tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN September 21, 2016 12:00am-2:01am EDT
>> afternoon. i am the director from stanford university we are thrilled to host this event today. i also like to recognize us senator and also thanks for coming out to join us today. our discussion is titled innovation with u.s. defense policy. and it will take a deep pocket held unit states has used his defense of the nation and whether that remains a feasible proposition. once the novel is use of self technology satellite command and control is now being challenged by new technologies like cyberand autonomous weapons. with the research and development process will
u.s. continued technological dominance? what role the is the private industry play? our moderator knows both of these well as the former washington bureau chief to have from rose seats to the most consequential security events of the last few decades. after retiring from the dr times and also served as secretary board of trustees then veer share but will be a fascinating discussion also to incredible public servants the honorable parry from national security for nearly half a century. starting his career writing
intelligence reports as his advisers join the height of the cuban missile crisis after he was named 19 secretary of defense. leading efforts in the post-soviet era with the transition into the post cold war world. 1997 president clinton awarded the presidential medal of freedom from but career in government taking of another form of service and at stanford a senior fellow at the food for institution pdf for international studies. ashton carter is the secretary of defense the chief executive and defense policy advisers for men and women of the united states armed forces devoting much
of his professional life to advance science and technology in the united states a variety of positions in the pentagon including secretary of defense under secretary for acquisition and logistics and assistant secretary for international security policy. the visiting fellow at the hoover institution together they have spent years focused on how to maintain peace and stability they code directed a program focused on how to do large-scale threats from emerging. the collaboration is successful because of the admiration and respect.
in those benefits it is has brought to the security. i would like to give special thanks to the team and the pentagon staff for making today happen. both participants have chosen not to speak about policy under consideration by the administration and will not comment but further we have the secretary for about 30 minutes and thanks for doing that. there is a change in the middle please remain seated at that point. >> of course, it is no accident they are here to
assist discuss defense technology. started his life as the mathematician with a ph.d. in mathematics and physics. when you look back at the history of innovation with the defense department you can find scientist as the catalyst for that type of change. we don't have much time but i will be mine do that science and technology and defense in is indivisible and if you pick up the story with world war ii, working as the head of science of research and development with the manhattan project of world war ii which was staffed by many eminent scientist as what i would
think of as the first explosive . the allied to call innovation in the fifth postwar period in the eisenhower administration the nuclear navy and the development of the first reconnaissance satellite. if you jump ahead the next big . began in the carter administration largely thanks to carry to win a secretary of defense and by the way also a physicist. and miso the beginning of the developmental efforts that led to the gps system, stealth aircraft and
munitions. the subject of today is what people are referring to as the third offset, with the prior offset which is done to give the advantage of technology where we lack some of the of manpower to replace the of threat to of the warsaw pact. you have launched interesting initiatives. and from what i read for more semi a autonomous weapons with silicon valley. in the goals for white even blake to achieve the top two or three? >> the goal is from all of the of predecessors to make
sure that we read me the finest fighting force in the world. for two reasons that matter civil different subject and also where innovation matters. the other is technology. and rugby are doing today is an technical substantive terms to keep up with the times. you mention cyberand autonomy. and because that is the revolution coming after the information, we need to be there for that as well but it's inefficient, we are present across and will always need to be there is a stylistic change from the
time when i was working for bill and i will tell that later laugh laugh but first of all, i always tell people be buy things first and foremost, and private industry. some of the key is the relationship with a private technology sector. the alternative was tried by the soviet union and it did not work out very well. it has always been our relationship with private industry that has ben the channel through which we got the best technology. the past to be different in today's world. in the world where i began.
