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 here goes to part of it. We are all in three different locations right now and we were sitting lean around the same table to discuss this but, 19 changed the lives of so Many Americans in so many different ways, virtually overnight our lives shifted to the internet, whether for work or doing or educating our kids or exquisite accessing telehealth. We saw tremendous spike in that traffic 2030 increase of the fcc immediately went into action to make sure that our network continued to perform and importantly that americans got to stay connected. Im incredibly proud of the work fcc staff did and they were also in remote locations after we shot the building down but we took a series of steps to support internet conductivity when so Many Americans depended on the internet more than ever before and so im proud of the amount of work our staff has been getting done this year. Host joining us to look at some of those policies is cat of the washington post. Thank you for having me on the show. Commissioner carr, following up on that point about the pandemic. We are early in the school year and you mentioned the shift to School Online for so many communities who are dealing with the pandemic so you been reading stories all year about children having to logon to school and parking lots or getting left behind because they dont have reliable Internet Access in their home. What steps are you taking at the fcc to address that Digital Divide . Guest closing the Digital Divide has been the top priority for us at the fcc. Im proud of the amount of progress that has been made in the last three years alone. If you look back at the Digital Divide it is narrowed by over 30 in the last three years. Read more miles of highspeed fiber buildout in this country last year over four and 50000 miles connecting a recordbreaking number of homes so we really are lucky in the sense that the pandemic hit after we saw this explosion of Internet Connections being built. To your point, no one is raising a Mission Accomplished back at this point. There is much more work to do so we partnered with a lot of internet providers over the last few months to launch new or open up existing ones to more eligibility, low income programs to make sure that families, particularly those of School Children have access to the connections that they need. That effort has included partnering with the department of education which has a 16 milliondollar funding for Education Stabilization Fund and work with them on ways to open up that funding to provide connections to schools and kids dont go to local wifi hotspots together local connection. Given the fact that this pandemic is dragging on longer and looking like some schools may be having students logging on from home for at least several more months, do you think that Congress Needs to address these access issues in a potential stimulus package . Guest i am open to congress providing additional funding, particularly but the sec could help further close the Digital Divide were putting resources into it and just this month we were starting an auction of up to 16 billion to help bring Internet Connectivity up to 10 million americans that for now have not had highspeed services and were voting this month on a 5g fund to open up mobile highspeed services in rural areas or putting resources to it but Additional Support from congress to fully get this job done would always be welco welcome. I wanted to ask because you mentioned 5g. Just yesterday we saw the apple unveiled the new 5g iphone and we saw the verizon ceo talking about how 5g is now a reality. Where should americans expectation be on 5g can actually buy into that hype that we are hearing from the private sector . Guest we have come a long wait when you think about 5g, if you flashed back to 2015, 2016 there were analysts including deloitte that wrote that while the u. S. Let the world in 4g there was about to be and there were say 5g tsunami from china and other countries making it nearly impossible in their assessments back then for the u. S. To catch up and what weve seen is not the u. S. Providers have been slow in building out but that the u. S. Government was slow them down in terms of their ability to build out these networks. Weve engaged in a series of steps over the last couple of years to clear the unnecessary regulatory red tape and the u. S. Has the strongest 5g platform in the world and to your point the news of the new iphone coming out with 5g i think is a great indication of how far weve come in this country with the 5g network. Theres always the challenge of the chicken and the ache and is the Network First or user devices first and i think this announcement about the 5g iphone really secures in everyones mind that 5g is here and now we will have these devices in the hands of millions of americans potentially around the holidays and so people will see for themselves the impact that 5g can make in their lives. I will also add the handset that was the main functionality of the 4g network is probably going to be the least interesting thing about 5g now record 5g is much more internet things, virtual reality, augmented reality but i do think the 5g iphone is a significant measure as to where we are in the u. S. With 5g builds. Host commissioner carr, given the two issues that cat has introduced already, Digital Divide and 5g do you consider broadband expansion and these issues to be an infrastructure issue much like rails and highways . Guest its an infrastructure challenge but the solution is not the revelatory approach that happened when you want to monopoly utility because of the end of the day americans want choice and want competition but it is an infrastructure bill that ive spent a lot of time in this job outside of dc in Rural Communities meeting with telecom tax that buildout this internet structure because it is a build project at the end of the day. That is why i love the fcc to modernize our Wireless Infrastructure rules so that these internet bills can accelerate and we seen the results of that. Internet bills are accelerating in communities across the country in fact we had this great job story right now where there are up to 20000 jobs that we could add just with tower climbers alone to complete the countries 5g build. Its all right to view this as an Infrastructure Project and we need to make sure that we can drive down the cost of those builds. Host if the congress were able to introduce an infrastructure