Authors experiences covering terrorist groups around the world. Many of these authors have or will be appearing on booktv. You can watch them on our web site, booktv. Org. Host and fcc commissioner Mignon Clyburn is our guest on the communicators this week. Welcome, commissioner. Thanks for coming back, we appreciate it. Guest its great to be back. Host this is the first time in your service on the federal communications economies that youve commission that youve been in the minority, and its been about five months. How is that different than the previous eight years . Guest very interesting. I often think of myself playing offense and defense. And so, you know, playing the entire field has been a little exhausting but exhilarating at the same time. I havent changed. The things that i care about in terms of consumers being first and foremost in our minds when it comes to policy and when it comes to my interests, when it comes to serving them, that has not changed. But youre right, things are a little different. There have been a couple of 21s, more than a couple of 31s. So those 21s. So those things are different, but mignons essence is still the same. Host june 30th is coming up, and thats a significant date because thats when your commission ends. Guest well, if i were to look at the calendar, one would say thats when our term of service ends. But just like politics and everything else, thats not necessarily the case. I have not heard and i have not made any plans, i havent turned in any paperwork, i havent even talked to ethics about, you know, my series of next steps. So i am here to serve, i am pleased that i have the opportunity to do so, and i will continue to be an advocate for those who dont have a voice. Host well, joining us as our guest reporter this week is lynn stanton of telecommunications reports. You mentioned playing defense, and one issue that you have to play a lot of defense on is Net Neutrality. Youve been out rallying the troops, if you will it seems, trying to get support for not rolling back the rules that you and your fellow democratic commissioners adopted in 2015. Do you think that will have any effect on your majority republican colleagues, just having a lot of voice in the docket of people saying that they dont want to mold back . Or are you looking more to try and put pressure on congress or create a record that will hold up in the courts . Whats your game plan here . Guest often i jokingly say when people ask me multipurpose or compound questions i say, e, all of the above. And i really mean that in this case. Number one, i feel like title ii is the best, strongest authority that we have to insure that we can bring broadband to the american people. Just think about a live without title ii. A life without title ii. Look, how do to we provision and allow and enable and fund broadbandenabled services to providers who are in line best in place to serve this nation . If broadband is not classified as a title ii service, tell me under the universal service construct where we have the authority to even give the first dollar when it comes to that. So when you think about that, when you think about possible other barriers to deployment pole attachments and the like who are we, under what title, under what section of the act to say who can do what, you know, what authority do we have to say, you know, in terms of rights of way and what Backstop Authority do we have . When you think about just a daytoday, not even talking about what it means for everyday people that i can use whatever device i want as long as it doesnt harm the market, that there are no fast lanes or slow lanes, that you cant, you know, give preferential treatment to someone elses web site or service. Were not even talking about that. Just think about what the fcc did does daytoday and tell me if we change classifications, i want to know how we willen able, how we will enable, how we will fund these providers to insure that we have the services that america, particularly Rural Network expects from us. And it even goes beyond universal service. Your colleague, commissioner reilly, is a republican, raised this multitenant building that you were voting on recently saying he wasnt sure whether this would be moot, essentially, to even discuss this if things are reclassified as Information Services where the fccs authority for this comes from guest so the word that comes to mind when i hear you say that is certainty. Right now we have certainty that we will be the referee, you know, on the field enabling and answering the calls of people who said i want choice, you know . I want connect it. I want to be connectivity. I want to be able to, if my doctor is 100 miles away, to be able to speak to them without getting in a car. All of these things are made possible with connect it. And if we do not have all of the tools in our regulatory belt to be able to say that, you know, we have an authority to enable all of these wonderful opportunities, then who does and how does it get done . Someone honestly can challenge and say who are you if this is an Information Service to use my universal service dollars to provision, to fund these activities . Thats my fear. You mentioned certainty. On the hill republicans say theyre offering certainty through legislative proposals that