in those-- the technology of consequence mostly was american and much of the government sponsored were still major players but they are not to be taken for granted. but to have that dynamic and innovative culture of the united states from when we started my career. barre is a change in that technical substance but also change of style where ucb all the time in the palo alto area and elsewhere trying to connect to the innovative community with the recognition, it was part
of my dna to have a responsibility and a connection to public life. that just is not a reflex anymore. we have to reach out especially hard to connect. >> one of the things that you are doing is experimental. these units have been set up >> we will keep going because there is a lot of technology. is this a cyberworld we can talk to each other but proximity matters to have somebody in the neighborhood to reach out to meatball people with the mental territory that matter so we are grateful to stamford
which is important part to set up but then up in boston that had a somewhat different technological center of gravity from the valley. that is good then just last week, vibrant technology. if you talk to somebody and give them a chance, these are young people who want to make a difference. just like the hoover scholars. they want, what is up here to make a contribution. when you tell them they can do that and that is meaningful and to make it possible he done have to join the non-military but
there is a way to make it possible to go in and out to broaden themselves and recognize these kids are different from our days and we have to adapt if we draw that into my mission. >> with that defense acquisition world and a very slow-moving process and cumbersome and bureaucratic and what they seem to be doing is an alternative universe agile, accelerated agile, accelerated, buying things off the shelf for to be involved early on with the development of technology with military applications. this is not such an easy
thing to do but to face that resistance in that shares additional consolidated industries? >> bell last part is easy. no. the reason is a company that worked for us for a long time, they are in the same situation as high-tech companies that i just described with the department of defense who made the has good talent meeting to draw people into them with the importance of what they do. so every time i get someone to work on one of our problems to work for them
and in many cases, this becomes a theater for the traditional defense industry. and with that logistics' the job that bill had for herald and he does that extremely well it was a different era but it was the same. there are things that take 10 years to let everything take that long. you will fall behind because technology is too fast.
it is a double brandy. and the war's oddly it is a sour to agility because you cannot stand to be there on time. and fighting today. so we learned a lot about agility that i learned a lot about it but everything is perfect but they are in the same boat that we are. with every major institution they're trying to get the young people especially up-to-date in their environment and working on the problems that matter to
them. every petty here does the save thing, but competing for what you see around this room. they are up-to-date with the best military. >> >> it is not to agility. [laughter] but the missile defense system that we have been working non, shall we say are not perfect? my question is when you think about what you try to do with other acquisition what do you imagine r.d. one outcomes to the north koreans quite. >> first of all birth to rea to be deadly serious for a
moment and perry is someone who tried very hard. to be on dead different path. and it is not in the headlines. for the slogan is fight tonight. but because that is what we have to do. so we have a very strong presence that is an up army that it was once upon a time. we have a strong ally in japan. but unfortunately, the
diplomatic picture is bleak. and we continue to be ( but for ebs far into the future as i can see it is then deterrence. no i will differ with you a of that'll bit but we do try to stay ahead of the north korean missile threat to. and when it comes to a major nuclear threat like that, we have no way to protect ourselves except deterrence but we don't accept that and we are not going to for as long as we can possibly avoid it in reinvest allot
but you have north korea, problematic situations, russia, and what we need to destroy. pet north korea is one of those things that never seems to go way. once upon a time spent half of my time working for bill perry. was dead the serious. tonight tell u.s. story first? because it is aimed at some of the who for people who are figuring out where to go
. for what bill has done but this is the of most noblest way to spend your lives that it is to have nothing better to go home to tell your family. the bill would not know this but you did not know at the time. i was a physicist absorbed with physics and i went to raise scientific conference. about particle physics.
and the public interest speaker and that our was freed long -- and analyze cheerleader that -- a year later the essentials ec was badgered about smart weapons by the audience and the question that they thought was what will you do with these complicated microchip enabled the will never forget the phrase how will some sgt fix that? peace said they will not fix it they will throw out to get another.
[laughter] i said that it is interesting answer. smart. gaslight he is doing? and a lilt light went off down the road when i was louvered into this just do that for one year. [laughter] here we are 38 years later. with a little spark. he is something else. but for white young person in the audience to connect the mission and understanding and about autonomous weapons. but that raises possible
additions of the future of those missiles aboard is this something you can imagine? and with the use of lethal force. and that it is necessary. to have the greater and greater degree of the ability to carry out certain functions. and to continue to think of that overall system. >> but interestingly before
this started, i issued a directive because i was deputy secretary. and a directive that says exactly that. there needs to be a human being in the decision making with uh it united states military. >> also with the downside of technology and the loss of privacy, as you want the programs but one change the legal and political or moral questions. >> and now this was four
years ago to talk about autonomous systems. and so was privacy was concerned we are eager mess consumers of information protection because there is nothing more important. a cybermission. that is what i tell our cyberpeople because there is no point otherwise because they are all connected so we have to have the network projected so we, winning the
network did the largest of the world's. but that was awful of protection be key and. >> but there is a future but they are full verbal to hackie and in this speculation talks about a nuclear war. potentially to be resolved in a situation where the systems could be taken over by foreign powers or terrorist organizations. >> not in that case or a special case of the safeguards i do have confidence.
