We have two new colleagues late last week and we are starting fresh and running rights to work this week so we will see how the chairman sets up the agenda for the next couple months. We have another and number of issues on our priority list infrastructure high on our priority list and some others that we have spoken about as well. Host what is your take on the recent New York Times article linking media ownership pools with sinclair and ajit pai. Guest i completely disagree with the article. I dont find the arguments presented were valid for my purposes. The items that they cite in terms of sinclair were generally available to all broadcast. Its more important or items he important or i can say that there were complying with the statute is written so when you talk about uhf discount is one of the three that they highlighted that certainly an issue that i believe in and talked about a number of times. I think our hands are tied by the statute so its a Previous Commission who in my tent and went rogue and off the rail and we were reinstating uhf. The chairman has done a wonderful job. The attacks made by the outside folks and in the article and i wouldnt quote it in any way is an attack that tends to try to show correlation between the two i dont think are accurate. I think its inappropriate that i think we are trying to do the best work we can and we have locusts on the two issues that ive i said. Its the law and the records. Thats how i approach the job. Host will please the media ownership as an agenda item this fall . I certainly hope so. Its something that passed in Previous Commission ignored their responsibility to the statute could we have a statutory obligation to modernize their media ownership pool. Nobody who rightfully looks at this universe today can say are made euros match up with whats happening in the marketplace today so i think its arab location and our responsibility and of the statute enacted by congress to do so and i hope we correct the mistakes of the less commission. Host joining us on the commissioners as her guest reporter, lydia beyoud. She is with the financial new startup. Guest thank you. There was a Coalition Announced earlier this week representing a lot of Different Industries and also a very different political spectrum. When a group comes together like that who often oppose one another at the fcc how do you factor in that sort of coalition as a unified voice racing the sinclair major market guest i want to be careful because we have an application before some i was talking generally about the profit but in the broader sense, a Diverse Coalition comes forward we need to Pay Attention to it whenever its in the record but everyone has a particular reason why they are coming forward. A lot of them are businesses recent so i want to be mindful of that and will make a decision we get to the right time. Guess who you talk about modernizing media rules. How then do you look at the media market . What he think it includes an hows that reflected in the rules right now . Guest i think the media market if you talk to the average consumer how are they envisioning media and how are they digesting content its not just a small segment of the three Major Network channels. You have a much wider swath heading towards their palette and they are digesting so much more from different sources so my definition of the market is probably broader than some. I think the past commission failed in this respect when they viewed things like radio, only competing with radio comparing competing with fm radio. They think the market, everyone has the same advertising dollars and how best will it reflect their current rules . Guest what are some of the policies that you think should be kept . I am open to considering whatever rules are put before us we look at our media ownership rules. This is where the commission failed in doing its work so they are a number of things that will have a chance to look at again. A number of them dont make any sense. Im not sure i can say right now want to eliminate all of them because they are certainly some concern. He would want every component to be owned within the local market and the big markets per se but there are certain cases and instances where it would make sense especially when you have a very diverse definition. When you talk about competition and more dollars and investment coming from the new overthetop players it has to be taken into account. Host commissioner o. Riley how do you view the fccs rules when it comes to competition and when it comes to local control . Its a very important issue. We have obligations depending on what is put before us whether its the transfer licenses we have an obligation under the Public Interest standard that we take very seriously and work through the issues in terms of the filings made by the applicant and whether they support or prose the material. We take our jobs very seriously. Local competition is incredibly important. It depends on everyones definition of what is competition in local competition has changed but we try to follow when it possible is when it makes sense. I find the past commission didnt live up to obligations as a requirement of law and i think we have an opportunity to guest so if you change the rules specter missing quite a bit of consolidation among broadcasters and tv and radio broadcasters content makers. Do you think that that sort of consolidation will help the market and is that in the Public Interest . Guest i talk about it in general. Thereve been deals that have been done notwithstanding a rule changes and other deals that have been done where rules to change and they dont surprise me one bit. The market change and companies have fallen to favor have Good Management in bad management and make decisions and bets based on where they think they should go. We see a number of companies that bought radio and sell radio and we see a lot of different formulations on what will go forward. So i dont necessarily tied one particular decision to the commission but a variable to modernize the rules i think you will see some properties some assets being transferred