Ill take your questions. Good evening. Are there any questions . Is there any version of the means to you mainstream rule in the nation you would support, what a partial inundation of it where it would keep one employee or something. One of the things that i made clear is if you have a very small station and even a midsize station but when you talk about small, out outweighs as employees, if indeed it is burdensome, i made it very clear in my statement that i would be receptive and empathetic to that. I really am concerned about what used to be one of my biggest criticisms or excuse me, observations when it comes to radio. As i grew up knowing and loving, that radio and localism was part of that. Part of that passion. When things started changing and we started getting simulcast and it was very clear that you could go from city to city and every station sounded the same, i thought it lost a lot. When you talk about you know, broadcast stations and what it means the community and what they serve as underlying , underscored by senator smith, i think we need to be very careful and in what we do and i think it serves the stations interests do not get caught flat footed. If indeed something were to happen in a community. And they are the ones of course that people can rely on. Have a signal 24 seven and they are not, they dont have the boots on the ground or someone there answering the phone ensuring that the Public Interest standard is upheld so thats my biggest concern. Im not rigid. And i think its important for us to, thats why i said i would have a problem with a blanket group if theres something with the smaller station or smaller footprints, if you can demonstrate its a hardship, i am not so close minded or nacve to think that a onesizefitsall approach applies. Mister artisan with the l. A. Times. Touch on this with your statement and i want to expand, the regulatory assistance that the fcc seems to be pursuing under chairman pai. One of the things that its concerning to me and i thought about this on the way back down is, i thought about this as a sort of a dingo so to speak, if you remember cool house rock and we were talking about this a couple days ago. And the majority seems to have a problem or issue with conjunctions. And what i mean by that is we look at one side of the coin and not the other. Theres not and, but poor or what it comes to a policy. So what im hearing is particularly among you mentioned the, you know, the rule that, thank you. The main studio rule thats the lack of lunch. The main studio rule issue, we cant look at this in a vacuum. You got to every action we take when you come from a deregulatory posture or you say that a rule, we need to talk about the rule has outlived its usefulness, theres a reason why that rule was implemented in the first place and so if we just look at something as 20, 30 or 40 years old and adopted when the ecosystem was much different and not take into account what it means to get rid of that rule, the impact would be, what the Economic Impact because in talking about that also over the last several months, the Econometric Research and the like, what with the impact before the community because we dont do that. Honestly, i believe we run the risk of not upholding the standard we are supposed to, that the public needs in necessity and we will leave communities worse off. And is it to get rid of as much regulation as possible . Its obvious to me, seemingly where not looking at an 86 billion merger. We got capacity to look back, were not looking at that. We just overturned a decade, well, the uhf discount that was a decadesold waste past its prime. We said lets bring it back and make technological changes in what that does, it allowed an entity to basically pad their holdings and it would lead the public to believe at least some of those holdings are 50 percent of what it is. There seems to be this posture that everything that industry presents on every posture that they take is the right one and every time when youhave 4 billion people , others want robust media ownership rules, all the other things in terms of impact, there seems to be no listening to those voices so yes, everything that i hear since the transition, its seemingly been about being consolidated business only and very little feedback that is listened to when it comes to how communities will be impacted and what individuals and smaller businesses, what the impact will be on there . If there seems to be a lack of listening on amongst the majority commissioners, whats the way ahead on the Net Neutrality battle for you . And for people who agree with you, is it a lost cause, what can you do, what you foresee . I never believe in lost causes, im person of high faith and i believe in American People and i believe in the voices and a half, i believe in the power that they have to influence commissions and their elected officials. Or Million People affirmed or got a pathway back in 2015 and millions more will lend their voices to and to wait in so as the chairman says, he is not incorrect in this, we, weve lost something today and it will allow the public to further weigh in and if we believe listen to those voices and those individuals, thosesmall businesses and others , outside of those four or five or six large Internet Service providers, i think we will make the right decision so i never believe all is lost. If we truly listen to those who weigh in. Speaking of listening, do you feel like your concerns were listened to at all in release of the draft of the neutrality or Internet Freedom and drm and today, if anything you say in terms of requesting changes or edits, if you did request those and its have any impact . I think particularly when it comes to the open internet, if youre asking me particularly to the open internet item, i dont know if i can say. That i felt individually that