the aunt who will take an interest i set up an innovation board, jeff and reid hoffman looks at personnel things and what i've said to them as i don't expect you to know anything about defense. that's not the point but you do know what the forward-looking companies and people are thinking. tell me some things that might be valuable and useful. we can't use everything but one of the ideas i got early on and this is the kind of thing i've asked the board to provide me more of it turns out the entire government have ever done the bounty which a lot of companies
do and it's when you go out and invite hackers and then report for a reward of some kind, vulnerabilities they find. and nobody in the entire government -- it was spectacul spectacular. we offer free a friendly and very thorough examination on the attack surface from which we were able to make hundreds of adjustments and the kind of thing that you can pay for and wouldn't necessarily be as good. it's a pretty cool thing to do.
as i think about myself cutting to audiences and trying to draw people in. a great majority but not all of them have served in the milita military. how can i connect to them and inspire them with a greatness of doing something in public life. it was a very big inspiration for many other people in my generation but certainly he not only represented that connection of thinking and understanding to
my apologies. knowing what you know about innovation in the military knowing what -- is trying to do, what would be your advice and what should be on the lookout that is going to surprise him and end up in some of the plans? we talked about how autonomous they are today compared to 20 or 30 years ago. i think of them as remotely controlled. we don't have a doomsday.
make about that story now is that our computer was making an error but the system understood and therefore luckily for the country and all of us it's a thoughtful general who made the right decision. that is a very important point. >> where do you think the trapdoors are since you've been down this road before with new technologies with other things can turn into problems?
we do not have the capability and the government to make state-of-the-art to get that done and the industry is different than when i was the undersecretary of defense getting things developed. people then understood the importance of assisting in what they were doing. he's creating this industrial and one of the main planes is to get them on our side doing these things and we will have good
results. when i was in the several years ago when they did the strategy, more than 95%. one of my jobs wasn't just to bring in the smart weapons and so on but simply to get the agreement upgraded for the cost of advantages and the reliability advantages. they never talked with each other so i created one program
normally it was too advanced to the next level of the design for military equipment so we put out money and invited companies to bid and required anybody that bid on this program have to have a team. the good that came out of that was far more important. >> secretary carter eluted in his comments early on in the
cold war balance of power in the soviet union. in the sovie soviet unionthe sod there for over three years. the soviet union was technologically backwards. they may have been a superpower militarily but technologically they were not even in the race with the united states. today when you think about the things ash carter is trying to do with artificial intelligence and the kinds of startups that spring up in silicon valley we think about other countries in the world specifically china
which is going to have a technological progress as the united states is going to have so when you think about this how does that change the stability issue when you're trying to develop. >> i'm in my firs met my first e soviet union and prior to that i got all of these intelligence readingratings of how they workt tall and so on. so when i went there and visited people finally this is a third world country.
of the stealth aircraft that technology was based on theoretical work that had initially been done in the soviet union by a scientist and they were either unaware of the potential applications of the technology than to the stealth aircraft so that is a kind of striking example in some ways a. basically what we were proposing to do. they said look th what the answe were three times as many, who needs it.
carter is trying to do, on the one hand the pentagon is trying to do business with silicon valley. a lot of the biggest companies felt as if they been violated by the department. after all, let's not forget the nsa in the department of defense so how does he bridge this kind of cultural suspicion in the defense department? >> with great difficulty. they are dealing with the countries and companies they want to deal with and reading the bill. all of these things annoy people
and you don't have anything to balance because of the danger and theft. he's having a hard time getting support from the companies. he's put time and energy and applies to the management by walking around. he went to silicon valley for times meeting of the companies at the highest intermediate levels so he's trying hard. >> we have one more question. my question is looking ahead to the next administration whichever candidate ends up as
president i than the current administration there was no guarantee they were going to be carried through to completion by your successes and future presidents so what is your advice let's assume what ash carter is doing is smart and pivotal to the future defenses of the united states, what's your advice to not only his successor as defense secretary but even more importantly to the next president and to the congress which first of all has to cut the check to pay for these kind of projects. >> that is a good question and in the field of national security, there has to be some nonpartisan approach. but also an even broader area.
when i left the pentagon with its offset strategy of the development has been completed and we have the stealth airplanes into the first test flight we've done in about three and a half years but it still wasn't fully operational. so if the administration had dropped the program, that would have been it. i was concerned about that and some of the other programs we have going which were not even publicly known at the time. so not only had they not been supporting these programs but they didn't even know about a good many of them. in fact they did just the opposite and took the program from the stage. think of the f-117 smart weapon
and all these things where they made a tremendous difference in the outcome and i felt a sense of pride but i also understood my successor and his boss not supporting that. so it's a very important point and we have to hope he will be sustained. if it is going to be carried forward i would have said probably not. but they did follow it through. >> questions from the audience, please and keep the questions brief, please.
