tv Politics and Public Policy Today CSPAN September 26, 2016 1:00pm-3:01pm EDT
get to 5-0 where we can. it seems there are two principles to adhere to when we're trying to get to 5.0, right? one is compromise. and i'll get to that especially on the set top boxes in a minute. and the other is conduct. you know, the exchange that senator nelson said with commissioner o'rielly i thought was important. not because we want to single you out, but because all of us say things that maybe don't lend themselves to get to 5.0. i just offer to you, commissioner and to all of us that we ought to think through whether or not what we are saying is constructive and leads us to strengthen the institution of the fcc, which has done so much over so many years. and to strengthen the institution of the senate. and this committee to get back to that history, that disposition of trying to get to 5.0. so now on set top boxes, i absolutely support the principle that people shouldn't be ripped
off by being forced to rent a device. that is a commonly held bipartisan principle. and i wasn't without some objections over the months and years. but now we're very, very close to getting across the finish line. my concern, both on process and on policy, is that the thing that i thought i was trying to and advocating for may be accomplished in the next 15 days. but hrts of other things which i think deserve more scrutiny and oversight and discussion may also be accomplished. and it's not at all clear to me that it is necessary to do all of these other things in order to get across the finish line when it comes to providing consumers with some relief on set top boxes. i'm absolutely encouraged by all the commissioners's willingness to kind of get at what the offending provisions may be. i heard commissioner o'rielly
and pai talk building how -- talk about two positions, how licensing would be overseen in the future by the mission. and commissioner rosenworcel and wheeler talking about their willingness to discuss and probably pursue a compromise. and so i want to just get as clear as i can without sort of referees the commission's deliberations. first, for commissioner wheeler, it sounds as though you are open to modifying this to accommodate some of these quite legitimate concerns. is that accurate? >> yes, sir. if we can do that and protect the mandate from congress, which i believe we can. >> commissioner pai, part of the difficulty when conducting a negotiation is to find out
whether or not these are two of the many objections that you may have to the current proposal, or if these are the two main objections. to the extent wheeler makes accommodations and you pop up with three new objections, and i'm not suggesting you would, i want to be clear if we're trying to get to 5.0 and he does back-flips to accommodate these concerns, we don't find three new concerns 72 hours out. do you want to comment on that. >> absolutely, sir. we put our suggested changes that we vote on at our monthly meetings. on our internal chain, sometimes several weeks in advance so everyone knows what the universe of our concerns might be and what our proposals are. those are two key ones. another one, on i don't want anything to inadvertently delay innovation. any change to the standard licensing agreement has to be approved by the media bureau. that might slow things down. the other thing is i don't want mbpds to be either deterred or just delayed in introducing new
delays in their new equipment. they would have to ensure the consumer experience is replicate on every other app. they have to make it available on every other platfor >> you are just flushing out the original objections. these are not different objections? >> well, this is related to it. it is related to that core concern. so that's one of the things we're going to be hopefully talking about in the days to come. >> okay. thank you very much.
>> thank you, senator schatz. senator daines. >> thank you. in the expert of senator ships let me take a shot at that as well. in march of this year, the united states house passed the small business broadband deployment act. it was a vote of 4-11-0. very few votes in the united states house where you have a zero on the end of anything. it then came over here. this is my bill. it passed this committee 21-3. that's a pretty good shot. three touchdowns versus a field goal. so that's about as strong bipartisanship as we will see around here. the commission is set to consider extending the exemption again in december. it is clear that congress has spoken on this issue. i would argue it hasn't stuttered. it shouted pretty loud. maybe i will start with the chairman. do you agree that congress's intent on this issue is clear, and will you vote to extend the exemption for small businesses? >> thank you very much, senator. one of the issues about on the whole small business question, what is the definition of a small business when you're in the broadband business?
the sba defines a small business as $38 million or less in the broadcasting space. >> and a lot of times they are looking to stratify and look how you segment businesses within a particular vertical. congress has spent a lot of time, and we debated that. i worked very is hard with some of my colleagues across the aisle. we took a subscriber view of that versus a revenue video. 250,000 subscribers. >> we're sensitive to what you -- the interesting thing is 250,000 subscribers is about $250 million in revenue when you take a revenue approach. so you've got to say to yourself, are you going to keep transparency because it's too expensive away from consumers
who are on companies that do a quarter billion dollars a year in revenue. i'm not trying to be judgmental with that. that is the facts. what we're doing is we have until the end of the year to decide are we going to extend this or not. >> okay. so it's not so much whether we principally agree with there should be a lawn drawn, it is where the line is drawn? >> yes, sir. >> in the spirit of trying to hopefully generate more bipartisan agreements at the fcc level, congress has spoken very loudly on that, very clearly on that. and i hope you would respect at least our guidance there as you deliberate on where that line should be drawn. >> thank you. in fact, the only difference was a 5 versus 3 is the difference. we're in agreement on where the level we want it to be drawn. i want to shift gears and talk about wireless coverage.
