Nd so long as it is not inconsistent with the rest of it. It gives a most any authority to the fcc. This is a broad expansion. I pose the question, what happens when an fcc not to their liking grabs the regulatory throttle. That means that amazon betsy and every other m internet based company should be prepared to meet its new regulator. Look no further than your fellow witnesses, mr. Powell and miss baker, former regulators who currently represent the regulated. We who are elected to write the law and set the communications policy. My priority is to protect consumers and the internet we rely upon. My priority is to encourage its expansion and to various segments of our population that are underserved and too often ignored. We have taken on complicated medications challenges and produced good legislative solutions. We are stood up to special interests and stood with the American People. The draft legislative proposal represents our good faith effort. Our committee will not ignore our responsibility. As some of my colleagues know we have been working on the principle and draft legislation for months. We will take the advice and counsel from our Witnesses Today into full consideration. We will not let the Old Washington gridlock stand in the way of doing our job. With that i recognize the gentlelady from california. Thank you mr. Chairman. Todays hearing renewed a critical discussion about the internet. Should it be truly open and equal . Should privacy and the disabled be protected . Should every region, city, town and reservation have equal access to Broadband Speed capable of leveraging innovative online content and services6. I reviewed your proposal carefully and i commend you for finally technology that we do have problems with online balking blocking throttling and authorization. We agreed that it should apply to fixed and mobile band services. What is abundantly clear in the proposal is that it is to purposely tie the hands of the fcc to prohibit them from retitling it. On the one hand, the proposal will prohibit fast lanes, but under Specialized Services broadband providers can give themselves prioritized service and the fcc will have no power to define this. We want to have a system that can guarantee equal access of open internet to everyone, who will carry out and oversee this. This proposal carries an enormous bias against enforcement which does not give consumers a leg to stand on. It could unintentionally harm the 911 system, limit the authority to promote access by the disabled to Communication Services and could constrict access by competitors to utility poles. It also attempts to address describing specific forms of discrimination, but who today knows what tomorrows forms of discrimination will be. It takes away the authority of the fcc to address them. I dont think your constituents or mine are clamoring for a bill of rights for these companies. They are clamoring for an open internet, 4 Million People spoke out and our goals should reflect there. We should protect ordinary consumers, promote innovation and advance startups. When we do, our constituents should be 100 confident that these things will be carried out. Open internet is not only critical to the future but essential for every american to learn, educate, conduct commerce innovate, expand our economy and to promote democracy. It will strengthen the middle class and will bring more into it. The pats we take paths we take will determine our future. We should not be tempted to establish rules that will create new best practices. Does the gentlelady yield back the balance of her time . I yield the balance to doyle. Thank you mr. Chairman for holding this hearing. This draft legislation represents a step forward by my colleagues. That being said, the bill still falls short. It permanently revokes and significantly weakens the ability to encourage competition, broadband deployment and protecting consumers and their privacy. Technology policy needs to be flexible, not restrictive. It needs to be a adaptable to meet our future needs. The principles included are similar to what the fcc imposed in its 2010 roles. Since then we have seen battles of netflix and isps over interconnection. Renewed efforts by cities to build up their own infrastructure, to create jobs and continuing need for strong Consumer Protection. The last five years have been a lifetime in the technology world. I yield back. The gentleman yield back the balance of the time and we will now go to the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from michigan. This committee is known for working together to tackle the tough issues. The permission to get the job done were each side does a little bit to help the general public. The issue that has divided us for so long is how best to ensure the open internet. While i certainly believe that free markets address these issues, the fcc seems to believe that regulatory action is necessary. One of the only tools at its disposal is to provide tools from the roosevelt era to the 20th century. Giving the choice between enacting prudent legislation are leaving the fcc with the tools unfit for the task, we choose to take action. Last year we put together legislation that would codify the fccs authority. Legislation protects consumers and innovators. Our proposal prohibits Internet Service and providers from blocking content selectively changing the quality of traffic based on where it came from, and prioritizing certain traffic based on payment. It requires providers to be open and transparent with consumers, allowing them to make the most informed choice about their service. It also adds safeguards to close potential loopholes and prevent mischief. This should sound familiar to my democratic