to reflect that the marketplace is not as singular as it once was. You are talking about a very Global Market space with a lot of new players that havent been taken into account. Host what is the next potential action when it comes to Net Neutrality . Guest we are in the process of continuing to get reply comments on our preceding. At some point that timeframe will conclude for an additional two weeks of pretty much the end of august we will conclude that process. And we will digest the record we will analyze the record and determined what substandard points are made about arguments are made and how they match up with the questions raised in the nprm. The proposed rulemaking was put out by the commission. I want to see other matches up and see what direction we should go. Obviously i outline my views on the topic but im waiting to see if something the record changes my mind. Guest what you think it would take to change her your mind . Guest i testified before congress on two parts of it and i think theres a third. There are two major categories. One is real harm to consumers, not hypothetical harm. To his economic analysis. We are talking substandard data points that we can look at verses the hypothetical scenario and the third is sarp precedented statutory obligation and reversal that we made a couple of years ago an existing rules to go a complete 180 direction from what we had previously done from most a number of decades. Those are three that the categories and i will wait to see if anyone makes a compelling case. Tesco you work in congress for a number of years before coming to this ep what do you think a legislative bill would satisfy Net Neutrality and what that might look like . Guest i have to be careful because good part of my experience on capitol hill they dont appreciate unsolicited advice but i dont know if they were asking my opinion i dont know they are too far from where they are per se. I personally dont have a great need for some of our rules. I have articulated the reasons why i think a couple of our rules should not be embodied into legislation and hopefully they would make it into things like general conduct standard. There are a couple of things that to me its more important about precise drafting and having congress and their great wisdom decide what it should look like. The more precisely can be the better and ive always had any direction that they determine we should go thats my calling card so im completely comfortable with that but i would say more precise the better. The statute i worked on behalf of members when i spent my time on capitol hill i found that over the years the less precise i was they always pulled in my my. Host commissioner orielly you talked about drafting. Does that indicate a need for an update to the 96 at or the 1934 act, which ever one is the chief regulator at this point . Guest we are governed by the 34 act. The 96 act is a modification of the 34 act and abundance to it. But to your point its up to congress to decide. They had previously wanted to do that and it made a couple of runs at trying to modernize the statute in updates the 96 act or the 34 act. I was part of one in 2004 and 2005 so its just one last congress who didnt make it in the committee. Theres great changes to the statute and whether they succeed is for the members to decide. Host your perspective as a regulator, can it be confusing at times . Guest very much so. Ill give you an example might testify to that fact, depending on the Underlying Technology you can be governed as a broadband provider number of different ways but if your wireless you were title iii and satellite you are governed under the rules in a different way and you can be governed in different ways because of the statute and because of our rules. I dont think thats appropriate. Guest focusing on. Policy and Foreign Investments in the u. S. Last year you headed an effort to streamline a process that reviews and youve also called for congress to codify that. Do you have any hope of that happening in this congressional session . Guest i would say im extremely disappointed didnt happen unless congress. I think you was a mistake by some of the leadership and this commission and elsewhere that it didnt happen. We worked within a week of being done with this entire issue they pulled the plug from under my feet. I think one issue the administration and i dont give them any advice but they just need more people in charge and want people to get confirmed to congress and more people and Political Leadership so they can make decisions. We are probably a little bit away from taking up that issue again. Im hopeful that we can modernize a rule at the commissioning codify those provisions in the statute. Host because that is there some inertia in the rulemaking . Guest absolutely. I thought we were just ready to be done with the issue and now there are a lot of things you would want to have and i would want to have with the new demonstrations and there are the folks in the seat that youd want to talk to. They are very good people and the administration that they may be at a lower level that needs guidance from someone who is waiting to be confirmed for whatever reason. Guest you mentioned whos been nominated to the ngia how is ruggles implemented into the iaa impacting fcc policy issues have been working on . Guest david is a good friend but ill leave that process to the senate to work on. I think whatever they decide to do will figure out how best to approach the nomination in due time. To your point there a number of seats both mr. Rydals and taa and guidance at the department of state that would be very helpful to have. Certainly my work on International Issues on the half of the chairman those slots are currently unfilled and it makes it difficult to have a formation of policy and on a unified front as we approach other nations and the global currency. Host as we mentioned at the beginning the fcc is now a full contention of five. What they do with the five that you could do with three . Guest im happy to have my two colleagues and i dont want to say otherwise. We have had a conglomerate