There is a yen and again. I get the sentiment. I want to correct the record where i can. Dan diamond a very provocative way to end the panel. If you disagree or agree with any panelists, find them in the lobby. Ununfortunately, no more time for questions. For those of you in the room, thank you very much. Those watching on the live stream, thank you also. A final thank you for philips. Make sure to join us for cocktails. Please drink responsibly. Do not share your medical information. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] announcer tomorrow, president obama gives the commencement speech to students at rutgers university. Coverage begins at 12 50 on cspan. Fcc chair tom wheeler dement defended the privacy rules for Internet Service providers. He testified before the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on technology and the law saying consumers should have similar Privacy Protections while on the internet as they have when using Telephone Networks. This is an hour and 35 minutes. Jeff flake were here today to discuss the federal Communications Commission proposed privacy rules that are currently in the notice and comment phase. The fcc under its most recent Net Neutrality order have created a vacuum in privacy enforcement when reclassified broadband as a common carrier under title 2 of the communications act. Previously, the ftc had successfully enforced privacy against broadband providers. Except for the Net Neutrality order, the ftc would still be doing that. Over the last ten years, the ftc has brought a number of Enforcement Actions against broadband providers. However none were a result of privacy violations. Given that, many wonder what justifies the new proposed rules which are a significant , deviation from the ftcs approach and more burdensome as well. In fact, there are widespread concerns that the proposed rules are another step in the fccs attempt to become the policemen of the internet. These rules will also have a number of problematic consequences. First and foremost, the proposed rules will impose static regulations on a dynamic and innovative internet ecosystem. Would we have the same internet today if these prescriptive rules were imposed a decade ago . Im concerned that we would not. Additionally, its likely that these regulations would only confuse consumers and give them a false sense of security. Finally, there are serious legal questions surrounding the proposed rules, in particular, are they consistent with the First Amendment . To discuss these issues, weve assembled what i believe to be the perfect panel. We have the chairpersons and minority members of both the fcc and the ftc to provide their perspective. I thank them for appearing here today. I look forward to the testimony. Senator franken will give his Opening Statement and then ill , swear in and introduce the witnesses. Al franken thank you mr. , chairman. I want to thank you for holding todays hearing on the fccs proposed rules and the very important issue of consumers online privacy. Chairman wheeler, chairwoman ramirez, commissioners pai and all house and olhousen, thank you for appearing before the subcommittee. A little over a year ago, the fcc voted to preserve a free and open internet. It was a very exciting moment for supporters of Net Neutrality. And that means it was a very exciting moment for a whole lot of people. Nearly 3 Million Consumers and Business Owners spoke out and urged the fcc to adopt rule s that would ensure the internet remain the platform of free expression, innovation, and Economic Growth that it always has been. It was a very exciting moment for me and remains one of the highlights of my career in the United States senate. Many of my colleagues and i long fought for strong rules, and we argue that these rules should be be grounded in the fccs authority under title 2 of the communications act. If they were to survive judicial scrutiny and withstand the test of time. Now that very question is currently before the d. C. Circuit, and we could see a decision from the court any day now. But as we await that ruling, the fcc has a job to do. Since the open Internet Order went into effect, the fcc has had a responsibility to implement privacy rules to protect consumers, promote competition, and ensure that broadband providers are given certainty with respect to their obligations under section 222 of the communications act. So i commend the fcc for starting this necessary process. For my part, i believe americans have a fundamental right to privacy. They deserve both transparency and accountability from companies that have the capacity to trade on the details of their lives. And should they choose to leave personal information in the hands of those companies, they certainly deserve to know that their information is being safe guarded to the greatest degree possible. Now this transparency and accountability should come from havehe companies that access to americans Sensitive Information. This includes Telecommunications Providers like comcast and at t but also edge providers like , google, facebook, and amazon. I have repeatedly pressed website operators and other Online Service providers to ensure that their customers have more information about the data being collected about them, about how the data are being used, and whether the data are being shared or sold to third parties. Here, the fcc has