>> i'm with the project on government oversight. there's been a lot of focus on science technology. we have the greatest technology in the world in the military, the option in the marine corps we have four tanks in iraq and even with all the great technology, we are 0-for in the fourth-generation even with all the greatest technologies. somalia in the early '90s and now in iraq and afghanistan it's very hard to say that we've been
successful and we've had all this great technology so what can we do to make sure that we are actually creating the right technology to properly implement the art of the war flex >> he might give you one footnote that when he was the under secretary of defense. the primary one was protection for the forward operating post. they became convinced that it
was something they needed done and concluded the best way to solve that problem. that could be best done by a balloon on the ground. it was a case the system didn't permit us to bring a stealth airplanes to the fresh flight in three years. but people can do it and what he did in afghanistan before we set
up a special case to push it through. it was easier to do than it is now but it's still possible to do it you have to give some forbearance from congress which in that case the observation person in afghanistan but generally if you have a good idea you have to be willing to take a chance. a very interesting example that isn't applicable to development of the spy satellites i wrote a book about this in the problems
and the deficiencies in the pentagon acquisition system and dwight eisenhower so when he became president in the new technological innovations were being promoted gave them to the cia about all people so in the development of the first photo reconnaissance satellite system corona they have zero technological background but he knew how to get something accomplished. he had an anecdote for the aides were writing with him in washington. they said i don't care as long as there is no traffic coming that's the way that he ran the satellite program. other questions?
here's the microphone up front. my esteemed colleague. >> i think it's on. >> i was stuck on the statement here that information technolo technology. it comes on the heels of mike hayden having said verizon does a better job of protecting information than the u.s. government does and i think that he's accurate because even the cloud system shows we have this enormous amount of information that we depend on. is there a disconnect between the priority number one and the fact that there's not an effort
we have the most networks in the world and most formidable in the world. we have to have top priority protection >> of the arms control association we have a related question. as you know the pentagon appears to be planning for how to use cyber attacks with respect to any nuclear command and control.
there are many who see this useful approach and see this as possibly the other edge of the sword of it could be a double-edged sword not just for the u.s. but other countries. what thoughts do you have about the considerations of policy planners for the decision-makers as the cyber attack and defense issue in the command and control? >> sometimes the way to deal with an attack is to attack ba back. we have to be the very best and
will let me preface my opening statement is severely hurting then designed in the interest not of my personal feelings but the importance of the relationship between congress and this institution. so i want people to understand as said make my remarks the germain of which it is intended. people used to say telecom policy was not partisan and both parties could find common ground to work together but that bears out with those previous chairmen combined with the open meetings during the tenure
for co-chairmen velar this is with a highly partisan agenda with ideological belief. the chairman has forced votes on party-line items just to put that into perspective, a three years the sec has seen twice as many partisan votes as in the previous 20 years combined. once a very rare are standard operating procedure . free and open end internet innovating offerings and privacy protections all have broad bipartisan support. so why do they advance policies? for consumers and innovators of the bipartisan solutions can offer. i am the first to reality that but with choosing a
path over collaboration by relying on unnecessary tactics there is missed opportunities for bipartisan accomplishments. and used as a political weapon to use e disclosures with that partisan agenda. i reiterated my call to be as transparent as possible not using the disclosure would lead to a better process that the agency which in turn readily look at that issue as they seem to be a minor transgression transgression, and this case it illustrates the divisive leadership approach into the future. but partisanship has been
used for the following things how the internet is regulated, stripping important responsibilities from the ftc and a failed attempt by municipal broadband overturned by the courts from increasing the size of the universal service fund while undermining bipartisan efforts to representative improve accountability be unnecessary unlawful disclosure of trade secrets and the plan that could be adopted this month to dictate the future of television app. the common thread is to install the fcc has the most important player in the landscape. if you are the innovator
with uh consumer based app make sure if first conforms by the sec if you are able subscriber. enjoy it while last while the commission may be okay it could be unlawful next year. if your small business seeking a new way to promote your company on line, sari it is prevented them from the dominant players of the advertising market berger rather than exercising humility over and over again the fcc banks and permission to innovate on several locations refusing to support these actions. it is far less complex
refusing to defend municipal broadband this all stands in contrast of republicans and democrats and congress with of bipartisan act with kerry's law. and the liability act. and even here the commission has reached across the bipartisan wirth. looking further from the telecom agenda while admitting this committee has done its work.
