Transcripts For CSPAN The Communicators 20160924

Pay television provider, not just in the United States, but in latin america as well. It is a Premium Service that we feel we can marry up with at ts Broadband Internet can abilities to deliver a bundle to the American People that they are really going to like. We are rolling out some of those services now, taking a lot of the directv Video Services online through apps, and you will see more later in the year on that. As a Senior Executive Vice President of external legislative affairs, what are some of the issues you work on in washington . James most of it revolves around the fcc. Usually, there is some proceeding under way the impacts the impacts us, either directly or indirectly. At the moment, there are quite a number of things. Peter one of those is the issue of settop boxes. The sec has come out with a new proposal. What is at ts take on that . James we are concerned. I suppose it is which proposal we are talking about the initial proposal was put out for comment by chairman wheeler we are very much opposed to. Most of the industry is opposed to it. We have seen a number of other players express concerns, including the u. S. Copyright office, and a large group of members from both parties and congress. Chairman wheeler has indicated that he has intended to modify that proposal. Has described it, briefly it is not out in public. In fact, some people have asked him to put it out in public here to public. Not think the revised proposal really goes far enough in making changes. It still does not provide the copyright protections that are absolutely needed for this content. Peter how would you grade the wheeler sec . James i would give it an incomplete right now. We will have to see how these proceedings go. I think there are a lot of Disturbing Trends that have developed during his tenure. I have a great deal of regard and respect for chairman wheeler. But i do think the polarization and politicization of the sec has accelerated during his tenure there, and i think that is a bad thing. Peter lets bring Howard Buskirk into this conversation. He is with communications daily, executive senior editor. James you werent howard you were just talking about the polarization of the sec. Do you think that is going to be a permanent state of affairs, and that the secs of the future are going to be much more political . James that has not been the case in the past your past. I would hope it would not be the case in the future. It depends on whether these disturbing precedents are actually followed by others. But it has not normally been the case. The president s of the United States personally weigh in on proceedings at the sec, even monday and proceedings that are not generally a matter of Public Knowledge or interest. We had an instance in the settop box case where the white sent out thegain, chairman of the council of economic advisers at the end of next week last week, to indicate support for chairman wheelers new proposal, which is not public. After a rather tough hearing on the hill. So clearly, there is a lot of table talk going on here. Howard do you think there is something more chairman wheeler could do, in terms of saying, appreciate the advice, but we are an independent agency and we are going to make these decisions on her own . A question for chairman wheeler, not for me. I do think the sec was set up by the congress as a separate and independent agency, primarily to insulate it from politics. If it is operating in a way that is not insulated from politics, i think it calls into question the rationale of having the fcc as an independent agency, especially if it is not showing signs of independence or i think the chairman of the fcc has always been the custody custodian of that independence, and i think it is incumbent on him to preserve it. I think the institution is undermined otherwise. Howard how difficult of a choice was it for you to decide to endorse Hillary Clinton in the upcoming election . James this is obviously something i did personally that does not have anything to do with at t. Howard it is the thing everybody is wondering about. James i know it surprised number of people, but i would tell you it was not a real difficult choice. A set of values and beliefs, like most people. They are conservative. I still consider myself a republican. Enough to been close that office during two white houses, working for both president reagan and president bush, to see it up close and personal, and i think anybody that has been in that position oferstands the importance having the Person Holding that office be a person of character and values and moral integrity and intelligence. Think those are characterizations that described mr. Trump. To so that is what led me endorse and offer to help secretary clinton. Howard have you looked at or thought about the election visavis Telecommunications Issues . James it did not enter my mind on that decision. I do not think anybody can look at mr. Trump and have a clue what he is going to do on any issue, let alone telecommunications. It did not enter my mind. This is a very important election, i think everybody says that every election, but it is the only one in my experience where a major party has nominated a person manifestly unsuited to the office. A recent poll asked the question about the economy, whether the system was unfairly hased and that washington got to make decisions