Of the commission is up for renomination and confirmation by the senate and the process continues irrespective of the outcome of the election. For instance, my term runs through 2023 and i can hold over for a longer time potentially and i will continue to serve regardless of the outcome of the election. Host with Michael Oreilly not been renominated by the president if there were a change in administration you and chairman pai would be the republicans, correct . Guest yes, Michael Oreilly has served for a long time on capitol hill and at the fcc in his term expired about a year and a half ago and we are allowed to stay on until the end of this congress when we are in that situation whether it is any one commissioners so commissioner oreillys term will come to an end and commissioner piatt, chairman pai and myself can continue to ser serve. Host now to the policies, in an Election Year are you able to get things done . Guest fcc has been incredibly busy. I think this interview right her
Vote the presiding officer on this vote, the yeas are 71, the nays are 21. Threefifths of the senators duly chosen having voted in the affirmative, the motion is agreed to. Mr. Leahy mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from vermont. Mr. Leahy mr. President , i think were waiting for somebody on the other side. Ill yield, but i want to thank everybody for joining senator shelby and i on this vote. Its going to help us move forward, where i noted, as i said earlier in my remarks, republicans and democrats came together and worked extraordinarily hard on these appropriations bills. It shows what can be done when we do that. I think the vote here is an indication that if nobody is seeking recognition, i will suggest the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Quorum call mr. Thune mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from south dakota. Mr. Thune i understand the national . A quorum call. The presiding officer it is. Mr. Thune i wo
Your local cable or satellite provider. Speech than, your unfiltered view of government. Host Michael Orielly is one of five commissioners on the federal Communications Commission and he is our guest this week on the communicators. Welcome back. Commissioner orielly, its only been about an hour since the court decided the Net Neutrality case. Want to get your immediate reaction. Guest in fairness unstressed digesting the item, the decision from the court. Its quite lengthy. Im generally pleased. They seem to have found the right landing spot in a number of decisions. Our couple pieces i probably would take issue with them and probably articulate that in the coming days. Host one of the issues thats been reported is that it doesnt preempt states from doing their own thing. Guest as i read it its not a proactive preemption structure. It still allows the commission to go forward and child in states with the item would be in conflict with our rules. Its going to lead to more statebystate c
Guest that part is to be released during a certain time period so it will come forward in the next couple weeks. Host what your philosophy on the conditions . My approach to mergers is similar to a number of republican viewpoints. We have charges in the statute and they are transferring wire licenses in this case and we have a number of licenses that Different Companies own and hold. In that review, something we have required to do to make sure the new party is able to hold the licenses and qualify to hold them and have sufficient statutory requirements for having those licenses. From that, other read the statues in a way that provide other opportunities for different reviews of the merge itself. Guest they do not today. In some services they are and in some instances they are actually different since we treat them the same as Net Neutrality rules which i dont agree with. So its a bifurcated approach and how we treat it and some of it is a statue. A lot that congress has enacted that g
Minimum requirements if were looking at the high noncompliance rates of utilities, the problems with 56rdability, the problems with small customer bases that just some great emphasis needs to be paid to providing more funding for these disadvantaged and smaller communities. My home state of texas has a lot of money theyre putting into water problems as a result of droughts. Californias done the same thing. Each state runs it different. A lot of states put extra money in. Some states dont. But i think its good. G. A. O. s done a terrific job at looking at some of these issues and i would encourage them to continue to do so. Thank you. My last question for mr. For mayor keegan mr. Newman and mr. Sellman, can you just given us briefly your success on the state resolving fund versus the r. U. S. , or do you access that . Why dont we go with mr. Keegan first . Sure. We havent had very much success. Weve had some limitations due to the average income of ow community. Weve been told its been