an obligation to specifically address broadband providers collection and use of americans personal information, and were talking about a whole lot of personal information. Isps have easy access to americans unencrypted Online Communications and browsing histories, as well as well as Internet Usage patterns which can provide a lot of insight into peoples daily lives and habits. Practically speaking, this means that comcast knows exactly what ails you when you visit web mds symptom checker or that you recently experienced a major life event when youre browsing maternity clothes on target. Com. It also means that comcast can tell if your Home Internet connection, which may be silent during the day, suddenly starts seeing increased use between the hours of 9 00 and 5 00. Combine that information with the browsing history of employment bulletins, and comcast can infer that youve recently lost your job. Simply put, isps know the most intimate details of our lives and, even worse, americans have no choice but to hand over this information or forego access to broad broadband, something we have repeatedly recognized as an essential service in todays world. Currently, more than 55 of americans have just one option for Broadband Service. So subscribers who object to their providers Privacy Policy are simply out of luck. This is unfair and unacceptable. I see todays hearing as an opportunity to think carefully about how americans data are currently being collected and used, and what we must do to ensure that consumers receive the highest standard of protection. I look forward to the testimony of our panel. Thank you, mr. Chairman, again for holding this important hearing. Jeff flake thank you, senator franken. Senator hatch is here now and needs to leave somewhere else pretty soon. Glad hes here, and well allow him to make an Opening Statement now. Orrin hatch im headed to the white house after this. Thank you, mr. Chairman for , holding this important hearing. Im a strong proponent of free and open internet. I recognize the need to allow the internet to continue to flourish and to drive our economy while also protecting consumers privacy and Data Security. Consumer privacy is an extremely important issue. However, i have significant concerns about the fccs proposed privacy rules for broadband Internet Service providers. And like many of my colleagues, i believe that the fccs 2015 open Internet Order which unilaterally reclassified broadband providers as common carriers under title 2 of the communications act, was a serious overstep of the agencys statutory authority. Now, this major policy shift with farreaching implications well beyond the fccs current jurisdiction should have been made by congress. For decades, the ftc has been effective in enforcing and protecting consumers on the internet. Now, however, the fccs misguided open Internet Order must put the ftc of regulatory enforcement authorities over internet providers. Why is the fcc, which has less capability and less expertise in this area, not following the ftcs wellestablished and effective Privacy Policy regime . Rather, the fcc is proposing privacy rules that apply exclusively to Internet Service providers, creating a potentially confusing and unfair set of rules for both consumers and businesses. I am concerned that these proposed rules, which do not apply to edge providers, will allow competing entities to collect the same consumer data while subjecting some, but not all, to a completely different system of rules and regulations. Second, i am following closely the issues surrounding the socalled set top box rules proposed by the fcc. Technological advancements have provided consumers with almost limitless options to watch pay per content on an array of smart tvs and other devices. Now, streaming technologies have freed consumers have costly and cumbersome set top boxes. To date, the fast growing streaming market has forced cable and Internet Service providers to be more ninlmble and competitive with consumer choice. This committee has exclusive jurisdiction over intellectual Property Rights protections. As such, i continue to be concerned about how the proposed set top box rules will impact video content. Unfortunately, many believe that if its on the internet, it must be free. But producing an distributing video content is not only costly it also requires a legal , framework to license that content. Approaches that ignore the need for licensing or undercut existing Licensing Agreements will, in my view, increase costs for consumers, reduce choices and discourage innovation. , i strongly urge you to keep this in mind when considering the set top box issue. Third, i would like to comment briefly on the chartertime warner merger which the fcc voted to approve last week with conditions. Mr. Pai, you dissented from the commissions decision on the ground that the conditions the Commission Imposed have nothing to do with the merits of this transaction. Rather, you said the conditions are about the government micromanaging the internet economy. Now, this is not the first time youve raised concerns that the commission is improperly used merger conditions to micromanage the internet. Last summer, for example, you dissented from the commissions decision to impose 17 pages of conditions on the at t directv merger, saying the conditions have nothing to do with the transaction at hand and