but what they can do when it works toward bipartisanship. and to make money to fuel the next-generation allow all members to respect the allah two-seat consensus whenever possible. doing so will result in agency actions and further the goal of improved credibility of the statutory responsibilities. on a side note as part of the jurisdiction as society
is hard to overstate. there at the center of america's lives and the increase over time but regardless of who is in charge it is important and worthwhile to hold oversight hearings and to date should be viewed as a regular biannual schedule for oversight. i will now recognize the ranking member for his opening statement. i also have a rather hard hitting opening statement and i certainly knowledge with you a harley charged -- highly charged partisan times in this committee
whiff the relationship that you when i have personally personally, cuts through that partisanship to come up with bipartisan solutions with issue after issue. if you look back across uh charged that your staff just held up, the administrative agencies often reflect - - reflect the times in which they are holding the administrative hearings and this is one of the most contentious as the matter-of-fact it is still beyond my and standing when one of the two republicans was confirmed between the two leaders of the senate
that then pleaded fact be confirmed as a follow-up and now was the agreement. can you imagine mike mansfield? i have heard stories when a democratic senator does not keep this word to republican senator in the whole state of that this city, vp of tim :dash would we buchanan and why do we still wait for the confirmation?
and i said this with a day heavy heart because of the relationship that you and i have bad how we can get some things done the the of the stuff which just recently the faa bill. so here we have the fcc, a very full and ambitious agenda and while proceedings like this one on broadband and privacy are incredibly important, now all i want to free consumers from having to pay those rental fees for the set top box. everybody agrees we need to
move beyond as technology rapidly expands is the set top box. to the marketplace should constantly strive to give consumers what they want. condorcet as much in 96 think use senator from massachusetts. and congress set up as much when n and be required in the fcc to give consumers alternatives to the box top. baguette 20 years have passed and consumers still look at them like the after market and we are beyond that. the is why this senator is fully supportive of the fcc efforts to use its a third -- authority to give
consumers relief. as the chairman has discussed buying encouraged the your relentless drive that has gotten us so close to that shared goal. we have spent a great deal of our time in the senate to put politics aside as we have stated on a number of issues i learned not matter how good the proposal och -- it will not be success. so we sit here two weeks from a planned vote of the proposal and i hear from many stakeholders we need to
continue to need work and i share those concerns and stated those to you and i stated those publicly months ago. if we stay on the present course i fear the fcc actions to promote the set top box competition would be tied up in the courts and hamstrung. we just experienced that reality with neutrality which created a decade-long fight to leave consumers without effective consumer protections and they use the broadband service. it is my hope to take the time necessary to reach out and in good faith to resolve some of these concerns so we
can once and for all free consumers from the monthly set top box. and is very important to consumers and needs to be done. i will mention a couple of other issues and at the last oversight hearing, mr. chairman reed talked about the need for congress to act today as the ongoing evolution of our nation's infrastructure to the next generation of 911 as a public safety priority for the federal government and states, also with this transition to make sure that 911 service remains robust and able to respond adequately in emergencies.
we've rely on it and we hope it is a call that we never have to make to make that a reality throughout the entire country. i will be offering for the co-sponsors ship in the near future legislation to promote the development of the next generation 911 services to make this transition phase success. and i invite all of our colleagues to join. with that, if the key for the opportunity of working with you. >> we will turn to the panel
will come to all of you as always hear delighted to have you and hearing from each of you today. please proceed. >> senator nelson members of the committee, addis a certain november even to approaches of this may be mass last appearance before this committee i will cooperate fully with this new industry shin to assure a smooth transition, but i do want to take this opportunity to observe the privilege to work with this committee over the last three years. i am grateful to the committee for recommending my confirmation, and the dialogue we have had i look forward to the continuing
today. one of the dialogues is from senator nelson that the benefits of the ip networks are simply not being realized because for far too many americans next-generation networks don't exist not only defers see advantage of technologies but increases the risk of the 911 failure to those that our off legacy the old debt networks are under attack last saturday's washington post had a big article how they can and have shut down 911 networks.
