Again, the headlines of the day, and what the talking points have been, they are important. Not they are very significant. For communities will ultimately find is they will not have an f cc with the teeth needed to ensure our university of Service Principles are realized. It might not be tomorrow, it might not be next week, but soon we will find ourselves challenged. I believe will will we will be challenged to the point of being vulnerable. Were going to have serious issues when it comes to connecting, particularly Rural Communities. , for either or both, will be agency prevail in court . I have no crystal ball. Nor can i even tell you what courts our appellate litigation will actually wind up in at this point. I do know this. The American Public is angry. I have not, during my tenure here now or during my previous tenure here seen anything like that angst and irritation pouring into mighty mail inbox and tumbling into my 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 have awoken this Sleeping Giant to the American People were very angry that a Little Agency and washington is mucking around with the open internet that they know. I think Going Forward, they will only think about litigation. Recognize that there is a level of Public Awareness on this issue that is likely to shape what happens next. 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 harms, that the competes tumor 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. I wanted to ask a question. There was a lot of Economic Analysis in the order, but some of the economists i talked to said basically that they felt sophisticatedt that they look for certain results and that is what they found and there was not an objective analysis or even determination of what values they were trying to encourage. Do you agree with that . And then i want to ask a followup. Yes. I think the Economic Analysis in this decision was woefully deficient. It was ideological, and it was designed to achieve an end. Just as an example, our own data demonstrates that half the households in this country do not have a competitive choice of broadband provider. I am 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 it treats my traffic, fails to provide the open access to all websites or sensors content, i have no recourse i do not understand what type of Economic Analysis suggests that competition will solve a problem for me if half the households in this country do not have competition at home. My followup question is we have heard a lot about the chairman, he wants a new office now of economists. I am just wondering i want to a i do not want to ask this in a way that is too pointed. Are there bad implications if you felt that the analysis was so lacking and so nonobjective from this report, that what is really going to come out of that if you put all the economists in one office . I do not know enough about the effort to respond. That i do notay either. Things if we approach without a decent sentence or point of view that skews something in one direction, then any type of analysis that could be more enhanced is beneficial. What has been shown, particularly through this item, is that you can build any case if you want if you have a in ain premise that tilts certain one direction or another. I think we would be best served by looking through a business nonprejudiced approaches to policy making. It would be as good as the parameters in the directives that the leadership will give. It is 4 30 and i need lunch. Ok. I am thinking some other people here ido too. Any other quick questions . It feels like 7 00. It does feel like 7 00. I am with you. Think you very much. It has been a long day. Thank you. Cspan radio spoke to reporters to find out what todays vote means for Internet Users in the u. S. Were joined on the phone from San Francisco with jeffrey fowler, a Technology Columnist post. The washington thank you for being with us. What does this mean for the average consumer . Geo
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.