and omnibus info structure bill would you want broadband to be included in that . Guest i think it makes a lot of sense. Again, a lot of Funding Sources we are pulling on right now, 16 billiondollar fund for fix and not access, 5g fund for mobile but there will need some Additional Resources to fully get the job done. When you say what kind of number would you put on that . Much money does Congress Need to allocate towards these projects . Guest if you look at where we are with the fixed side we have allocated roughly 20 billion, 60 million for a first space, potentially 3 billion for another phase in this first option will give us a lot of information so we set up where we have 60 million and providers can bid down from there if they can provide connectivity and the information is a significant indicator of the remaining amount of funding that we would need. I just wanted to switch gears for a little bit because were getting close to the election and a big issue in this election is social Media Companies and how they are monitoring content. Republicans have traditionally supported a more light touched approach to tech regulation but we now see President Trump calling for section 232b remote and passing executive orders targeting that law. Do you think this is a change in how conservatives think about regulating the Tech Industry . Guest i do think the debate over big tech is a microcosm for a broader debate taking place within the conservative movement. I think there are some who embrace what i would call abject corporatism which is different with what you let off which is a light touch regulation. I think we should bring a light touch approach to regulating big tech but up till now theres been a no touch approach and we never had a gap between the size, scale and power of an institution like big tech in the absence or near absence of regulation. Get internet providers. At the sec we dont have a complete handsoff approach with respect to isps but we have a transparency role that applies to them and ive called for bringing some of that same type of light touch regulation too big tech, including application of a transparency rule, including getting back to what i think is the original intent with section 230 and the courts have given that provision and expansive reading over the last couple of years and just this week Justice Thomas waited with a very similar view about courts going beyond the limited protections at 230 affords big tech. A light touch approach but i think the no touch approach would have up to now is not in the best interests of americans. Host branded card when you talk about the original intent of section 230 what are you referring to . Guest its a number of provisions and one of them talks about not treating an internet platform, website like the speaker of the content that was provided but Justice Thomas walkthrough in a statement recently about how that doesnt mean not to treat them or doesnt give them immunity as a disturbing her so if they know about illegal content on the website that may necessitate them taking action but we seen courts read into 230, not just immunity from liability you would treat as a speaker of content but also liability as a distributor of content so there is a more limited view of 230 based on the tech that we seen from reports. Thinking about that dynamic where you have the courts interpreting it in one way, do you think it should be then the role of the fcc to redefine section 230 or should it go to congress or perhaps even the Supreme Court now that we hear Justice Thomas wayne and . Guest i think the fcc has the authority to address section 230 and we should very congress placed 230 in the Communications Act and its very clear if you look through the case law on this issue that we have authority with respect to the provisions put in the medications act. Whether it is a rulemaking or desperate ruling i think we should move forward and look at the terms of section 230 in providing Additional Guidance about what those terms mean. Trumps executive order earlier this year opened a common time and pass the f cc with section 230 and where did those efforts stand and do you see the agency making any changes since section 230 but to work before 2020 . Guest the fcc put it out for Public Comment and hunt of comments and reply comments i been surprised at how sort of robust and full the record was in response to the petition and now the fcc is reviewing the comments that were filed and the fcc chairman ultimately will decide when and if we move forward but at this point i would say we are still running our normal course with respect to that petition and i dont know when we would move forward in terms of timing. Host twentysix words that created the internet, no provider or user of an Interactive Computer Service shall be treated as a publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider and how would you alter that, commissioner carr . Guest one idea laid out in the petition filed by the sec pursuant to the executive order was this idea that you have not just that provision, those 26 words but there is other sections 230 that talk about Good Samaritan productions. In other words, if you engage in a takedown of content you would have to do it on a good faith basis that this was in certain specified, ill be at broad, criteria. I think one stop we been asked to do is to clarify it when that other portion of section 230 applies. When idea is the language that you applied that you read should apply when a provider takes no action in response to a post going on the internet but if a platform will take down content that post should look closely at that separate provision that imposes arguably a higher bar on when you can take down content. Take down content with 230 protections so the petition filed with the sec was very clear that if a platform wants to take content down it can and it can do so pursuant to its First Amendment rights but the question before us is whether it can take it down, not just for cement rights but with the bonus protection of section 230 but protections that a lot of other political actors dont get to benefit from. Commissioner carr, a lot of president s attacks on section 230 and the executor border that he passed addressing this came right after the Tech Companies took action to moderate his own tweets or posts on their services, particularly twitter decision to label some of the president s tweets that they say violate its policies. Some of the democrats