in montana, the wireless coverage is really a public safety issue. many montanans, as many people live in rural areas live many miles from the next home, from a hospital. and having that kind of connectivity is essential. mr. chairman, you talked about competition. thank you for coming to montana. in montana, competition can be limited. and i'm curious on your thoughts on what can be done, what are you doing to promote competition particularly in rural america. >> thank you very much, senator. i think there's multiple things. one, i know your question was about competition. but first we have to make sure everybody has coverage. that's what i was talking to senator wicker about. we are going to adapt the mobility fund to work with that, to move towards that. secondly, i think that there are new technologies that hold great
promise. you know, there are, you know, rwanda, which is worse than montana in terms of disburtion has infrastructure sharing things they're doing. i suggested at the cellular connection two weeks ago, they might want to look at things like that. i think 5g and the promise of 5g, the folks of verizon has been telling us they think 5g is a rural solution in many ways. and they refer to it as wireless fiber. so i think that there are multiple solutions, including our policies, innovative approaches, and 5g. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm out of time. boy, it goes by fast when you're having fun. a closing comment, we are getting a fair amount of input about a.m. radio.
i want to share my concern. as is written today, it could leave some montanans without a.m. service. i look forward to working with you to discuss it further. sometimes you have a disconnect -- you can't get connectivity, a.m. weather radio is your link. it becomes a link for weather forecasts is and so forth for folks out there spending time on tractors. thank you much. >> thank you, senator daines. senator markey. >> two years ago i voted for commissioner o'rielly. i've known him for 20 years. he's a conservative. he's a republican. i voted for him. commissioner rosenworcel two years ago was promised a vote. by unanimous consent, we can bring that vote up this afternoon on the floor. so commissioner rosenworcel doesn't have that cloud over her head. and i ask we confirm her on unanimous consent. we can do it immediately. and i just think it is an
important statement for the committee to make. this is a -- this is a relic of the past. it's a typical satellite or telco top set box. it is today. this could be in your house today. this could be in your house 20 years ago. an investigation led by senator blumenthal and i found that one, approximately 99% of american paid tv subscribers, rent this set top box from their paid tv provider. two, subscribers spend on average $89 a year renting a single set top box. but the average household spends $232 a year on set top box rental fees renting about two and a half boxes. in other words, over 10 years, the average family is paying $2300 to rent this box. $2,300. that's a good business to be in.
the set top box rental market may be worth $19.5 billion a year. now, this little device i have here in my hand is an amazon fire stick. it costs $40 for a consumer to purchase. and there are many other devices like this out there such as roku, chrome box, apple tv. consumers today can use these devices to watch content from multiple sources. hulu, netflix, for which they also pay. but this device cannot play the programming package that consumers pay for each month from their cable satellite or telco provider. put another way. the only way for a consumer, the approximately 100 million households who subscribe to paid tv is to watch the programming that they have paid for is to
rent a box from their cable satellite or telco company. consumers cannot watch their paid tv programming on these third-party boxes. $2,300 every 10 years for this. good business. that's what the fcc is considering right now. how do we transition to the modern technology and not archaic technology. we did it with the black rotary dial phone. you don't have to rent that anymore from the telephone company. you can go out to the store and buy one. we had to change the laws. on the programming, the program was a big controversy in 1992. rural americans wanted 18-inch satellite dishes. but the cable dishes wasn't willing to sell hbo and showtime and cnn to them. so we had to change the laws to those 18-inch dishes could get access to the programming. it has to be reasonable. that's the standard. but we changed the law. who would imagine a world today without directv?