they say democrats dont seem to be interested in discussing in terms of putting into law Net Neutrality rules but in some ways carving out exactly how much authority the fcc would have Going Forward to adopt new rules in terms of that. So are should democrats be taking a more active part in discussions about legislation . Would that not offer the kind of certainty you just said you want . Guest so i would say laws are very certain, but laws are very static. And the reason why i believe you created this now83yearold entity is that you know that things change, and you know that we can act and react quickly than a set of laws and principles that would come from congress. So my thing is this, i dont know and wont opine whether there should be more inclusivity when it comes to that. I will say this, if there is a law that is passed, it must give the fcc the ability, the dexterity, the means to protect the consumers, to be able to react in realtime if something goes wrong, to be able to react in realtime to enable more things to go right. And so if the law enables, sets, you know, clear, you know, guidance as laws often do and provide the type of certainty and support for the fcc to do what it does best, then, you know, it would be something that, you know, i would, of course, endorse. But until i see those details, you know, i would be hesitant about opining which must be my word of the day that we should go in this direction. Host commissioner clyburn, doesnt the ftc offer certainty as well . Guest they offer certainty with exceptions. If you were to look at their authority, it does not include what we call common carrier services. And right now under title ii broadband is classified as a common, you know, carrier service. And so what if we were to go in the direction with the majority of the fcc appears to be moving and said, okay, were just, you know, the balls in the ftcs court. What happens when it comes or if there is a company that has both voice and broadband . Who provides protections . You know . If theres a hybrid, if its voice and broadband, does that mean theres no, you know, regulatory cop on the beat . And so these are the types of things that we need to ask ourselves when we go into a direction that might be more philosophical, i believe, than practical. We need to ask yourselves will consumers be protected. And under the current paradigm that ive seen, you know, teed up, what i am hearing in terms of moving back to the days of old, i really dont see where the consumer benefits will derive. Host were moving into a hybrid world though. Guest wewe are moving into a hybrid world, but people expect basic protections. They expect the types of protections that theyve had for a long time. They might look different, the platforms might be different, but i dont think anybody says, okay, just because, you know, i am wireless now, i dont expect the type of certainty and, you know, a referee on the field that would say, you know, whether or not their balls are strikes or fouls or im out of my sports analogies right now. But people expect to be protected. And that never grows old. One sort of subset of the whole Net Neutrality issue is broadband privacy which the fcc adopted rules last fall when you still had a democratic majority and then this Spring Congress and the president passed a National Resolution act which voided all of those rules and left the fcc unable to the pass substantially similar laws. Guest yes. Rules, rather. And now youre Going Forward with the proceeding to try and adopt some other way of dealing with broadband privacy. Guest so what does that mean . You mentioned two orders in terms of i wonder what it means substantially similar. If we cant adopt substantially similar laws, i mean, rules, what can we adopt . What does it mean . Right now i cant with certainty tell anyone when it comes to broadband protections that in terms of privacy that youre protected. Its a regulatory free zone from what i interpret. And is so what does this mean in terms of what the cras mandate is . How do we go forward . How do we truly protect consumers when it comes to their privacy, in terms of the internet or broadband world . And so i am worried that consumers, many of whom believe that theyre vulnerable anyway, that they have a regulatory referee on the beat, on the field be looking out for them. No one with a straight face can tell you that theyre protected right now. The ftc, there are holes in terms of their regulatory, you know, arsenal. And so were in forgive me for saying this, were in quite a pickle right now, and its not a comfortable, that brine is not comfortable. Theres coming legislation that congresswoman Marsha Blackburn has offered that would put the authority over broadband privacy with the ftc. One might say historically that the ftc has been a more active cop on the beat with respect to broadband, witness with respect to privacy in general than the fcc. Is it not possible that consumers will be better off with a more copfocused, enforcementfocused agency dealing with these issues . The ftc tends to be more the fcc tends to be more regulatory rather than enforcement, very few cases. Guest so im going to go back to my compound answer and say, e. The one thing that has been beneficial to every single citizen in this country