characterizing them as, quote, the force tribute that the company must offer to nullify the capital, unquote. Mr. Pai, i want you to know i share your concerns. In fact, ive been troubled recently by a number of Commission Actions that, in my view, have sought to extend the commissions authority beyond statutory bounds and to Push Administration priorities in a onesided way. Now i am unfortunately unable to stay, and ask you questions today, but ill be submitting some for the record so i will look forward to the responses of all four of you. And i just want to express my gratitude that all of you are willing to be here today and help us to understand these issues better. I hope we can make some headway together and of course im going , to do everything in my power to try and make sure that we live within the framework of the laws. Thanks, mr. Chairman. Jeff flake thank you. Thank you, senator hatch. Its custom to swear the witnesses in, if youll stand. Do you affirm that the testimony youre about to give before the committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god . I do. Jeff flake record will show they all answered in the affirmative. Ill go ahead and introduce all of you together and then turn for Opening Statements. Chairman tom wheeler is the 31st chairman of the fcc, a position hes held since november 4, 2013. For over three decades chairman , wheeler has been involved with Telecommunications Networks and services as a policy expert and advocate and businessman. Prior to joining the fcc, chairman wheeler was a managing director of core capital partners, a Venture Capital firm investing in an early stage internet protocol based companies. He served as president and ceo of shiloh group llc, a Strategy Development and private Investment Company specializing in Telecommunications Services and cofounded smart brief, the internets largest Electronic Information Service for vertical markets. Chairman wheeler is a graduate of the Ohio State University and is recipient of its alumni medal. Commissioner ajit pai has been a commissioner of the fcc since may 14, 2012. Between 2007 and 2011 commissioner pai held several , positions in the office of general counsel, serving most predominantly as deputy general counsel. Prior to being sworn in as commissioner, pai worked in the Washington Dc Office of jenner and block where he was a partner in a communications practice. Commissioner pai has served in all three branches of the government, clerking for the honorable Martin Feldman of the u. S. District and the Eastern District of louisiana serving in a number of roles in the department of justice as well as working as chief counsel on the Senate Judiciary committee. Commissioner pai received a ba from Harvard University with honors and a j. D. From university of chicago where he was editor of the university of chicago law review. Thanks for being here. Chairman Edith Ramirez was sworn in as federal commissioner effective march 4, 2013. Prior to joining the commission, ramirez was a litigation partner in the Los Angeles Firm of quinn , emanuel, iraheart, and sullivan. Before then, ramirez was an associate of gibson, dunn, and crutcher in los angeles. She clerked for the honorable alfred t. Goodman in the United States court of appeals and for the ninth circuit. Ramirez graduated from Harvard Law School cum laude where she served as editor of the law review. She holds a bachelors degree from harvard college. She would probably get along well to the guy to my left here, my far left here. Just kidding. [laughter] joking. Harvard jokes. Commissioner i get it. [laughter] jeff flake commissioner marine olhawsen has served as a commissioner for the federal trade commission sings april 4, 2012. Prior to joinings the commission she was partner at wilkinson , barker where she focused on ftc issues including Cyber Security and Data Protection. She previously served on the commission for 11 years, most recently as the director of policy planning from 2004 to 2008, where she led the ftcs Internet Task force. From 1998 to 2001 she was attorney adviser for former ftc commissioner advising him on competition and Consumer Protection matters. Before coming to the ftc, commissioner ole housing spent five years on the u. S. Court of appeals for the d. C. Circuit, serving as a law clerk for judge david b. Seinetal as a staff attorney. Commissioner olehousing graduated with distinction from George Mason University of law and graduated with honors from the university of virginia. Thank you all for being here. We appreciate. I know its an effort to get you all here. Chairman wheeler, if youll start the testimony, and if all of you will summarize your testimony to about five minutes, well include the longer version for the for the record. Chairman wheeler. Tom wheeler thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Its a privilege to be here and to be with our colleagues from the federal trade commission. You know, the ftc in 2012 set forth some key privacy concepts in their report, and the money sentence if you will, in that , report this. Broadband networks are, quote, in a position to develop highly detailed and comprehensive profiles of their customers. And to do so in a manner that may be completely invisible. But this is not the first time that society has had to deal with this kind of a technological challenge to privacy. Making a phone ca