who would imagine that world? we had to create it. it needed access to the program. so this device is something that only the fcc now can do something about. the fcc's proposal will ensure that through an app created by the cable company, the cable programming package can be played on this third-party device so consumers aren't forced to continue to pay exorbitant rental fees. we don't want consumers to be forced to rent a box in perpetuity when they can buy a device that gets the same job done. that lack of choice has to end now. so chairman wheeler, you've heard these concerns on programming, on copyright. we had the same issues back with the 18-inch satellite dish. we worked it out. we created a standard that worked. we worked it out. so talk about how hope you are
-- how open you are to finding a common sense solution that works so over the next 14 days the consumers can be freed from these chains that have been binding them since the day they first had a cable system installed in their house. >> thank you very much, senator. i hope that the significant departure from structure but not from principle that our new proposal represents is a real life indication of how we are willing and seeking to resolve remaining concerns while allowing that chain to be chopped. thank you. >> and, again, if anyone wants
to continue to rent this for the rest of their life, they will be allowed to under the law. no one is going to stop them from paying another $2300 in the next 10 years. you still have options. >> the interesting thing i read in business week is that comcast is shipping 40,000 set top boxes a day, a day right now. >> that's our job and your job to find this common sense solution. but we have to find a solution. we did it for 18-inch satellite dish. we did it for the black rotary dial phone. past commissioners found the answer, and -- that's your job, and i urge you to do it in the next two weeks. i think americans will say that is one of the best days in history to be freed from this kind of a chain. >> senator from massachusetts, hold up that amazon fire stick. all right. there it is. the letter from amazon, the fcc, is opposed to this proposal, by the way, just point of fact.
>> i will add one more fact. all the programmers back in 1992 opposed having to sell their programming to the 18-inch satellite dish. discovery came in to me and said we don't want to have to sell to the satellite dish. i said you can write a note to me in five years when you have four discovery channels on satellite. i understand you have gotten a call you can't refuse. we know the only way this works physical we, that is the government, steps in to free up these programmers so they can sell to as many devices as possible. >> it is not often that a co-op their self-interest. but the statement is lay competition and delay customers from receiving the service they already pay for on the device of their choice. that is the statement. >> that is a concern about the licensing. it is not a concern about whether or not this device should be able to process the license part.
the cnn, hbo. we can work out this licensing board issue. and these commissioners are brilliant. they have the capacity to be able to resolve it. >> it would be good if they worked that out. it would be good if they published that so people could see it before they adopt it. >> next up is senator gardner. >> thank you, mr. chairman. senator markey, we finally found al gore's lock box. is that it right there? chairman wheeler, as we've discussed before, satellite tv subscribers in la plata and montezuma, southern colorado, currently received new mexico-based broadcasts. they left access to without over the air broadcasting. with significant mountains, denver, front range, durango. both broadcasters and satellite
providers continue to engage as they work to deliver colorado tv to all four corners of colorado. congress also worked to address this issue in the 2014 stellar legislation by extending the market modification process to satellite tv. as they crafted the final rules to carry out this provision i, along with senator ben and others, urged the fcc to permit county commissioners to petition for market modification. and i thank you for adopting that option. in light of the rules, the commissioner from la plata and montezuma county have expressed interest in moving forward with the market modification process. dish has indicated that providing colorado television is not infeasible. colorado broadcasters sent senator bennett and i a letter that they are willing to provide dish in the two counties. with this progress, i'm calling on the county commissioners in colorado at this hearing, the county commissioners in
colorado, the broadcasters, and dish together so that we can convene in a meeting next month in colorado to discuss ways we can reach a final resolution. i hope senators bennett, tipton will meet me in that meeting as well. we have to get this finally solved. so chairman wheeler -- >> i reiterate that. you've given to me here and before, will expedite any petition by la plata and montezuma. i'm sorry to senator udall, i don't mean to offend mexico tv.
>> washington, d.c., is the only place we make things simpler by adding to complexity. they quote simplified. do you agree with that, new rule simpler than the original plan and have concerns about complexity been addressed? >> wait a minute. you've got to push your button. >> as i said before, it's time to inject competition into set top box market. nobody has ever written me said they love their set top boxes. maybe that's happened to you but i pretty much doubt it's happened to anybody who has served in this room. a conversation to get a conversation started on this point. if i have one concern and i mentioned i to senator moran,
the licensing fee gets fcc in the business of trying to figure out model licenses. i don't see how that easily fits under the statute we have. so that would be the complexity that needs work, but i'm going to continue to talk with my colleagues to see if we can iron that ute and make it simpler. >> commissioner o'reilly, would you like to address the issue of simplification. >> i would agree. i think originally the apps proposal as presented to us was a much simpler one than we had now. the set top box proposal, i would hope we embrace more of the original apps proposal as was presented to us, and instead of adding in all these layers of f controversial c review, of programming agreements and standard licensing agreement and so forth. >> yeah, i would agree. i think that the -- what's been presented, circulated, is simpler than before.