the fbi is reporting record lovell's of attacks on the 911 systems there is a crisis cooking in the 911 networks to be necessary for this important public safety issue. as has the referenced the commission will vote whether to fill a mandate to ensure that consumers have competitive choice of the access satellite programming and last february we put forth a proposal to follow the command of the committee patients act that the commission shall adopt regulations for commercial liability and cable services.
i have heard the question now is why are you doing this of the market is working? it isn't. ninety-nine% of consumers have no choice despite that statutory mandate. the cable industry has been playing our role but dope for 20 years and created a licensing body, but failed to license that technology in a meaningful manner. :then in 2008, the age of the set top box is behind us open cable in is here.
eight years ago fancied nothing happened. to be filed in the proceeding that consumers should have the option that should accessible tight channel services without the set top box applied by that provider. six years ago they have seen nothing happened. the recent harris poll shows 74 percent of consumers believe the rental fees are too high. and for good reason and bonds steady submitted that they have increased 180% during nsa . over the other consumer electronic by 95%.
and consumers charged 1.$6 billion as congress mandated to have an alternative bill last seven months working with the parties to improve and simplify. when the cable industry proposed a more simpler approach we adopted that. will also adopted the programmer suggestions to ensure that copyrights are protected end to end. we're now at that point where each commission reviews the of work to make suggestions for improvement in have demonstrated our willingness to make significant changes in the original proposal while remaining faithful to the statue of looking at the colleagues in but in this
process of which we are engaged. for the of losses angeles times to editorialize that it shows how the fcc can live up to the congressional mandate allows saving u.s. consumers billions of dollars and the commission should move forward to correctly a assess how they are protected by the improvements made. as the commissioners said when we adopted the agreement, it is past time to live up the statutory obligations to foster the competition that consumers deserve. finally let me close by expressing high of the
commissioner can continue to serve. this committee knows with the chairman disabilities said depth of the understanding and is chairman of the agency i hope we continue for the insights of leadership. >> thank-you chairmen. commissioner? >> good morning. chairmen and ranking member and members of the committee thinks the opportunity to appear before you today. i will start by noting what is important door obvious we begin on the anniversary of one of the darkest days what happens 15 years ago changed assault to leave an indelible mark ended my
family is personal as one of my relatives died in the twin towers. it is just as important to recognize what has not changed we're optimistic and strong to strengthen our economy to give opportunity and in light of public safety to focus on today specifically what can be done right now to improve the nation's emergency system. 911 is the first telephone number we teach our children we learn by heart the hope we never have to use. across the country we called
911 over 240 million times per year. seventy% to raid over wireless so the fastball, are coming into the nation nine women centers but this is a problem. this is changed so much in our lives of the 911 call centers. i know because i've visited nearly two dozen across the county's last pet to arkansas. from california to colorado and in this sense that work is not being done but the last two years alone the fcc plan in place qualities for text robocall 11 to devise a framework to locate callers
using wireless phones and this is progress. but what comes next is so much bigger. to support a whole range of data entry dictations but it will mean the ability to provide first responders with the instantaneous picture of a fleeing suspect to deploy the limited resources. and to fully reflect the digital age to historical support the nation 6,000 to 911 call centers over a global affair there is no national program or a revenue source but still
there are two things we can do right now to jump-start local modernization. first, end of version 2.$5 billion is collected each year to support to service and those are typically a small long lane item. but then thieu's those dollars collected for the 911 purposes. the last years they have data eight states transferred funds for other purposes. including what has nothing to do with public safety. did in the past they have used these with a dry cleaning services for state agencies. but in the middle-class and
i'll legislation when one is run by the fcc to raise enormous sums. of $115 million but it has young -- yet to begin four years after the legislation was passed. the best near-term and resources we have for next-generation in place and while the funds are limited to have a broad impact use them wisely as the blueprint to update communities nationwide and when we do those debtor shortchanging
their programs should be at the end of the allied. i've looked forward to answering any questions you may have. >> thanks for holding this hearing in 2012 ahead is a privilege as broadband a deployment to free a up more spectrum for use. to build upon those sentiments expressed with those sentiments add i share but a particular to reach a bipartisan consensus to show a tremendous leadership the first is to ensure direct access at 911 ong with senators gordon and it was
sold in the united states for the 911 colleague as the default setting that to be sure that it always works. second i would like to commence my home state senators for introducing of bill to help law-enforcement locate wireless callers in emergencies by insurer in they have critical access to information it is inspired of an 18 year-old whose parents i had the opportunity to meet earlier this year. she was kidnapped and almost four days later law-enforcement found her body.
