After words, talking about a book about Stephen Bannon alw ays a rebel. What odds do you give him for being able to reach his goals . So, you want me to be utterly honest or utterly hopeful . Have you come to agree with a lot of what he says . I think there is a deep chance because i think steve bannon believes the electorate has already changed. Even in the general election, donald trump was successful. He is not a perfect person, he would admit them himself by despite a lot of controversy he was elected. I think what anna believes is already the longing for populism whatationalism i think steve bannon already believes is the longing for populism and nationalism is already there. At some point, particularly the senate, is driving him. Announcer watch sunday night at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan twos booktv. This week, the federal Communications Commission is scheduled to vote on a proposition that prohibits internet providers from blocking and slowing internet content. Brendan carr gave his perspective today at an industry gathering. This runs about one hour and a half. Im with the Consumer Institute, a 501 c3 Consumer Institute research group. Here, thankre to be you for coming. As of thursday, the federal Communications Commission holds a December Open meeting and deals with one of several very important topics and the issue order to restore the Internet Freedom, which includes a number of important provisions. One is classifying broadband acid services as an inch as an Information Services it was once before. Removing the ambiguous internet conduct standard and reestablishing the private mobile Classification Service for mobile broadband and promoting Internet Service transparency among other things. The transparency issue is very important to us because it helps give consumers better information to make better decisions. But there is a lot of noise out there. Confusion and misinformation as to what this will mean for consumers and today we have a panel of experts. Today i would like to first inch deuce a special guest to give remarks. We are so glad you were able to make it and join us today. The fcc commissioner wishing him a sleek and farmed and took office. Commissioner rendon car. Before he began became commissioner he was the lead wirelessf the fcc on Public Safety and International Issues and before that, he worked as attorney for the fcc office of general counsel. Priority joining this commission in 2012, commissioner car was an attorney and dealt with a lot of issues and telecommunications and Communications Regulatory law. A whole bile for all of our speakers today are available on your chair so i will not go any further with this. I just think this is a wonderful event and there is a lot to be learned on this issue and let me just say, here to talk about and give remarks on what this will mean to the public in general, it is my pleasure to inch deuce commissioner brendan carr. Thanks for that kind introduction. It is great to be here to offer some brief opening remarks before turning it over to the panel. Happy to talk about the fcc restoring internet rita freedom proceeding. In my view, this is a great moment for consumers, innovation and for freedom. Fcc will votehe to reverse an obama era fccs unprecedented decision to flag title ii services. This twoyear experiment has failed. We have seen investment in broadband decline. We have seen isps pull back on deployments. We have seen Innovative New cap on the shelf kept on the shelf. All of this has harmed consumers. Cap on the shelf consumers ed open internet. Fcc had not because the title ii in place. It is because the fcc at this longstanding approach. For 20 years, we abided by congressit is because the diree internet should be allowed to flourish, free from heavyhanded government regulation. This was not a complete laissezfaire environment. This was not a no holds barred. Back to 2015, that is the framework we are going back to. Consumers were protected. Innovators were allowed to innovate and we saw the internet the u. S. Become the greatest Success Story that we have seen. 1. 5 trillion in investment. Businesses of all sizes from startups to large corporations launched and succeeded. Excited that after this twoyear detour, we are going back to the same regulatory framework, the tried and true approach. If you step back i know there rhetoric that surrounds the fcc decision. Now to see whats trending faster than the nuance. I think the intersection of the government and they cherish their experiences. What im saying is the great title ii head fake. A tribute into title ii, things title ii does that too. One is the portuguese internet mean by repealing title ii will charge you for bundled access to the internet. Or make you pay per website similar to what goes on in the cable space. Not true. The title ii decision determine if isp wants to have curated practices they can. This does not change the law, another claim is the fcc vote will raise rates for consumers. Theyre free to charge consumers more. Again, not true. The fcc decision majority went to great pains were not opening the door to isps thats currently the place. Another thing is isps are not going to be free to block websites or throttle or create fast lanes and slowly from the internet. Title ii is not a thin line between where we are in that conduct taken place. Look at the d. C. Circuit decision it expressly said that isps can block provided they disclose to consumers. Theres no dispute thats the case. Or repealing title ii not going to change the law. The secs decision is going to be legally unsustainable or unlawful. The Supreme Court only time theyve spoken to the classification upheld the 2002 decision that found them as a title i information service. So again that doesnt hold scrutiny. I want to emphasize or not experimenting with the newer radical approach that will give isps free reign to do what they want. The title and framework were trying to put in place includes robust protections one that ill start with as Market Forces. When they observed that there is says theres a reason why theyre not to. The d. C. Circuit said its fear of subscriber losses, theres many people that will Market Forces as a solution in the broadband market or otherwise. So are not relying on that. First, consumers are getting back strong Consumer Protection provisions. 