it still has difficulties, and problems that i've outlined on the two major areas need to be addressed and hopefully we'll be able to do that in the coming weeks. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator gardner. senator booker has returned. senator booker. >> i'm really grateful and always excited when there is a corey to corey connection here. the corey caucus is thriving. >> both four-letter words. >> so as you all know, i was the mayor of new york and cities are where innovation is happening. they're finding creative ways to get things done, innovative private/public partnerships. i'm just excited about these mayors across the country, said no republican or democratic way to fix a pothole. you just fix it. so you don't see the kind of partisan rancor you see up here. you just see i've got people,
let's get it done. so i'm so supportive of the ideas of municipal broad band, especially in areas where there is poor or rural folks who aren't getting service. this idea that somehow the private sector is going to get this done, well, they're not, and other countries have greater broadband penetration than we have. and so we see that when it comes to overall, this crisis in our country, which i think is the broadband deployment, we have to focus on allowing municipalities to get things done. so the slow broadband or none, as a result, one of the early things i did as senator introduce community broadband act with support of my colleagues here in a bipartisan way to preserve the rights of local governments to invest in broadband networks. now, with consent, i would like to put in the record a new york times story from august 28th, that was really just disturbing.
it is about some folks who are rural consumers, who did not, in the wilson, north carolina, my father's home statement, and if i could have consent to enter this article into the record. >> without objection. >> but it's based upon a rural broadband program that was done by municipality, they were able to make massive investments in upgrading their farms to really fascinating article of innovation at the local municipal level and innovation in agriculture. but that's all now being put at risk. broadband law could force off super highway. this a bunch of people doing one line sports betting or whatever. these are folks that need this for education, that need this for work, that need this for their businesses. and so i was disappointed, if not angered, by recent court decision that overturned the fcc's actions for communities seeking to supply local broadband.
i was even more troubled to learn the fcc will not pursue the case further. commission's tight resources and i sympathize with the commission's tight resources and need to make tough choices, but i think we owe the american people a chance to fight, to make sure that they can get broadband access. so in light of the court's decision, how important is it then, and the fcc's inability to put the resources into pursuing this case? could you give a quick, chairman, a few moment thoughts on how important it is for congress, then, to act on this? >> a-number one importance. there is a few words. >> that's a few words. man, if everybody was as cooperate in my life as you are, i might be married right now. moving on. >> i can't help with that. >> moving on. i know there has been a lot of dialogue, and forgive me for
having to step out to vote, but i just want to get back to the set top box controversy. i have my own unofficial polling mechanism, which is when my twitter blows up, i know that this is an issue on the minds of lots of diverse interest groups around america. one of the most robustly debated topics is something that is great interest to me is a guy who has both a tivo in one room and a regular cable box in the other one. the product, the cable box is so inferior, so much more costly aggregated over time, so much worse technology. and i live in a poor neighborhood, below the poverty line and see my neighbors getting billed for this device. however, there are a lot of my friends, who i trust, who are some of the greatest companies in this country, who create
tremendous wealth, are responsible for the exports, who have expressed to me legitimate concerns. i would like to conclude, if you would, in the most succinct way before. i lost my notes. but you said that you've been talking with them, that you're 90% of the way there. i just want to, for my own benefit, can you be more specific about the progress made, what that 10% gap is and how do we get to a point where some of the value companies in america are satisfied? what's going to get us to 100%. >> thank you very much, senator. let me try to be succinct in a complex area. the congressman dated competitive boxes. the industry responded with a licensing body that they created. so all this stuff about
licensing bodies, a licensing body they created, that then put out -- then did not put out licenses, okay. now, as we look at this situation that we've got here, how do we set it up so that the industry, not us, is determining how this licensing structure works. but how do we learn from the past. so one thing that we did was we said okay, let's put a little tension on the board. let's put programmers on there so that the cable operators and programmers are kind of keeping each other honest. but you know, there is an occasional back scratching that goes on between those two, so we said, well, why don't we put on the equipment manufacturers, and have a three-way discussion there. so they're kind of everybody keeping everybody else honest,
so the licensing can move forward. absolutely not. programmers wouldn't agree. cable wouldn't agree. that will blow everything up. okay, so then who is going to be the trust but verify backstop in this. well, why not the commission. that's the thought process that brought us to where we are. as i have said repeatedly, we are now in the deliberative process at the commission. and that we are open to whatever can solve the problem that has been identified, in terms of licensing, which i'm not sure is a real problem, but i'm open-minded about how you solve it, and at the same time, respect the mandate of the congress that said thou shall have competition.