she was raped and killed and left 20 miles from where she was inducted. it never should have taken now long to find kelsey. she had herself all but the family and local law-enforcement and fbi were not able to get the geographical courts from the carrier but when they did it took law-enforcement approximately 45 minutes to locate her body. meal the law that bears her name works over 20 states have enacted similar bills to help locate victims and save lives i firsthand have learned that a baby was saved as a result i hope the bipartisan uncompromising can be reached to allow that lot to be enacted. turning to spectrum the one
to commend the chairman and ranking member of the committee for passing it i'm especially grateful for asking the fcc to open in the spectrum. the legislation recognizes it is the key part of cover future and critical input into american leadership into the space. thanks in no small part your efforts the fcc expanded the reading to include 17 gigahertz additional spectrum many were identified. i am glad we reach dave bipartisan agreement the hope we move quickly to achieve of resolution and finally to touch on an error another area in involves the
next-generation broadband in april broadcasters and the consumer electronics industry filed a petition to give broadcasters the option and intern we put the employment and the results was clear with widespread support no dispute the next-generation will allow broadcasters for the american people easier with the mobile devices and broadcasters can provide emergency alerts with localized to affirmation in much greater data. i believe it is important for the sec to act just as america is leading the way of global technology, so too we should be at the forefront of innovation and
therefore hope the sec will notice of rulemaking no later than the end of the year. day que once again for giving me this opportunity to testify with afford to continuing to work with you and your staff ahead. >> as i stated before while fundamental differences matter of the commissioners still seek to find areas of agreement i will focus on just three issues fell will answer all your questions the enormous functionality has help to cultivate the in the state's long insatiable demand to produce a global race among certain countries to be the world beater in the markets of the next
generation of wireless services, they referred to as 5g to effectively produce amazing speed and capacity fatefully the united states is on the accelerated pace to help shape the global market place for the next decade or two. to make that requisite bandwidth available to successfully include the spectrum to do additional bands and standing in the way are some localities tribal governments and states seeking to extract these four providers that are not conducive to a deployment schedule the commission may need to exert authority to preempt the activities of those without
the justifiable reasons. switching topics to the set top box, recently circulating the new alternative one that i have added levitated and i could say i appreciate they would jettison the model but it comes with its all baggage is headed in bracing the distributor filed proposals the latest version has complicated to that offer affectively threading to undermine the ability the proposed rule would set the commission up of the compulsory license that we have no authority to do to have the programming contracts with the programmers and tacked to be prohibited from signing contracts with programmers
to create a reasonable limits complete with the starter list of terms that are allowed or unreasonable or why the space in between. glass issue is the overall functionality but during that time with the shortcomings i certainly believe there are better ways to operate the commission that doesn't jeopardize the prerogative for power of the chairman of matter food that maybe i have given speeches sort testify or have written laws to discuss at length the steps to correct the bad practices but unfortunately to make these or other changes in favor of many of my suggestions. if the commission will not
fix it self conscious will reuse the subject. i look forward to engage in with you on these subjects and others. >> members of the committee, good morning despite in overnight flight data arrived, and know that i am honored and painful for the opportunity to bring robust connected the eight to all americans there is much to report and in april connecting communities as of the desire to see and hear as well as those without i've visited new mexico
where i jewelry and put it in the days following my visit but despite living just 20 miles east of albuquerque his staff would fix at $52 per month and in his letter he describes broadband as a cold hearted necessity in the digital age per card fortunately my experience travelling across the country has demonstrated that the story is not unique . with a solution of focus policy a georgetown university the 10 states including arizona california new york pennsylvania south
carolina washington and west virginia. i am also excited to share the commission will have the proposed rule making later this month that stems from independent programming. more than 36,000 from the prior notice, it has built a record that shows there are real challenges facing independent programs. for consumers this can mean higher programming cost as well as well limits the ability with their favorite content through on-line platforms. the commission promised taskforce focuses on the intersection of broadband and just last month relaunched a new tool that allows federal state and local agencies as well as the private sector to examine the relationship
