Chairman, and thank you, mr. Wheeler for your long and dedicated role, and i know it is often thankless. While opinions differ, your dedication is appropriated. Chair wheeler sir, i recognize your badge, and thank you. Rep. Russell thank you. You stated earlier today that it you came to an evolutionary decision because you determined it was reasonable for isps, but not reasonable for consumers with this ruling. Is it not true that federal taxes could be applied to consumers where it was once prohibited . Chair wheeler that is in the hands of congress. The tax freedom act specifically, the freedom of information act prohibits specifically that and whether that has changed is outside rep. Russell but from an Informational Service to a communication service, does it not lay the foundation for consumers being taxed. Chair wheeler again, that is going to be your decision and not mine. Rep. Russell was it possible when it was just an Information Service outside of title ii . Chair wheeler Information Services, some are taxed at state levels, i believe, and some some could be taxed at state levels, i dont want to say that because we have a tax freedom information act, and well, it cuts both ways. Rep. Russell article one of the constitution states that it is congress that has the power to regulate commerce. Do you believe this . Chair wheeler yes, sir. Rep. Russell do you believe that the public would have been better served by giving congress the chance to review the rules prior to their release, especially in light of your testimony today, where you said that rules have to apply across all agencies to be considered . Chair wheeler this has been, as you know, congressman, a 10year process there has been multiple input by multiple congresses along the way. There is legislation now which is entirely appropriate. I think what our job is is to take the instructions of congress as stipulated in the statute and interpret them in terms of the realities of the day. And that is what we did. Rep. Russell the quote that i would like to read to you by a Senior Vice President of a Communications Company says, the fcc changing a platform should be done after careful policy analysis and the congress, which is constitutionally charged with determining policy. Now, you and your agency have established a clear believe that belief that adopting these title ii rules would create problems, as we have seen in some of the email traffic that we reviewed today and you also stated in other emails that you produce to the committee that you did not intend to be a wallflower in your tenure at the commission. But given the coordinated efforts, and the pressure of the white house, coincidentally timed protests and other white house statements, would it be unreasonable, then, for americans to somehow feel betrayed that this decision was a cave against your earlier judgment, and damage the reputation of the fcc as an independent agency . Chair wheeler no, and i think it is also important to go to your key assumption there in quoting the Senior Vice President. The interesting thing and all of this is that there are four bright line rules, there are only four rules no blocking no throttling, no paid prior to her prioritization, transparency. You have been subject to this, and we would never think of not doing that, so when this person says it is going to change the basic operation of the internet, there is some kind of a discord there, because as they are saying, oh we are not going to do that, but when they say we require that, it is changing the operation of the internet, and i think that kind of is an underlying tension that has been going through this whole thing. Rep. Plaskett i would hope as we move forward in the future, that there is clearly going to be lawsuits in this process, there is going to be continued discussion about it, and that we would make sure the congress regulates commerce. I personally believe that what we will see follow will be a taxation of consumers. I think had they known that, they would not have been so quick to click the internet like to get these 4 million comments, and i think we have set back free information and access to all americans. Thank you, i yield back the balance of my time. Rep. Chaffetz thank you, we will recognize the gentlewoman. Rep. Lawrence thank you. First welcome. I appreciate you being here today. My friend, my colleague, stated you did not intend to be a wallflower, and i find that refreshing. Those who take an oath to serve to be part of a regulatory process, you should not be a wallflower, you should be actively engaged, and i appreciate the passion that you have distributed today. I wanted you to know that when i came to congress, i have heard a lot about this Net Neutrality, and had done my homework, and i came to congress with an open mind and willingness to see both sides of this issue. I also am aware that over 4 Million People filed Public Comments with the fcc. 4 million. Most of them average people voting yes. And i also saw the president s comments on this issue. One of the things that i want to ask of you today, mr. Wheeler, its to really solidify you in this position. Chairman wheeler, you were supported by Telcom Companies when president obama selected you to this position, is that correct . Chair wheeler i believe so, yes. Rep. Lawrence and you were unanimously confirmed by the senate and the house as well . Chair wheeler yes, maam. Rep. Lawrence so it was not just one side of the senate, it was both sides. From 1976 to 1984, you worked for the National Cable television association, which is clearly representing these agencies that would be affected. From 1992 until 2004, you served as the president of the internet association, is that correct . Chair wheeler yes, maam. Rep. Lawrence clearly you would not be a wallflower. You know this industry while very well, because if there was ever such thing as an internet