colleagues because they are the rules many of you and the president have been calling for. The fcc has spent years trying to craft rules that achieve those same goals. Much of the bills language is taken from past fcc attempts. Limits on the commissions authority have resulted in years of litigation and uncertainty. The consumers deserve certainty to know that they are protected by the rules. So they can move forward in the Business Models because without that certainty they suffer and consumers lose. The baggage of the law is created for the monopoly Telephone Service. Only Congress Give the commission the tools. In the internet era and beyond this draft legislation provides a sustainable, responsible path to appropriately and effectively address the concerns from the left and the right. It puts to bed one of the most contentious issues and allows us to move forward in double of modernizing the nations communication law. The act can bring bipartisan change for the communication law that but we first have to come together and resolve this decadelong debate over the future of the internet. I yield the balance of my time to mr. Barton. Last night after the president s state of the union i came back to my office and did a little video that we put on my facebook page. Also i believe we put it on twitter. I have a 9yearold son, who has an xbox, playstation four, cell phone, knows how to use the internet better than i do. Hes spoiled. His mother bought him all the things. Anyway, my point is to paraphrase, president reagan, he asked the American People are you better off today than you were four years ago . When you look at the internet you can ask the consumers are you better off today than you were four years ago. I see the advertisements every day. There is a texas plan right now give me your bill cut in half. Im not going to name who is offering that, you all would know if i said it. The internet is not a monopoly like the Telephone Companies were in 1930s. Its one of the most vibrant markets in the world. Some of the people that are at this table helped develop policies to make that possible. I dont have any time that im supposed to yield. If the chairman would give him at least a minute i would ask consent that he has a minute. Thanks to the witnesses for being here today. The fcc has indicated that it is moving forward with the broadband Internet Services under the title to Communications Act to be at this course of action will bring legal uncertainties, innovation investment and negatively impact american consumers. Even though this is a classification recognizing the challenge, but would attempt to circumvent by for bearing the sections of the law, the plan that would only seem to magnify and further postpone innovation. Avenues of ending the longstanding precedent of the light touch Regulatory Framework that governs the internet would add unnecessary regulations on broadband providers and restrict the ability to continue investing the networks that the consumers demand. Thats why it is performed by the chairman and senate and with that, mr. Chairman, i appreciate the consent. The gentleman returns the balance of his time. Before i proceeded to mr. Load who i believe this is your first hearing is the Ranking Member of the full committee. So we welcome you for that. We will add with unanimous consent and extra minutes to your side of the aisle. And ive been told that apparently during the opening statement, the microphones literally on the side where they could hear them screaming on the internet apparently not on your side. So i think weve got that corrected now. It was an attempt to throttle. [laughter] it wasnt supposed to catch anna along the way but anyway, i think weve got that. I think this has something to do with the deflated football. [laughter] ohio state im not going there. Its been painful enough. With that, we get serious and i recognize the gentleman from new jersey for six minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Let me start by stressing the importance of the Network Neutrality. It is a surprisingly simple concept that consumers cannot big corporate interests should control the access when they go online and it represents the idea that Small Businesses should be able to compete on a level Playing Field. Access has become a critical part of all of our lives and its how we apply for jobs and how we help our kids with homework and grow our businesses and that is why 4 million americans reached out to the fcc, demanding strong Net Neutrality protections. And those 4 Million People expect that we here in washington will pay attention. Im heartened that my republican colleagues agree that we benefit from the rules of the road and forced by the fcc, and i welcome their interest in the Bipartisan Legislation so long as it is truly bipartisan from the start. Mr. Chairman, i dont want to undermine the fcc authority as i think you suggested. And i certainly dont think that that will serve to protect consumers. The fcc must continue to serve an Important Role in the broadband age and gain the cop on the beat standing ready to act whether it is to protect the Consumer Privacy to encourage the accessibility for americans with disability or promote broadband deployment in rural area and just as important as must maintain the flexibility to keep up with new technology. So why are we in congress continue our work i do expect the fcc to continue its work. These are complicated issues with answers that have taken the fcc nearly 13 months to craft the rules that responded to the needs of the American Public and congress couldnt be expected to get out in 13 days, days, so why are the fcc to continue to move forward as we begin this legislative effort. It has