2015 when they voted to move to title ii that decision stripped the fcc of 100 of its authori authority. That was a loss for consumers that theyre getting back as a result. Second, the federal trade commission has been the premier privacy agency. Brought over 500 enforcement cases when the fcc voted in 2015 created a donut hole for consumers had fewer online protections than they did before that. That is where we are today. After the vote on thursday consumers will get back strong Online Privacy that can be enforced by the ftc. There is federal antitrust laws. The sherman act makes clear that as it enters an agreement that am falls blocking or throttling websites that will be unlawful. Section two applies to vertically integrated isp. Will attempt to discriminate against another provided unaffiliated in terms of conte content, thats subject to be an unlawful. Fourth, state attorney generals Consumer Protection laws and this is where theres been some confusion. The order makes clear statelevel Net Neutrality laws are printed as a matter of law because it would conflict with a title i decision. Its clear that they are not preempted. Consumers should benefit from those. Finally a transparency role. Theyre adopting a rule thats likely more robust than what you would see said ensures consumers have full disclosure and if providers dont live up to the their power to take enforcement action. Theres also claim that the regime is more difficult to enforce because theres a claim it doesnt have rules. This point misses the mark. The fcc we have a long those are not self enforcing. The same will be true after our vote. The ftc has legal standards, precedents out there, what are some of what they are and they can take enforcement action to ensure consumers are protected. I think its a great moment for consumers, for getting back to the same machine that govern for 20 years. They had robust Consumer Protections and saw them launch and thrive. Consumers benefit being protected. Its not a new experiment with the free market approach. Im excited about it. This is a twoyear detour they were pushed into, the Senate Committee found through political pressure its not a place they found that theyre going to go based on independent judgment. Its great that were getting back to this bipartisan consensus. How to take a couple of questions. From the sunshine time at the fcc. It prohibits lobbying of decisionmakers during this time. See you cannot make a presentation to me that goes to the merits. If youre not certain its probably best not to say anything. Then we can transition to the panel. I think it may think its difficult votes completely devoid. Anyone have a question thats not a presentation . I think we probably have some would be presenters but that would be appropriate. Want to think the commissioner. [applause] thank you. Sounds to me to some extent we have some regulations put in place to fix something that was not a problem. Without any evidence to benefit but it seems like theres no surprise weve seen some decline investments since 2015. How do we get there . What are the various aspects of the order . How will restoring Internet Freedom affect consumers, investors and innovators . Does congress ultimately need to have a role. Theres a number of issues to be considered and with that today we have an expert panel to clear up these important questions. Moderating on the panel is randolph mae. Randolph is the founder of a free state foundation. Earlier he worked in policy research at a major law firms. Prior he served as assistant general counsel for the federal Communications Commission. The full bios have been distributed. As always its an honor to have you join us today. Thank you for organizing the program. It couldnt be more timely. Thanks to the american Consumer Institute for the work you do. We would jump right in. Im going to introduce a panelist by their affiliation. Then i will ask them to speak initially, no more than five minutes. Unless the five minutes will be fine. Maybe even prefer. We want to make sure we have time for questions. With regard to commissioner carr, you dont have to be quite as careful in asking a question to these noted panelists. They are not covered by the sunshine act. We do want to have time for questions. I just want to say briefly before introduce the panelist, i was associated general counsel of the fcc from 1978 to 81. Spent a long time since ive been watching the fcc. I have a concern really that the way of proceeding like this the comment process in my view has been subject to some distortion. Public participation is welcome and important. Everyone can file a comment. When you get into arguments about this case with 20 million comments and you argue with a 50000 are valid or not, what is happening now disturbs me. It diminishes the notion of the expertise of the fcc. In the fccs institutional integrity and the role of expertise. I hope we dont go too far down that road. Ultimately what will occur on thursday should not and will not be based on the vote, how many comments are born against a particular proposal. This shouldnt be the way the process works. If that were the way it worked their way to not need the fcc to make that decision. Thats important. With that, going to tell you