and i'm heartened by the commissioner up and down the table -- not mine, the commissioner up and down the table saying they want to work together on this proposal and i want to join with them and try and resolve this. >> i'm way over time. i want to thank you my chairman for his indulgence. appreciate it. >> thank you, senator booker. next up is senator sullivan. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to begin by thanking all of you on the work that you and your staff did on the alaska plan. i know that several months ago we had, we had a hearing where you all committed to make the decision, whether you were supportive or not by the end of the second quarter, and we're close. so i appreciate that, and i appreciate the work you're currently doing to finalize the cap two funding, and i know the
staffs are working on that with alaska's price cap carrier. mr. chairman, you mentioned it, it is all about coverage, of course, particularly in the rural communities, the extreme rural communities that i like to say i was out like all of us, back home over the summer. and was in a lot of communities that are still struggling. sometimes you think about the most remote communities that don't have a lot of activity. i was in alaska, dutch harbor. out in the aleutian chain. this is the number one seafood port in america. it has enormous economic activity out there, but still really concerned about, you know, the lack of broadband access. i know the work that the commission did is going to help on that. so again, i want to thank everybody for working hard on that issue from my state, which i think has some unique problems. or challenges. i want to broaden the discussion here, though, building on a
little bit on what senator daines was talking about, about small businesses and broad be it to the broader issue of the lack of economic growth that's going on in the country. this is an incredible dynamic industry that all of you oversee, and yet, when you look at our growth from our nation's perspective in the last ten years, it has been very substandard. president obama will be the first president that we -- i think on record, never, ever hit 3% gdp in one quarter. we've had a lost decade of economic growth. one of the reasons that's clearly happened is that we overregulate ourselves in so many different sectors. we've had the secretary of transportation here saying it takes five to six years on average to permit a bridge. we had the head of the seattle airport who talked about it took 14 years to get a permit to
skpapd a new runway at sea-tac. oil and gas sector, seven years and $7 billion for a company to get permission from the federal government to drill one exploration well off the coast of alaska. seven years, $7 billion. we are our own worst enemy, the federal government, on inhibiting economic growth. in the last hearing, all of you committed to working with us on looking at legislative recommendations on the way we in congress can assist the fcc in helping streamline our processes and get projects moving. get dirt moving. starting to build things. so i offered an amendment on the mobile now that would have an application deemed granted if there is a certain amount of
time that passes on construction on federal land. but what i really want to hear from all the commissioners is on this issue, i know you've been talking about it a lot, but what are the big issues that we need to help deploy the resources of this very dynamic industry so we can start growing the economy. i know you've been thinking about it. commissioner rosenworcel, i know you've been thinking about it. i want to open this up to all of you. what can we do, what should we do to help us start building things in this country, particularly in this dynamic sector of our economy. >> thank you, senator. you know, we now are in the early days of a wireless revolution. it is becoming such an important part of civic and commercial, but the challenges to get it built everywhere, especially as we move to a new future and the internet of things.
spectrum and what is happening in the skies, and the least glamourous is what is happening on the ground, but it deserves twice as much attention. we need dig once policies all around the country, especially in federal lands, to make sure every time we have a construction project we also lay fiber. that fiber serves wireless facilities and towers. we need to start holding contests for communities, and tell them there is a reward in it for you, if you figure out a way to expedite wireless deployment, particularly of small cells in new architecture and infrastructures. and then finally, when it comes to federal authorities to control about one-third of the nation's real estate, we should make sure that there are master contracts, and that they are required to use them. if we do that we will standardize and harmonize and it achieve more build out. >> we want to work with you. mr. chairman, you don't have the authority on those kinds of issues. you need legislative approval to do that kind of streamlining to deploy these assets, isn't that correct? >> there is a debate over that,
senator. i have been very encouraged to hear my two colleagues today talk about how we have to step up to the question of preemption on siting issues. we need to respect the rights of localities, but the rights of localities do not extend to thwarting the construction of the information pathway of the 21st century. how do we work that out in a balancing act. that's what they are to -- >> we want to work with you, mr. chairman. i know my time has expired. we also want to work on your ideas on the federal, because that's where we have jurisdictional role. it doesn't get into the issue with the smaller communities and localities and i think it's an area we can get a lot of bipartisan support to start building things.