or an isp, you would know that, correct . Chair wheeler i have spent my professional life in this space, maam. Rep. Lawrence knowing this, would you push for regulation that you knowingly would be aware that would damage the industry that you represented for so many years . So the decision and the regulation that you advocated for, your position was, this would not damage, but enhance . Chair wheeler thank you, miss lawrence, that is a very good question, and i think there are two answers to that. Number one, i think that yes, i was the chief advocate and the chief lobbyist for those two industries, when they were growing industries and not the behemoths that they are now, a different time. I hope i was a good advocate. They were my client. My client today is the American Consumer. And that is who i want to make sure that i am representing. Doing that, you do not help the American Consumer by cutting off the nose of those who provide competitive Broadband Service to spite your face, and so what we were doing in this was balancing the Consumer Protection with the investment necessary to provide competitive Broadband Services. And i went back to my roots as the president of ctia, and when i was sent to congress, and they said we need to be regulated as a title to common carrier with forbearance, congress agreed with that and that is the rule under which the Wireless Voice industry has since then has had 300 billion of investment and became the marvel of the world. The answer is yes on both fronts. You cant help consumers if you are not stimulating broadband growth, but my job today is representing American Consumers. Representative lawrence questioning today is inferring would you support regulations and you eloquent inly said would you support regulations that would hurt isp just because the white house thought it was a good idea . Chair wheeler i have been trying to be independent and thoughtful. Uptotheminute lawrence representative lawrence do you believe that the intelligent would hinder the growth of the Telecom Industry given your 40 years of experience . Chair wheeler no and it is not just my opinion. When Major Internet Service providers like sprint and tmobile and Frontier Communications google, hundreds of rural providers, say that they to believe they will be investing and continuing to grow competitive broadband, i believe it is a reinforcement of this point. Representative palmer thank you for testifying. You claim to your Opening Statement that this was the most open and transparent rulemaking in sec history fcc history. You claimed that all your medications were properly communicated for communications were properly we have a slide. While they are working on that slide, i have here a copy of your ex parte filing for the president s statement on Net Neutrality. Mr. Wheeler, it is two paragraphs long, three sentences total. Are we left to believe the entirety of the white houses involvement can be captured in just three sentences . Chair wheeler i am now being passed, thank you. This is the letter, november 10. Mr. Palmer that is correct. Chair wheeler i believe there is a twopage attachment that gets specific and says what the rules should be, things such as that. That wireless should be covered, things like that. Mr. Palmer do they have that . I believe it is three sentences. Chair wheeler i disagree that they put in here the entire statement of the president. In which he was saying, this is what i think we ought to stand for. Mr. Palmer are you telling us that jeffrey came over to meet with you and just read the president s statement . I will yield back. Chair wheeler i do not think that was the question. Maybe i am confused. Mr. Palmer let me be more specific. Your calendar shows february 2014, you had two phone calls. The same afternoon, one with the White House Office of science and technology. Is that correct . Chair wheeler if the calendar says that. I do not recall, but if the calendar says that. Mr. Palmer you do not recall talking to mr. Podesta. Do you have any recollection of a phone call . Chair wheeler if the calendar says so, i will stipulate to it. But, you know, lets mr. Palmer do recall talking to the Technology Office . Chair wheeler i have talked to them multiple times. Mr. Palmer can you give us an idea of what was discussed in either of those calls . Chair wheeler what was the date . Mr. Palmer february of last year, 2014. Chair wheeler i do not know with the specifics of that call were. I dont call it. Mr. Palmer do you have a recollection of having those calls . Chair wheeler if my calendar says, i must have. I do not have a recollection of it. The other thing is, there was a whole bunch of things that are going on. That are relevant. But i do not know what we were talking about. Mr. Palmer it shows up on your calendar. If you are having a difficult time remembering the calls or certainly the content of those calls, should either of those calls have been recorded as ex parte contacts . Chair wheeler i do not recall the content. Secondly, as we have discussed previously, there are specific guidelines as far as ex parte as far as what ex parte is, and thirdly, there is and has been since the First Bush Administration a ruling that contact with the administration and with congress are not ex parte. Mr. Palmer last question. What other contacts the recall do you recall that you have had with the white house prior to april 2014 emails that have been publicly released . Chair wheeler you have my calendar and my emails. Mr. Palmer mr. Chairman, i yield the balance of my time. Mr. Chaffetz i recognize mr. Desaulnier. For five minutes. Mr. Desaulnier i just want to thank you for your service. I am tremendously proud of not just your decision, but your testimony today and how you have handled yourself considering your background. Coming from the San Francisco bay area, the importance to innovation for us, having