whos on the panel, we have katie maccallum, baron, who is president of tech freedom, shane, a fellow at the American Enterprise institute. We have steve who is the president of american Consumer Institute who is putting on this program today. Remember the speaker will only speak for five minutes. On task baron if he will lead off. Hes been a leader in exploring the ramifications of the fcc actions. Youll probably agree that if the fcc doesnt have the Legal Authority to maintain these rules, that goes a long way to answering the question as to what the fcc should do. I will ask baron if he will speak first. In fact that is the first question to be asked. If they decide they dont have authority then thats it. Thats how agencies are supposed to work. You dont start policy questions are looking at comments. You say what authority do you have that you can validly claim. And then using that to the extent to camp. The draft order that will be voted on concludes the two major claims of authority made by obama were mistaken. That is 2010 claiming 706 was an independent grant of authority. In 2015 with broadband. Fcc is reversing those menaces theres no longer any basis for Net Neutrality rules except for the transparency role. Judge silverman in 2014 noted the fcc always argued there is a simpler basis for upholding that rule. Its on that basis the fcc is maintaining that. Were revealing back to status quo. At heart, as a legal issue that should not be controversial. If anything people who are worried about government claiming too much power of the internet might be afraid what this administration might to should be applauded the decision. For the same reason in 2010 they were warning the previous claim of authority over the internet was a trojan horse for broader regulation of the internet. I would say the same thing. Thats why tech freedom has joined a lawsuit joined by small entrepreneurs and innovators who want offers a voice over Internet Services. Theyre afraid the legal interpretation open the door to blocking services they want to offer the to the services been subject to title to regulation. The 2015 order not only said that broadband in general is a title to service but it had to go to Great Lengths to justify broadband. It said anything that uses an ikea address could be subject to title two. That undoes the line the fcc drew between the internet and opens the door to fcc regulating the entire internet. Thats why were glad the fcc is on doing all of the and handing authority packed and not just the federal trade commission but also the state attorney general. The superintendent for size that if you have no confidence in republican ftc or department of justice, the states can bring the cases too. They have fewer resources but if theres a problem though sound the alarm. If they dont bring Enforcement Actions its because theres not a problem. Since i dont have a lot of time, want to say that while im very glad to see the fcc is on doing these claims and will continue to argue in court the agency should not get deference in claiming that authority, ultimately they will win the next round of litigation for the same reason they want the last round. That also means who were reverted back and claim the same broad sources of authority over the internet. Will continue to argue with the Supreme Court that they need to know that Congress Needs to act and fcc should not be able to claim that. Unless the Supreme Court takes it up will be up to congress to resolve this issue. So over the next few years i hope we have a way of making a permanent through legislation. Its ultimately how we will resolve the fight. Thank you. I think its important to start with Legal Authority issues. I think next i want to steve, steve, im sure you want to add to your introductory remarks and say more at this time. Then well move down the line. Thank you. I will defer to the panel. The sense you gave me the opportunity i will pass up the mic. Just to put on my economist head, as i look back think its an important issue we need to think about. When you look at title ii regulations, the reality is governments can fail. Regulations can be imperfect and costly. For example, when you look at onerous regulations there might be heirs on what might be good market conduct instead of remedying back conduct later. These type of errors can be costly. They create uncertainty in the market which chills investment. They can increase costs and fees, they can take away opportunities of value limit price differentiation which is important for maximizing consumer welfare. And they can lead to rent seeking and gaming. With the alternate over to the panel and let them handle the rest of this. Lets your next from shane. I want to thank you. Im sure youve taken many emails, phone calls and have a lovely thanksgiving. The dad said explain why we dont have Net Neutrality. This will be somewhat results i just want to review real quick the issue thats been brought up that seems that a natural thing we want no throttling or blocking. Most of these have been agreed to by the isps merger or acquisition. Those reasons why you might want to do any of these things. Ill highlight those. With transparency in place youll understand why this took place. This is a major reason why we have cyber attacks. If you dont have an ability to throttle or block its one of the reasons why we had the major iot where they could take Baby Monitors and operators over. You can see that on the system where you are in the stack. You might be the isp. Now they can see and have to let it wash over them. A lot of the great things we are seeing with 5g one of the reasons why selfdriving cars will work is because the information flow will be seamless. The information flow to be seen seen seamlessly may need to prioritize the information that comes fr