and president s critics see these actions as the president trying to work in the heat of the Election Year so what is your response to that . Guest we see this a lot in debates in dc, not just tech policy but the idea that the president speaks about it and there is automatically a lot of opposition to it but i take this issue right on its merits. There is bipartisan support for reforming section 230 and there is still in congress by democrats and republicans and partisan bill so i think the fact that President Trump has advocated for section 230 reform is meaningful to a lot of people out there and how they perceive this issue but i think all of us should move beyond any particular individual on this and look at the core merits of the issue. We seen from Justice Thomas to att to think tanks like Free State Foundation that have come out in favor of section 230 reforms and again in addition to the bipartisan movement we see on capitol hill. I think the days of maintaining the status quo with respect to big tech, whether 230 or broader scrutiny of the sec in a period of the coming to an end and that is a good thing. On that host would you like to comment on whether section 230 hertz Michael Oreilly and getting reappointed to the fcc. Guest i dont know. I did not have any good occasions with the white house about that and would defer to them to articulate their position there. Host katz, sorry for interrupting. No, sorry, its difficult with this zoom format, peter. Just to followup on that that trump has called for congress to confirm Michael Symington nomination to the fcc. You support that nomination and do you think congress should confirm him . Guest i defer to the president on the decision to nominate him and to the senate on their prerogative to confirm. For my part i think that nate would be a great addition to the sec team and has a lot of private and Public Sector experience in telecom and ive enjoyed getting to know him since his nomination was announced by the president but otherwise defer to the president and the senate on that issue. Thank you for correcting me on the name. I just want to ask what we talk about the senate as well we got a big hearing coming up with the ceo of several major social Media Companies, google, facebook and twitter right before the election. If you are a lawmaker in congress what questions would you have for those social media ceos . Guest its interesting because i think the debate about social media has sifted substantially in the last six, seven months. Used to be that people would say look, there is no bias being exercised by the companies and there is no, you know, market power they are applying and i think the cognizance has shifted around bias, the suspense about not being biased or statement of the course they are allowed to be biased because they are private platforms. I think its good to the sea that shift in the debate and then the debate becomes can they engage in this by his conduct within the meaning of section 230 or has their content moderation and other practices far outstripped the type of conduct the congress had in mind when the past that provision. The additional scrutiny is needed. Again we never had an institution in history that has as much power as big tech. I think youre seeing pushback from the right and pushback from the left. A lot of the left meaning ideas for solution on ones i endorse. They want to break up big tech and ban all mergers and thats not where i am but a put forward a plan that would bring accountability, transparency and user empowerment. I think 230 is a necessary part of that effort but is not sufficient. We need the federal trade commission to apply closer scrutiny to the Business Practices here and we need to make sure antitrust authorities have the tools to regulate fastmoving sectors like tech. A lot of the tools we have in antitrust were designed for slowmoving monopolies like railroads and oil industries. Im not calling for a whole sale rethinking of the consumer welfare standard but antitrust authorities have the tools to see how quickly things change intact. Take facebook instagram. We really have the tools back then 2011, 2012 to see how quickly instagram could scale to be a competitor to Facebook Connect maybe we still wouldve approved that and maybe not but im not sure we have the tools to actually see where that market was going so i think there needs to be zoom robust tools there. Host perhaps this is a theoretical argument but when you look at social media sites and streaming services and cable and broadcast all are treated differently in the regular tory market but they are all essentially providing the same service. Is there an argument to be made that there should be more coordination and how they are all treated . Guest i think this goes to the point about section 230. When you look at these different mediums and potentially political actors at the end of the day we singled out the largest institutions in history for special protections in section 230 that i think go beyond the actual words about law so i think that underscores the rethink but there is a broader competition that we are seeing. If you step back from the entities you talked about to the fcc right now we are seeing increased competition from fixed providers, cable providers, competition from 5g mobile providers and competition from new, low earth orbit satellites and i think that competition at the end of the date will be a really good thing for extending Internet Access and driving down costs. Host cat. Commissioner car, the House Democrats recently released a report findings from their antitrust investigation into the Tech Companies and you know, it sounds like you are talking about the need for greater enforcement of existing antitrust laws. Were there any recommendations from this report that you personally agree with . Guest im not had a chance to read through that report but i do welcome the additional scrutiny going on right now. From my seat we recently reviewed a transaction, sprint and tmobile. It highlights the concern that i expressed earlier with facebook and instagram. In some ways this was the other side of the same coin brick a lot of people looked at sprint as a number for wireless carrier in the u. S. And they predicted their antitrust tools that it would be the fourth competitor into the market but if you understood where sprint was you would understand the dynamics of the compete in the 5g space and you could see clearly brent was effectively a