been over a year since they wiped off the Net Neutrality rules so its been over a year since consumers and innovators last have a Strong Network neutrality and if it is too long. The time for the fcc to act is certainly now. I look forward to working with my colleagues and the commission to ensure that the internet remains an open platform for the commerce innovations and selfexpression for generations to come. I would like to yield. I know i have an extra minute, so i would like to yield two minutes and then the rest of the time which is almost two minutes to mr. Rush. I thank the Ranking Member who yielded the time and of the witnesses for being here today. The American People have spoken clearly on how important the internet is too daily lives. And ive heard from hundreds of my constituents who right, call or come up to me to share their thoughts and i heard the message loud and clear when i hosted the hearing in sacramento last september on the Net Neutrality. I must say it is remarkable how it has shifted on the Net Neutrality. I am glad that my republican colleagues now agree that there are threats to the internet openness. I am concerned about the unintended consequences of the current draft bill. In particular, it could undermine the effort to transition to broadband, putting at risk broadband deployment and adoption advances in the urban and rural areas. That said, i do believe that there is a role for congress and that is why i introduced a bill with senator leahy to instruct the fcc to write rules that ban the socalled internet fast lane. The bill has two components. It bans the agreement and it doesnt take away from the commissions authority. By contrast, the republican bill attempts to ban the agreement. I am very concerned that the overly broad definition of the Specialized Services in the bill could serve as a loophole for the partisan schemes. And create a 2tiered internet system. The internet is dynamic. We dont know what tomorrow will bring. The fcc flexibility to adapt to changes in the marketplace. As the Congress Considers legislation, it is important that the fcc does not slow down or delay the vote. I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues and to ensure the bipartisan fashion to raise the debt neutrality rules and i yield to the congressman. I want to thank the gentleman gentlelady and the Ranking Member. For two decades now the battle on how to best ensure the free and open internet has been persisted as a clear victor of or clear verdict. All of this uncertainty harms americas broadband consumers. Chronically and it disproportionately disconnected segments of our society and our local and state and federal governments and even our nations economy. Certainly, it also affects Broadband Network and edge providers as well but make no mistake about it, it is the consumers that stand to be the biggest losers of all. Many consumers weigh in with congress for the strongest rules possible. These broadband consumers and users have said they love and depend greatly on the Broadband Service. And that they want for the services to be provided on a level of competitive terms. They also said to us with passion and fervor they do not trust the broadband providers would honor those terms for the selfish and anticompetitive motives. This should serve as a powerful reminder to us and the issues arising around this controversy and its propelled by the bipartisan concern and minimal to the bipartisan resolution and compromise. He is concerned all broadband consumers and citizens in our society regardless of the political affiliation. We have all seen and heard however that this manner is too important for the congress to stand by what you consider or markup only the majority republican draft. It is my intention to introduce open internet legislation in the nottoodistant future. I would hope to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle with aspiration that whatever legislation is hammered out that it will be nothing but bipartisan. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, i yield back. That takes care of our colleagues for opening statements. We go to our panel of the witnesses and we are going to start out with what the federal Communications Commission we are delighted to have you back before the subcommittee and we look forward. Please go ahead. Nothing like starting with some easy. Its a fundamental constitutional principle that the congress establishes the law and the federal agencies implement. The Net Neutrality debate raises critical Institutional Policy and practical problems that only congress can fully address. The open internet struggle has been long and torturous precisely because the congress has not established a Clear Foundation for the fcc to act. The commission has turned itself in knots for over ten years trying to adopt a simple set of internet regulations. To review the commission for its tether even where it found merit in the rules themselves. If the Congressional Authority is the problem, then surely the congressional action is the solution. In the absence of such action, the commission is poised to try again with another approach, prompting a third round of litigation with an uncertain outcome. Congress has the power and the responsibility to end this roller coaster which is damaging to everyone other than leaders lawyers and advocates. The title ii approach being pursued is establishing an fcc ruling and Regulatory Framework over the internet but congress has yet to fully consider and consciously adopt itself. Congress adopted the title ii 80 years ago to address the parameters of the telephone regulation. The technologies were radically different. The prevailing philosophy favored monopoly rather