with the three of us and two more will add new voices and new thoughts so i think thats helpful. Procedurally to your question it does allow one more procedural tool to be used and that is something called and basically of three members of commission three commissioners vote for an item it upsets the timeclock for disposing of an item. When they are only three members any member can withhold their approval and languish it. Theres that part of it but again the important thing compared to the past this commission the chairman is running a much better process. I want to be clear i have the same concerns. There is still processing advocacy fixed at the commission but chairman pai is running as better process. Its more open and more friendly and the attention in the air is reduced so i think we are Getting Along Better and hopefully the two new colleagues would get along even better. Host do you think guest i dont doubt not only are they hiring staff and already started their meetings. I know when i came to the commissioner took me longer. I hadnt been at the commission before and im not as familiar with and i had past experience that i wasnt as experienced as they are in terms of. Obviously commissioner rosenworcel did the job before me so shes very familiar. I think its an easy transition for them. Guest you have worked with commissioner rosenworcel credit that on a lot of spectrum issues. Now that shes back at the fcc what to expect some of those policy issues to be and you plan to be in the planting 18 working with them on her and have the dynamics change at all . Guest i dont know that the issues have changed that much. My willingness to work with her is absolutely still exists and we are looking forward to tackling old issues that we worked on before a new issues that we havent contemplated yet i look forward to that opportunity. They are things like you mentioned spectrum. Five. 9 is an issue we have spent a great deal of time on together and i imagine its something thats still out there and the decision needs to be made at some point about hopeful the commission will do so. I think its a great opportunity to continue our advocacy. Guest do you have any sense of how your might take a different approach from the Obama Administration on 5. 9 and if you could explain it . Guest the five. Nine issue its a particular spectrum band thats been allocated for automobile Safety Systems and what we are examining as the commission is whether we can also allow that spectrum to be used for license purposes. Consumers may see it its referred to in one arm as wifi. Can we have automobile safety and wifi operating within the same spectrum . I believe we can and we are running tests at the commission right now, thats tests to determine if the systems can operate in not cause each other interference and that hopefully will prove my case. The reason to do so is because its sitting right next to a number of bands that are already allocated for licensed use and therefore we can expand the reach of Wifi Networks and the spectrum thats available and make them stronger and more capable than they are today. When it comes to the spectrum auctions how soon will that spectrum be on line . Guest that depends on the particular item. Theres still trying to figure the timing and thats the chairmans call and the number of auctions. We have a number of auctions scheduled as a release or universal service fund. Getting money allocating allocated is taking a bit of time. Their broadcasts that have to be auctioned off that will require a lot of time and we are trying to figure out the millimeter wave and an options for for more such in their end of the things we are putting up a plan going forward. Its the lag time between identification and clearing and then auctioning. We are trying to make that a short as possible and make those bands available soon as possible. We just came off the conclusion of the broadcast incentive auction not too long ago earlier this year so that played into how much spectrum is available in the marketplace today and whats available on the secondary market and the number of bands available with big holdings and well see what they plan to do with them and whether they meet observations. Host that of course feeds into one of the trump administrations priorities which is infrastructure improvement. How do you view the fccs role in that issue . Its an portnow purgation. I want to make broadband available to every american that would like it. Theres some people that are not interested in the internet and im not interested in forcing them to have it but those people that are ubiquitous ive like to try it and we are working through that issue. I spend a great deal of my time on highcost issues to provide mechanisms where the market may not make the case or buildout for Broadband Services whether they be wireless or wireline. We are trying to figure those issues out and trying to provide the best mechanism to get service to those customers so its incredibly high party. Its a uniform agreement among my colleagues and we just testified in front of the House Commerce Committee and so we agreed on the need to focus on this issue and are spending a great deal of time on it from my perspective. Guess who your comments from folks on broadband infrastructure how are you going to concerns between industry who wants to cableless fiber and with the concerns of cost and localities and local governments who are concerned about controls or other public areas and their need to control for their own cause. Guest the consumers are really clamoring for these services. I had gone and traveled throughout the United States and listen to consumers struggle with the lack of broadband that they have today and explain to them their local government doesnt want it to happen because they dont like the aesthetics on how its placed on the small cell situation. They get furious and irate so its a balance between those issues. The truth of the matter is most localities are doing a fine job and thats commendable. The states that have taken action on themselves and tried to do it on the state basis and t