i want to work with the commissioners to build these things, because we can achieve some bipartisan consensus here on these important issues. >> senator, can i do 30 seconds. tw patch is the guy who deserves the credit for getting the ball rolling on the alaska plan that you were talking about. and i just want to make sure that he gets the public recognition. >> he is a good friend of mine, so i'm glad you're mentioning that in this hearing and i'll pass it on. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator sullivan. senator udall. >> thank you, senator thune, i know senator gardner is not here, but i have the same issue in terms of new mexicans watching television in another state. >> they don't want to watch the broncos. >> yeah, well, this week marks the 15th anniversary of the tragic terrorist attacks of september 11th, a day that is seared into our nation's history. we'll never forget the heroic
first responders who ran to the rescue, sadly, radio inner operability problems led to further loss of life. this should remind us that our nations communication networks do more than just let us call someone, watch tv or shop online. in emergency situations, our communication networks save lives. you all as commissioners know that very well. we should keep that broader perspective in mind as we debate communications policy in this committee and at the fcc. commissioner clyburn, i appreciate your visit to the new mexico in the navajo nation last month. thank you earlier for reading a new mexicans letter about broadband. we had a tragic incident happen on the navajo reservation, following the abduction and death of an 11-year-old ashlyn
near ship rock, new mexico. the navajo nation moved to put an amber alert system in place, but this won't work in areas without wireless service. this is just one example of how the digital divide impacts those living on tribal lands. so chairman wheeler, i have other questions for the record, but i now want to ask each of you a yes or no question. in my home state of new mexico, 80% of those living on tribal lands do not have access to broadband. four out of five people without broadband access. i find that appalling. so i would like to ask a simple yes or no. will you support chairman wheeler's effort to take action this year to address the digital divide on tribal lands. why don't we start with you, commissioner clyburn. >> absolutely, sir. >> thank you. >> i don't know what his plan is, but i'm in favor of solving the issue, yes. >> good. we want to work with you on that.
>> yes. >> yes, senator. >> obviously, if -- >> let me -- >> please a say few words. >> let me hang my head here for a minute. because in a previous hearing, i told you this would be taken care of by football season. we're in football season. we are going to deal with this, sir. we will deal with this before the end of football season. but as you've heard my colleagues' support for doing this, dealing with greater return carriers and how do we make sure they're sufficient rate of return opportunities on tribal lands, yes, sir. >> thank you, chairman wheeler, for your commitment to this. commissioner, rosenworcel, we met with students when you were in new mexico at hatch, new mexico, doing homework in the parking lot or at a pick wick
store where there's free wi-fi. we need to close this homework gap facing students that come from rural and low income families. jonah madrid, varsity football player, had a bright idea. joanna told us there should be wi-fi available on the school bus. that would help him do homework when his team travels long distance for games. schools currently receive e-rate support for internet access at school but not on their buses. do you agree that wi-fi on school busses could help close the homework gap, and should this be eligible for e-rate support? >> well, first of all, thank you for having me in hatch, new mexico. it was a treat. i still remember that football player. this high school student who told me in rural new mexico, he would take the bus an hour and a half out to play games, and an hour and a half back at night, and then sit there in the pitch-black darkness of the school parking lot with his
device, because it was the only way he could get his homework done. it seems to me that that's trying too hard, and we should be able to help him and i think we should use the e-rate program to help make sure the school busses are wireless and have wi-fi on wheels. >> great, thank you. i don't know if any other commissioners have a thought on that. >> far be it from me to question commissioner rosenworcel on the homework gap. >> okay. >> i like that. >> it may require a change in the statute. it may not be something we're allowed to do in the current provision. that doesn't mean -- i'm not sure -- quite frankly, this is the first time, there may be other opportunities to help this particular individual or other, those in this situation. i'm not sure if that's the best solution. i'm open to solving the problem. >> okay, and we'll share our authorities with you that i think indicate that there is an ability to do this. thank you very much. thank you, chairman thune. >> thank you, senator. >> thanks, mr. chairman. thank you for being here and for
your good work. let me make a couple of really simple points. i know your world is a complicated one, the dockets, the agenda. but here are some really simple points. the united states congress must confirm commissioner rosenworcel. she has been a leader in identifying the homework gap. she's been a tireless advocate for public safety officials, and she's been a leading thinker at the fcc on creative ways to update our spectrum policy for both license an unlicensed use. she is a distinguished member of the fcc, and her confirmation was part of an agreement that led to confirmation of commissioner o'reilly. i'm looking at you, sir. and i note, you were not part of
this agreement? so i'm looking at you, because you are a member of this commission and you would not be there but for this agreement. and i'm calling on the majority leader to very simply keep his promise. number two, on the set top box issue, chairman wheeler, i want to really express my gratitude to you on behalf of the consumers of connecticut, who will stand to save millions of dollars as a result of the rule that you're proposing, and again, to be very simple, i hope not overly simple. there is a law that requires it. i am a law enforcement guy. the first and foremost duty of anybody in public office is to
enforce the law. if it is unenforced, it undermines the credibility and trust of everybody in that law. and the set top box order that you have i should very simply enforce as law that has been unenforced since the 1990s as we all know. it will save not only connecticut consumers, but consumers around the country millions of dollars. there must be fcc oversight voluntary standards got us into this mess. only reliable and consistent enforcement law will help preserve consumers' pocketbook. i want to enter into the record editorials from some of the newspapers that have expressed themselves on this issue. most recently, "new york times", which very emphatically came down on the side of consumers.