along with large corporations. Is there some validity to that viewpoint . James i certainly understand it, but i do not think there is validity to it. I do not think the system is rigged, i think the system is in paralysis. I think the different extremes in both parties have really helped polarize and paralyze the system in washington, so that it really is not able to deal with the core problems that the country faces. Compromise is now a dirty word. You have groups at each extreme that seek to prevent it and view compromise as betrayal, and frankly, compromise is the art of governance and is necessary to solve problems. And i think, frankly, that has leaked over into telecommunications. I think it has leeched into the fcc, and it is one of the reasons we are seeing this lover and this level of polarization inside the fcc. Peter has Net Neutrality affected at t . James we had endorsed at the Net Neutrality principles back when they were principles during the Republican Administration during administration. We have always been supportive of the main points behind Net Neutrality. I was very involved, on behalf of at t, in putting together the compromise which became the 2010 ruling. It may have been one of the last issues we were able to compromise on in this town, and that was litigated by company that did not share our optimism about it. I think the shame of that is that it was one of the few opportunities we have had to take an issue that has really conversation, at least in telecommunications, and actually settle it out in a way that everybody seems even if grudgingly comfortable with. Undone, ofat was course we have seen everybody going back to their respective find extreme solutions, and once again we are in litigation. And it is a challenge. Peter when of the concerns that have been raised about Net Neutrality was that it would reduce spending by the broadband providers. Here, let me distinguish because im talking about Net Neutrality principles. Those were never at issue in this case. Fccsas at issue was the legal ability to enforce those principles in case somebody violated them. And we think there were alternatives that the fcc could have chosen to do that. Unfortunately, the fcc chose the most extreme course to give itself Enforcement Authority, and that was classifying all Broadband Services as title ii services. They effectively said that we are going to regulate all of these Broadband Services wireless or wired or cable as if they were the legacy Bell Telephone network. And so what concerns us is not the Net Neutrality principles, but it is all of the other authority to regulate that the fcc has given itself by deeming these to be title ii services. So they can get into a whole range of things, up to and including price pricing pricing regulations. Howard i want to make sure im clear on this. Effect,s the economic we will not know necessarily whether there is going to be a bigger financial effect down the road . Does it depend on what happens next . James you are certainly not seeing increases in capital spending, you are seeing reductions during we are down reductions. We are down this year. People frankly, some feel it is because of circumstances, but i think the uncertainty and frankly, the potentially onerous impact of title ii certainly can affect that. We are investing in wireless in mexico right now. Frankly, a better Regulatory Environment in mexico right now that it is in the United States for investment. Are going to start to see Companies Making these kinds of decisions. You are not going to know for years what the impact is. But the notion that is put out there by some, but that the fcc can impose any regulations it wants and will have absolutely no impact on investment, is simply wrong. It has proven wrong and it is economic heresy to argue something of that nature. There are two more rulings that are pending that we think are going to be on the commissions agenda for november. Access. Pecial do have concerns about that as well . Talk about that a little bit. James i think it is important to understand that the Business Data Services market was actually deregulated in the Clinton Administration by chairman bill kinard. This was actually done under a democratic majority fcc, and it was done on the basis that these markets are competitive and are becoming more competitive. Since that time, the cable industry itself has built out facilities along these lines and is competing actively for customers in this space. And so the market has gotten even more competitive than when andas deregulated, essentially, what this chairman is saying is that nonetheless, we are going to propose to reregulate the services here. And i think the danger of this is not that they are proceeding with data that is, we feel, then manipulated to yield false outcome but everyone is talking about the importance of 5g. The president has been talking about it, chairman wheeler has been talking about it. And there is two essential components for the United States to be a leader in 5g that they all want us to be. Spectrum, and the administration is doing a pretty good job of getting the high band is that from out there and available, but the other is backhaul. That means fiber backhaul. And during the entirety of this proceeding that has been going on about 10 years, and no time have they asked the question about the potential impact of reregulation on these services on the