my voice would be heard. On some of the other items it was very clear that they listened but i think the guy was already cast as it relates to that item. And again, i think if we were truly listening to the American Public we would not be here today. Sorry. It might be my fault but i thought i saw her hand first. Might have given where thingsare at the commission now , do you think that congress should be getting involved. As an answer to Net Neutrality, it lies in legislation negotiated between both parties . One of the things weve been hearing including from the majority, now majority is this, would be best adjusted at the congressional level. I will take a particular position on that. But i will say that if they were to weigh in and they have talked about weighing in some time now, that they should give the Expert Agency in this nation the flexibility to do its job. People have an expectation that there should be a referee on the field ensuring that the owner open internet remains open and free and when i say free, i noticed a number of people, i dont mean free in terms of cost, i need free in terms of openness and the way we access or are able to access it so if those whatever, if they were to ask, it would allow this agency to do what it does best, to be the referee that will look out for the publicinterest , that will ensure that the infrastructure and rules and regulations that we promulgate are ones that will allow for robust investments and innovation. Then i think that will be as close to a proper balance as possible. All of those elements have to be in place. Two questions, one and just to follow up on something i ask you last month, your term is on june 30. There is regulation that maybe the leaders in the senate are either close to reaching a deal or an agreement about, insurance term and filling the empty slot. Is your expectation you will bestaying on beyond june 30. You will probably know my faith because better than i would. To be honest, it is a little business and an incredible honor and privilege for me. And i knew when i signed up so to speak what my term of service, you know, what my terms of service would, what it is. My term as you know officially ends at the end of june and any daybeyond , is a day that i will be, another day for me to serve the American Public. The rest of it involves other peoples courts and i would respectfully, i know how to ensure that any transition is smooth whenever accounts. And theres obviously news going on the last few days given the fbi and all the various issues, standing through washington, you think the Net Neutrality they is not getting the attention or focus of the American People . How big concern is that to you about changing minds or putting, convincing your fellow commissioners to make changes . Ill address that, you made me think about three different dynamics and i think i heard at least two different elements there. I have not met anybody in my childhood, no matter my nieceor nephew. In college, who went a little bit beyond college but thats a family issue, we need to talk to him about graduation but they dont know about. Theyre very much aware and i think , other personalities that weve been speaking about in the last few weeks, making the public more educated in their own way about how important and open internet platform is. I really think people are learning more and are hearing more and engaging more. One of the things we need to work on as an agency is how we ensure that people are comfortable in participating in the process so you know, hopefully we will continue to work with the chair and we will continue to work with those who manage our websites to ensure that people can call, write or weigh in online in a way that is barrier free. So, i sent everywhere i go to , to talk about what an incredible platform it is and we cannot take anything for granted. And that, im a positive one when it comes to talking about an open internet. And i think there are a number of others were doing the same. If we do not address some longstanding issues than i thought the idea would be less efficient so i descended to day but not because i have an issue of the rate floor perce but i could not get a Firm Commitment to move forward on what i consider the other outstanding issues and that overture with all due respect i did not get any time of commitment moving forward so i thought it was important to take a stand. Remember i voted earlier even expressing to let them know i had an issue taking one element added tyco my fear is even talk about waste fraud and abuse six months or one year from now i dont think that is a proper way to be accountable to the American People when it comes to saving money and having a dog bit with an item that is a robust taking all into an accounting that is an efficient and was a lost opportunity. If there is nothing further something that i noted when the chair put up his chart i thought it was very interesting when i looked at that of the poll point or counterpoint of the 2015 order has had and i thought there was very curious. Number one that charge came from the analyst who with cherry pick the data specifically. To use partial data from Internet Service providers not a comprehensive list but to cherry pick the partial data and also the same author of the 2014 study of 15 billion of increased taxes that never happened. So ever since i saw the chart that has been on my mind and i wanted to go on the record to address that. That is when good data it is imperative. [inaudible conversations] to outline key infrastructure priorities and initiatives. Civic good morning ladies and gentlemen. Here at the u. S. Chamber i am delighted to welcome you here today. When you have my job you can be in this room that i mean that more than usual today not because there is such a charming audiences but with the american trucking