many constituents who work at Companies Like facebook and google and apple, we want to make sure we get it right. And having a presence in my district of at t and comcast, i understand the balance you had to go through and the importance of your balance of your independence and expertise of independent commissions and relationship with the administration and congress. I actually think there is obviously a very strong argument to be made that someone like yourself or your staff are more appropriately situated to make avoid some of the politics and make these decisions. Having said that, i was particularly taken by your comments to one of the questions about whether you were by appearance looking like you were secondguessing your decision. And your response to that, i thought was very forthright and very determined and clear. That was to the decision. Knowing that the process is probably as important as the perspective of the process and the actual decisionmaking, how would you respond to the question of are you equivocating about your concerns about the questions you are being asked and the process . Chair wheeler i believe that we handle this, congressman, just as any other issue that comes before us. Whether it is exciting like this or much more mundane things we normally deal with. We use the established procedures and precedents very religiously. Mr. Desaulnier would you say that your comments about the decisionmaking, you feel equally as proud of the process. Chair wheeler i think the process works. Mr. Desaulnier you commented about the number of the input from the public in the form of 4 million comments. Would you describe the reason for that . I have gotten lots of input from average, everyday citizens. Would you describe the motivation . Chair wheeler you know, i think that the internet touches peoples lives more than any other network probably in the history of mankind. Everybody, believe me, everybody has an opinion about the internet. Everybody wants to talk about the internet. When you begin addressing issues such as will the internet continue to be fair, fast, and open, those are things it does not take an engineering degree or Computer Science degree for to be able to understand. Those are things that affect people individually. And i think that is why we had this kind of response. Mr. Desaulnier it is interesting seeing behind you a picture of the connection of the transcontinental railway. When you look from a Historical Perspective of how government and federal government has handled what considered aspects of the commonwealth, and also wanted to be fair to the people who were investing in the private sector, whether it is railroads or television or the media, from your perspective one of the concerns is who benefits and who does not. Usually, the poorest americans have benefited the least in the short term. Do you have any comments about the rulemaking about the Digital Divide . Will it help eliminate that . Or have sort of an opposite, how it would affect the poorest of americans . Chair wheeler if you do not have access, free, fair open access, then you per se have a divide. And so when we come out and talk about how there needs to be, no matter where you are, no matter what legal content it is, that there should be open access to it. That is the predicate to not having a divide. Not to say that there are challenges that we will continue to face. But that the baseline is there has to be open this. Openness. Mr. Desaulnier thank you. Mr. Chaffetz i recognize the gentleman from iowa. Iowa. Representative blum thank you chairman wheeler, for being here today and sharing your insight. I admire your tie. I did not get the memo. It is that day. I have a general question. Chair wheeler i grew up with an iowa woman who is big into irish. You make sure you well a green tie. [laughter] mr. Blum in your Opening Statement, you mentioned that one of the fccs goals is to protect the open internet as a level Playing Field for innovators and entrepreneurs. I am one of those innovators and i am one of those entrepreneurs. My concern, as a small businessman, is i have seen firsthand what happens to private and free marketplaces when the heavy hand of federal government gets involved. Typically, what happens, we see less innovation. Lower qualities. We see higher prices, higher taxes. An example of that recently of is the Affordable Care act which was supposed to level the Playing Field for small businesses. We have seen higher prices, lesser innovation, higher taxes. My question to you and the question i am asked in iowa often is what steps is the fcc going to take to ensure that the internet remains vibrant innovative, and open . When history has shown us, when the heavy hand of federal government gets involved in a free and vibrant market, bad things happen. Chair wheeler first of all, i would like to identify with you as an entrepreneur to another. I too have been a small businessman. I have started half a dozen companies. Some worked, some did not. Mr. Blum that happens. Chair wheeler you understand that experience as well, im sure. For the decade before i took this job, i was a venture capitalist who was investing in early stage internet protocolbased companies. So i know both personally from my own experience, as well as from my investing experience that openness is key. If the companies i had invested in did not have open access to the distribution network, it would have been an entirely different story. The thing that is most interesting about the difference mr. Blum what will you do to guarantee it . Chair wheeler you can tell your constituents that openness is the core of creativity. There should be nobody acting as a gateway and saying, you are only going to get on my network if you do it on my terms. And the key, then, is we go to the previous discussion that you make sure you have the gateway not blocking the openness of en