availability of backhaul that is essential for 5g. The core point i think we make is that when you regulate, you require it to be wholesale. Wholesale, fcc regulated prices. A lot of people are going to sit back and wait for someone else to invest, because whoever invests, ends up with the short end of the stick, and i think our experience with that in the past has proven it. Then people are not going to go out there and build the fiber backhaul, the infrastructure that is necessary for that 5g. And it is the type of question that needs to be examined. Instead of examining that question and seeing whether it actually undercuts the goals of the chairman and the president , they seem to be racing to the finish lines can get this done before the election or before the new Administration Takes office. And i think that is wrong. Howard policy is the other big one. That would bes unique to Companies Like isps, Companies Like at t. Why is that a better idea . James it is not necessarily a bad idea, if you are going to have a common policy. Haveis a bad idea is to two entirely different policies by the same government applied to different parts of the internet. That makes absolutely no sense. It is not logical. It is the antithesis of good public policy. The president s own Consumer Privacy bill of rights has been very clear on this point that we need a common policy out there. And it endorsed the approach taken by the federal trade commission, which is an opt out type of policy. Chairman wheeler is trying to propose an opt in policy on Telecommunications Carriers that would put them, not just at a unique disadvantage visavis other internet companies, but you would have two parts of the internet ecosphere with totally different privacy policies. From a consumer standpoint, it makes no sense. You are not going to be able to differentiate easily how your information is being used. Example of how an agency, in order to establish its own prerogatives, is moving into a space that is need not have moved into. Peter do you consider google and facebook to be competitors . James in some ways. They are partners in other ways. If you consider our Wireless Services, we sell android phones using googles os. Revenue goes to them through the Wireless Services we provide. Facebook certainly is partnered with us on many things. I think it is very possible that on an ongoing basis, we will be more direct competitors than we are today, but i think it is a mix. Peter you mentioned that you have two weeks left in your current job. What happened . James im retiring. Im 64 and ive had a good career at at t. There are other things i would like to spend some time on. I am noty retiring, saying this in the typical washington way where it begins my new consulting practice or Something Like that. Wonderfuly has been to work for and work with for so many years. , bute enjoyed it immensely i have got a great successor who hasmed bob quinn run our regulatory stuff for a lot of years. ,e is extremely intelligent sharp strategic, a real good leader, and the organization that we built together is going to be in very good hands. Peter i will look forward to interviewing mr. Quinn when he takes office. What are some of the big battles or issues that you have confronted since 1998 . Past so much of it in the 18 years has been transaction related. Approvals,merger those have been the biggest fights. We have managed in that time to win most of them. We had one big loss. That was the tmobile merger. But most of them have been successful. Those arese james probably the biggest issues any Telecommunications Company confronts, and they are driven by the desire for growth. Some of it was driven, in the early part of my career, by the changes that were occurring in the industry itself. But a lot of it since then has been driven by the convergence and wherese services all of them were divided up previously, you can look at the Telecommunications Act and see that all of them were regulated in their own silo. And everything is a sort of must mushedr now. Sort of together now. And the consumers have been the beneficiary. They have got more services and choices than ever before. Peter isnt there still a desire by legislatures to regulate the silos . James they certainly did in 1996. I think the challenge for the next congress, if indeed they reopen the telecom act as they are talking about doing, is going to be to not only take a snapshot of the industry as it is today, not the way it was in 1996, but also to try to look down the road and project these trends out. I do think that the most important thing is to recognize that ideally, you want consumers to make the choice. You want them to have the choice and make the choice. You do not want a regulator or a Government Official to end up getting in the middle and picking winners and losers between companies. You ought to have a competitive situation where consumers themselves can do that. , ifif those choices exist the competition itself exists, then the regulators stand back and let the market worked market work. And that they intervene only when there is a market failure or abuse of market power. We be talkingll about in five years, and did you think the telecom act is ready for a rewrite . Question first, i think the telecom act has been ready for a rewrite for the last 10 years. Many of the fights that we are having now over the fccles are over bending its provisions to