dead man walking and combining sprint and tmobile would be much stronger competition to verizon and at t. Were saying that with accelerated bill that tmobile is engaging and that competitive responses were seen in the market and again the broader dynamic is do we have the tools to see where the fast pace sector is whether with sprint, tmobile or facebook or instagram so i would welcome any antitrust tools that would allow people to get a clear picture of where the markup is going. Host commissioner carr, one of the issues the fcc has been dealing with is the installation of 5g powers so what is the status of working this locality on this issue . Guest this has been one of the unheralded success in the last three years and 2017, 2016 we were at serious risk of falling behind china in a global competitors and adjust talk too much to build the infra structure and it took too long. I led the fccs effort to modernize our wireless and for structure rules and to support 5g we updated the federal environmental Historic Preservation roles that now make sense for 5g and sharepoint we build on it some comment sense that state and local comments and put some guardrails that put exorbitant fees are long timelines that it may be okay to build 5g in new york or San Francisco but it sucks up all the capital you would need to build in smaller communities. Weve engaged in a five or six different reforms that are paying off and today 5g is live in places like sioux falls south dakota and a couple weeks ago i was in defiance county, ohio where there was 5g live. Those are much better measures where we are as a country today than we saw 5g and some of the big cities. Commissioner carr, the pentagon put out a request for proposals related to spectrum for 5g and its causing some backlash from the wireless so do you have any comments on that rsp we recently solved in the pentagon. Guest the pentagon put out and theres been some discussion about an rfp and there was a dod official just this week that said it wasnt clear whether or not dod was moving forward with an rfp and the official indicated that they are more contemplating 5g uses for their own sort of internal uses and they werent looking to create a competitive or commercial 5g offering and she said thats true and that makes a lot of sense but for some who have pushed for a different approach and what some is viewed as a nationalization of 5g and ive written opeds on that and laid out why that is a mistake. Again, if youre looking for old data 2015, 2016 data maybe you can make an argument they are about the need to take drastic steps to accelerate 5g build so if you look at where we are three years later in the current data 5g is now live in this country nationwide and weve accomplished that not bite mimicking the command and control approach communist china but by getting the u. S. Government out of the way and letting the private sector build and invest so that is the successful model we should continue to go down. Host commissioner carr, and are two or three minutes that are left i will ask you a question and then i will let cat close with a closing question. I wanted to take you back a few years, one of the former commissioners Mignon Clyburn democrat, highlighted the prison phone rates and that was an important issue to her. Has anything been done about that since she left the commission. Guest good bruise moves on that. Commissioner clyburn we think her for her advocacy on this issue. Within the last month or so took a vote to address some of these issues and determine pie recently have been coordinating with state regulators to address issues that are outside the issue of the fcc and restarted to see additional action of the state levels. Its great to see that progress and the other thing that was telehealth and that something weve also built on and i led a new Telehealth Initiative and as covid head we were able to use that docket and that procedural vehicle to stand up a 200 milliondollar covid19 Telehealth Program and now traveled to ohio, michigan to florida to meet with some of the beneficiaries of that program and again worked on commissioner clyburns leadership and they were able to see a 20, 30 fold increase and they were able to meet that demand due to the funding and support for the sec provided. Proud of the sc work on telehealth. Host final question. Commissioner, the election is top of mind for Many Americans heading into the polls on november 3. I wanted to just ask you you mentioned about the bipartisan. [audio difficulties] how do you think a trump second term would differ for biden presidency when it comes to. [audio difficulties] guest i can focus on what my priorities would be, whether majority or minority, i think they stay the same. First and foremost we need to take action to rein in big tech them in section 230 reform. We need to continue to build out internet infrastructure for the private sector in an raising internet speeds double in this country over the past three years and we need to continue to build on that momentum and make sure the private sector continues to bridge the Digital Divide. Host brendan carr is one of the three republican commissioners on the federal Communications Commission and cat it covers technology for the washington post. We appreciate you both being on the communicators. Guest thanks. Thank you. You are watching cspan2 your unfiltered view of government. Created by americas Cable Television company as a Public Service and brought to today by your television provider. With the Senate Confirmation hearing for judge Amy Coney Barrett concluded watch the next step in the confirmation process starting thursday live and 9 00 a. M. Eastern the Senate Judiciary Committee Votes on judge barretts nomination and friday live on cspan2 the full Senate Begins debate on Amy Coney Barretts confirmation. Watch live on cspan and cspan2. Stream ondemand on cspan. Org or listen live on the free cspan radio app. Former National Security advisers john bolton and retired general james jones talk about the most serious foreign and domestic threats and they share their thoughts on the evolution of the different administrations, coronavirus and the next administrations priorities. Such an honor to be here and of course very impressive panel and im honored to lead this conversation today. Gentlemen, do not need an introduction but for good measure i will run through the very, very top lines of their bios. General james jones as executive chairman emeritus at the