is that youve got at least two entities, the ftc and the fcc, that are there in your corner. And where there are gray areas or where its very clear that the fcc has authority and where its very clear where the ftc has authority. Were all there. We work complimentary. We have them ran that of understanding memoranda of understanding. We know that in order to provide services in increasingly consolidated, combined, americaed world, ecosystem that its going to take more than one entity to do it right. We are the Expert Agency of federal government when it comes to communication services, with all due respect. The ftc is more broad in terms of their portfolio. They are not. To me, to carve out the Expert Agency thats been around for 80plus years and say we dont have anything to do with the most enabling, inclues i communications Inclusive Communications platform of our time . To me, thats nonsensical. Host commissioner clyburn, one of the programs youve championed is calls from prison. And theres been a recent court case on that that struck down your position. Whats next . Guest i am hopeful that those that include the fcc, that includes state commissions, that include county and state legislators and lawmakers that they will all weigh in, because the issue and the question and we knew it was going to be difficult is intrastate calls. Who is going to be there to insure that theres affordability when it comes to intrastate calls. 85 or so percent of the calls made to and from mostly collect calls, you know, to homes, to and from families from facilities are made inside of the state. The court dealt us a very crippling, hurtful blow. And 2. 7 million children are on the wrong side of the communications divide right now. So i am hopeful that those who say that they care about children, that they care about families, that they care about what is very clear in the Communications Act in is section one, you know, of the Communications Act that we are supposed to be the entity that will enable just, reasonable and fair, inclusive, nondiscriminatory services and make them affordable. You cant look at that paradigm and say that it is so. I think we have a role to play, and i am hopeful that everyone will weigh in and, there has been discussion of fcc preemption of the states to get rid address, rights of he way access, regulations, and, power sighting concerns, that, seem to take a long time. And, you generally, have spoken generally speak in favor ever not preempting, find collaborative solution with state partners. What do you think of the approach teed up in proceedings. This is this specific enough thing, like the prison pay phones, that the fcc should go in and tackle them . Or,. There are 3,000 counties if, ply research is connect, in this, in this nation, over 3,000 counties. , multiple jurisdictions within the counties. Not all are created equal. I am from the great state of tulsa, we like to say, where historical presentation. Tourism is number one economy. That is our business. And, to erect, whatever you power in the middle of the bat arery is not going to fly. And so, i know that, the city of, you know, i city fathers and mothers know that. But the fcc doesnt necessarily know that. So that is why i always say, you need to, we all need to Work Together with the local communities, addressing their needs, seeing where the bottlenecks are. If youre getting two, 300, requests for small cell deployment, and you have got half a person that is over this and higher, you know, portfolio, youre going to have a problem getting something out in an expedited time. So we need to really look, work with, i am for, creating another type of loosely fitting model consortium, that would include you municipalities and counties, that would include people from, Government Agencies and companies, coming together, saying where are the bottle next . What can we do to solve them . Strictly to come from a posture were going to preempt with not taking into consideration what the unique needs of the communities are, maybe, just maybe, the companies are all of their eyes dotted, ts, crossed, so many variables i dont think people take into consideration when you talk about the deployment and application process. We need to sit down, take a deep breath and see if all of the needs are being addressed, particularly when it comes to intake, and to insure that the communities are in sync with the companies in terms of their needs. I think if we come from that posture, things will be more expedited. Isnt that what the broadband deployment advisory council, that republican fcc chairman pai would propose to do . I aphopeful it would. One of the things im concerned about you ever who, there is only one, only one mayor on that, on that advisory committee. I dont know what is going to happen with some of the other compliments, meaning there might be other committees that are created outside of the full body, but if the local voice is not heard, we will continue, i believe, react in, create policy in silos. That i think would be detriment in terms of, you know, what we want in connection activity and affordability and options at home. Host commissioner clyburn, i know you wont comment on specific mergers, when it comes to merger like at t, time warner or Sinclair Broadcasting buying tribune