try to deal with the technology of today with the legal tools that were never meant for it. And that is why everything seems to go to litigation these days. Now, think five years from youre going to be looking at a situation on the infrastructure side, where the differences between wired and wireless is totally faded and become irrelevant to the consumer, where the devices simply work and what is going on behind the curtain is of no concern to them. I think 5g is going to take wireless speeds up dramatically, to the point where they will be a very acceptable alternative to wired broadband. And i think that is going to revolutionize not just the services we offer, but the capabilities that consumers get in the process. And i think it is going to lead to a raft of new innovation. Similarly, you are going to be using a lot of this technology through what people are calling the internet of things. Internet of things work, you have got to have the spectrum and the capacity out there and the system to deal with these billions of devices constantly pinging over the internet to convey data. I wanted to ask about something you said earlier. It sounded like you were concerned with a couple of these items that the fcc is working on , this preelection stuff, and that there is a lot of politics behind it, especially privacy. Is that a concern . It is something people are reluctant to say, but you think the tone of this is clinically motivated heading into the election . He said they were politically motivated heading into the election. He said they were trying to rush before the election. James i think the commission is clearly in a rush right now. Frantic to get these three proceedings concluded before the end of the year, and if they can, before the election. I think that is obvious to everybody, whether that is politically motivated or legacy motivated, i dont know. But i do know, based on my spirits and government, that it is always about idea to try to rush policy if it is halfbaked. I think what we are in the settop box proceeding is an illconceived and ill written proposal that is clearly halfbaked. In for criticism from virtually everybody involved in the industry and from both parties in congress. Is a sure sign that as a policy maker, they should slow down and take stock of this. They do not have to conclude every one of these things before they run out the door. The fcc is an institution and has its own credibility at stake here. Asis damaged if it is viewed rushing to judgment or rushing proposals out in a halfbaked way, were, frankly, being pushed by the white house to do things of that nature. I think we have seen far too much of that with this white house. People have been talking about Telecom Legislation for a long time, 15 years now. It looks like there is a lot of buzz there was something coming 15 years ago. Do you have the sense that things are coming together at this point, that we might actually veryems like it is difficult to move Telecom Legislation, for various reasons. James i think it can come together. I think clearly the chairman and ranking members of the key committees would like to see that. They are legislatures first and foremost, and i think they see that the act itself is broken down. And i think it is possible to do. I think the last time it was done, we had divided government and it got done. But it has to be done in a bipartisan way. I think the stumbling block is the thing we hoped we had settled in 2010, which is Net Neutrality and title ii. With so many groups feeling that they got a victory, they are going to be much more consumed with defending that victory and worried that it could be undone with a rewrite of the Telecommunications Act. I think that is shortsighted. I think Net Neutrality principles can be preserved. Abouthole debate was how how best to enforce them, that is how we ended up with title ii, not because somebody inherently felt that title ii was appropriate in the space, it was all designed to give the fcc a means of enforcing the Net Neutrality principles. When you are legislating, you can write those principles into law and give the Enforcement Authority direct the. Directly. I do think this is something that can be solved. I think it is going to take a lot of good faith on both sides and a bipartisan approach. Peter does at t have a dog in the fight of who owns the internet . Not directly indirectly, obviously, because we operate globally. Been sympathetic in principle with the approach taken by the commerce department. I would be less than honest if i did not tell you there are a lot of people in my company that have serious can earns about how about serious concerns how that actually works in practice if the transfer is accomplished. There is lot of concerns about authoritarian states and the very different goals they would have in this environment. And so we are watching it very closely and like many, we have a lot of concerns, even though, host for the next two weeks, jim cicconi, Senior Executive Vice President of at t. At least another two weeks. [laughter] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] announcer go to cspan. Org monday evening for the present debates on your desktop, phone, or tablet. Videolive screens and questions to the candidate, as well as their answers. Create video clips of your favorite debate moments to share on social media. Not able to watch . Listen to the debate live on the as