this issue is a classic inside the beltway versus the people of american issue. inside the beltway, there is this hand wringing and, my goodness, what are we doing. outside the beltway, there is no question that consumers deserve to save money through more choice and more competition. that's the way markets work. so i am leading to a question here. but i want to express the strong view that this rule is needed and deserved by the consumers of america. and i would like to just open it to you, sir, to explain perhaps what the numbers are here in terms of savings these set top
boxes are dollar devourers. they suck money out of consumer pockets, without any real need. what are the numbers in terms of the potential savings. >> thank you very much, senator. you know, i was talking to senator mccaskill earlier about the study that she did on cable pricing and the consumer experience of cable consumers. how one of the major findings of that was the surprise, oh, my goodness, i've got this additional charge. this isn't what they were telling me on the ads and everything else, but there is this additional charge. you and senator markey did some great research that came up and showed there is about $230 a month per household.
you do the math on that. it is about $1,600,000,000 every 30 days. >> without any benefit to consumers. >> without any choice. and by the way, i would just, i don't mean to quibble, but the benefit is you're going to pay this, or the money you spend on your cable subscription is down the tubes. so it is beyond that. yes, you get a result from your payment, because you're being held hostage. and as commissioner rosenworcel has said repeatedly, it is time to do something about this. we respect greatly the various
corporations and trade associations that have come to see us, and we try to work with them. but congress gave us a mandate of a responsibility to consumers. consumers. and our job must be to fulfill that mandate. >> thank you very much. my time has expired, thank you, mr. chairman, and i offered, i guess i didn't wait for the potential by entering those editorials into the record, but if there's no objection, i'll have it in part of the record. >> without objection. >> thank you, senator peters. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i wanted to also thank all the commissioners for appears before us here today and appreciate certainly your tireless work on some very, very complicated issues. and working to deploy and develop all the cutting edge, 21st century technology.
it's a full-time and i think you put in marn full-time job. approximately the question -- i have some questions actually for chairman wheeler. basically it relates to a letter that chairman thune, senators booker, rubio, and mccaskill, endorsing a plan for the joint testing for spectrum sharing in the 5.9 gig ga hertz. in july, the public comment period closed, and now it's my understanding that the commission received prototype devices and is prepared to begin both field and testing. so chairman, just some brief questions here as we wrap up here, i understand that the fcc will release it's test plan prior to beginning phase one of interference testing. when will the test plan be
released to the public? what is your estimation? >> so thank you very much, senator. as you know, there's a three-step process here that you all outlined and we say yes, that's a great approach. we had just received the equipment, five manufacturers. so we are beginning, immediately, to assess that equipment it's caseworkist icha on a bench test. to get off on to the d.o.t. and their facilities to be able to test it in, in that environment and then to move on and test it in a real life environment. this is something we're moving with dispatch on. it's actually the equipment came a little later than hoped for, but it's here now. >> so when do you plan to
complete all phases of the interference testing? do you think it'll reach your target of january of -- >> i can't -- i will get an answer from our lab folks, but i'm hopeful that, you know, let's push this forward. >> right, you're hope forful january. >> i will get you, that's not a commitment, i will get you a real date once the people who know what they're talking about tell me what i think. >> that's good. that's reasonable. i appreciate that. but when i talk about commitments, will you commit though to making sure all the data that is kplekted by the fcc during the field testing phases? >> we will commit to the spirit of what's you're saying, if there is private data that is company-specific, asked for confidentiality we will have to respect that. >> what is your target date for spectrum sharing in the
gigahertz ban? >> i think we have to wait to see what happens here. >> you don't have any -- >> i haven't got a target for you. >> it's a work in progress. >> yes, sir. >> and most importantly, i can't overstate how critical it is that when you're evaluating out of these proposals, that it is based on facts, based on science, not opinions, subjective judgments about what will or will not work is simply not going for hard engineering data. which because of the importance of the spectrum from a safety perspective both rigorous and open reviews. so that's why i would hope that the commission's final determination on spectrum-sharing will be base odd than data and will undergo that review and will be plenty of transparency throughout the process as much as possible given some of the constraints that you mentioned, but certainly have your commitment
and the other commissioners that this will be an open process. it is a very important one, and one that has tremendous benefits, we to want make sure it's being done property. i just want you to know that i've learned that in the next couple of weeks at the ohio state university, they will start drive iing aeen to mouse s around the campus as apart of exactly what we are talking about right now. i just wanted to make sure that our information is complete in that regard, sir, and it'll be operational the last saturday in november as well. >> well i appreciate that, and at another time, i will talk about the wonderful i don't recollect done at the university of michigan.