stations. What is your general philosophy . Guest one of those if you note, i think the current leadership made clear they dont think they have a role. I disagree. This is a 86 billiondollar plus merger that will influence everything just about in the communitycations space and for us to sit on the sidelines and not even use what i think is authority that we do have to look at something that will dramatically change the communications ecosystem, i think, i think that is pretty sad actually. And so, the or the merger proposed, it is proposed, there is no paperwork in front of us, but, you know, transaction that has that type of influence, that has that type of depth in terms of the communication space, should always be something we review, the fact were not think about it is troublesome to me. Host would you agree with at t time warner, like president trump, too much power in too few hand . Ive been concerned about consolidation for consolidation sake. If any transaction, i approved of mergers in other transactions, if they meet our checklist so to speak in terms of dressing and improving the Communications Space, you know, insuring that individuals will have more options and more competition and more, more say so, then i will be for that. But if it just consolidation, making, bigger and better for synergies only benefit shareholders, that is problematic to me. Host that merger kind of brings up a couple things weve been talking about. Living in a hybrid world, silos, regulating in silos that you have spoken of. This is provider who is also, providing video but also, you know, supplying it. So guest what does that mean for smaller players . What does that mean for those who are really content dependent . Would that create some type of disparity or, an issue in terms of market share, again when it comes to content, access to content. When we, the reason why it is so important to look the a an application, proposed transaction of that nature, we need to figure out and we need to know how it is going to impact everybody else in the ecosystem. If we do not, if were hands off about that, and you got, you know, negative outcomes with everybody else, then weve lost an opportunity to really insure that there are protections for individuals, protects for smaller players. We cant forget, there are not three or four cable providers in america. There are multiple others that may be smaller but theyre lean, providing services in their communities, and if youve got this, another, you know, larger entity that can exact or can influence from pricing content and the like, i think that is problem. We should be looking at transactions that would influence and would change the, you know, trajectory of the Communications Space for years to come. You have talked a lot or we talked a lot about issues which you and your republican colleagues have disagreement. One space which you and commissioner riley have managed to at least come together and consider, raising concerns is means testing for highcost universal service. How would that work . I youre asking a lot of questions from yourselves how to figure it out. Maybe you had feedback from that blog post you now. Do you have any post how actually works in terms of, providers use that money to fund the network, not, it is allocated in terms of per customer but, they need to build a whole network to serve an entire community. What if wanted to charge full freight for higher means customers. For that price i can just get Better Wireless Service and Satellite Service if im really out in a remote area . This is why were having this conversation, to put all of these issues on the front burner. Here is the motivation behind why we did what we did and why we wanted to ask these questions. You and i both know that there is universal Service Money flowing in the lie cost fund which we call the connect america fund to places where there are megamansions. You can not sit before me and tell me that as lovely as aspenn, colorado, is, those individuals need subsidized service. So the motivation behind all of this is making sure that the money is going where it is needed. The fund was intended to bridge the affordability gap to show, to go and to flow into places where there is both need, but that the marketplace of scale economies are not there, with all due respect of aspen, they dont need help when it comes to that. Not everyone lives in aspen, live in megamansion, people provide all the food services, and that people live in the megamansion and housekeeping, trash collection and taxis and School Teaching all kinds of things that doesnt afford them the money to live in a megamansion to pay full freight . I will give you this. I dont know. The money to live in megamansion and pay full freight. I dont know what the municipal boundaries of aspen, the people i saw, that work in, as you mentioned work in the fastfood establishments, who. We are having funding that can go to areas more in, put on table, lets talk about it. We did not reach a conclusion. We saw some issues that we you know, said, we think we need to go to places, respect tulley. Every weekend, book dd offers programming focused on nonfiction authors and books. Keep watching for more here on cspan2 and watch any of our programs online at booktv. Org. [inaudible conversation]