between connectivity at the local level to identify current issues to develop future solutions to address the connectivity gap to promote the health outcome and from this initiative those counties are 10 times more likely to have low broadband access and high rates of diabetes. lead comes to the intersection of broadway and are concentrated in the south and midwest with the public of private-sector tour improve infrastructure and deploy a health technologies and finally a believe the commission is on the cusp of what it comes to deployment of services we have seen the name for mobile data continue to grow
and even a few years ago. the first of many steps of the technology is moving to the new age of increased connectivity is essential that those that are in the high urban areas that industry and government work together rather than widen the digital divide in this country they give for allowing me to share and added four to answering any questions you may have. >> can we get you a cup of coffee it? [laughter] >> despite uh charisma to put people to sleep you have
been up all night. we will proceed with questions i have of list of members but as i pointed out commute presided over the most the three party-line votes and i say that because i am concerned for future fcc chairs if there is a republican fcc to just reverse and to reverse the of majority on and on saul my concern is your view whether that approach could lead to a destabilizing and
endless cycle of regulatory uncertainty which is what everybody who follows these proceedings that is involved with is concerned about to create certainty and that is sa way of the current pattern or trend because future commissions, then with thought party-line vote. >> you raise a legitimate issue and wind of the saving graces is the need to make at decision on of record. i agree we don't want to have up and down with the situation. any changes are based on the record but your chart is correct and i presume that
you did but, 90 percent of the decisions that we make our unanimous and i was sitting here trying to think about the times when those votes were being voting against my democratic colleagues on the of question for those that were the three on the alaska plan for carriers at was the commissioner and i that were the three we could pull things out the spare -- in
the spare moment but this is of body with the deliberative process is important, and i hope we can find ways to resolve issues in a common banner. >> i will shift gears to just a minute but chairman reed his opening statement says all copyright licensing agreements remain in tact with the set top box with those deals made with of content providers and not affected by the proposal commissioner you said that it prohibits them for signing contracts that the agency deems to be
unreasonable swine wondering do you think that is accurate or misleading to say it would have no effect on freedom of negotiation? >> i do think it is inaccurate and allied why because it puts the commission the middle 2% them from signing the contract from what we deem dazzled reasonable. that is usually done at the bureau lovell but that puts the band of middle those accurate to say we're leaving them intact. but nothing prevents them from going backwards. >> in your opening statement
you find that particularly helpful in with our discussions 25 ill comments with the final rule the fcc flu dash sec withy privacy protection by with like to know william of an opportunity to read you mean the proposal before you vote on it? >> the just to make sure this is what the process is about. end if there asa desire to remove the specific provision, we can do that.
the matter of interfering with contracts however, a to make a clear point was we have been saying we are not setting up ourselves to second-guess the contract after it has been done by what provision the commissioner is referring to is that they cannot be hated that manner with programmers. as you know seven or 82 weeks we held extensive discussions with the cable industry and programmers. this was a provision that the programmers specifically asked to protect their contracts.
they can say i am protecting the programmers and if that was a mistake, as was anything else, and we have a different approach, let's do it. let's get added to deal with this process so the door is not closed on anything. to the privacy question it did file on privacy and dave had made multiple suggestions to us then terms of how to approve our original proposal and as i indicated to you the other day, we take those seriously
and we are embracing them and what we do with the ongoing ftc. the authority on privacy is significantly constrained. in which a suit brought by a at&t indebted did not have any jurisdiction over any activity of any company regulated by the fcc. the ninth circuit agreed. therefore there is not an ability, if there ever were, for the ftc to exert its jurisdiction or exert to
authority over the question of the privacy activities of common carriers. but the question i had do they have an opportunity to comment? >> as recently as yesterday we were working with them. >> they can make a public comment certainly. >> anybody else before i had and that over? >> i was agreed with the assessment to underscore the importance of releasing the documents but server betty can have a chance to see exactly what they will be focusing on because they'd
declare certain contractual terms and they cannot be allowed to enter into even if they're asking to be included in the contract. >> i noticed in each of the opening comments, you pick up of the bipartisan flavor that we commented upon earlier and the needed to build consensus. commissioner already coming in your confirmation you were asked how you can ensure there is not a partisan divide pass and you responded that you have the
history of working across the aisle. that it is good but just a few months ago you said in a press conference, in every dash me of the old phrase on capitol hill, and never count on a democrat to hold their photo dash you hear the chairman and me talking how we tried to operate in the best traditions of the senate, when i hear comments white that made publicly in which you, in effect insults every aid democratic member of the senate, and then i