>> senator johnson. >> that's what i'd like to talk about. last weekend opened up the regular season and we had begin the unfortunate circumstance made constituents in wisconsin were forced to watch the vikings beat the tennessee titans instead of having the joy of watching the green bay packers beat the jacksonville jaguars at 27-23. i work with a fellow packer fan, one of his more endearing qualities, quite honestly. among many. so we added in the style authorization to allow broadcasters to position. wrote and asked you to act expeditiously on those petitions, asked you in a hearing back in march of 2016 to also do so.
we had our first petition filed up in wassau, asking for permission to have their signal carried up in, i guess it's iron and ashland and iron county. >> yes, sir. >> there are components here. there's one, this is great. we have the local petition. two, then we all have to sit down and work with the satellite provider for the technical capital distance to do that. >> satellite providers agreed to do it. they're in favor of this. >> and senator gardner, when he raised a similar issue about bringing the various parties together, we'll be happy to bring that table together. >> can you give me a date? trust me, packer fans are
anxiously awaiting the ability to see that on their satellite signal. >> date for when we'll put it out? >> yeah, so we can start the clock ticking to celebration. >> i don't know of any reason why we can't put it out -- i mean, instantaneously. >> tomorrow. >> they'll kill me, as fast as humanly possible. >> okay. we'll keep asking the question. >> good. >> okay. >> commissioner, as long as i've got some time, are you aware of cost benefit analysis conducted by fcc or privacy proceeding for the commission? >> senator, i am not. >> should there be? >> i do think that any regulation that is considered by the commission should include cost benefit analysis.
>> i think the kpoel comment process zits one huge cost benefit analysis. because we are constantly having folks come in and talk to us about here's what the cost is or somebody else coming and saying, here's what the benefits are. and so, you know, this is i liken the process as the administrative scientific method. somebody proposes something, they refwut, they change it, and it goes here. this is what the whole process goes through. i think there is a fulsome cost benefit that gets done. >> how can you collect as much information as possible? and then the challenge, of course, in a cost benefit judgment comes back to, to to
that old harry truman quote, i wanted a one handed economist, on one hand or the other. and it becomes less math and more judgment. and so, as we are going through this entire, long-running administrative process, i think there percolates up to all the members of the commission just what the cost and benefits are, as put forward by various parties. i mean, you know, the cable folks on the issue rates, i mean, they went out and hired, you know, a former chief economist to the fcc to come in and give a quantify kags of their numbers. others have quantity fied it other ways. >> yeah, i'd like to see the process real quick, commissioner riley. you said they're withholding freeda that plans because they are afraid of what the commission might may do. can you talk about that briefly.
>> yeah, so the commission is in the process of examining what's known as zero rating plans. the process has been going on, my understanding, for ten months. i've been trying to get better information from the bureaus on when this process would conclude. what's the likelihood of concluding? what is the conclusion? are carriers going to get a gold star, violation in the enforcement action. what is the likelihood of that? we check in every periodically, we've got our last answer yesterday, surprisingly. and the answer came back which was we continue to work through the issues and not in the position to see how each policy concludes. we do not at this time have a tame frame to provide. so, it is an ongoing process. we have no idea what when it will conclude and in the meantime, carriers are wondering whether the particular service they would like to offer is permitted or are they subject to immediately going to enforcement action. i think that's a problem. >> thank you, mr. chairman.
>> thank you, senator johnson. senator markey. further questions? >> no further questions. thank you and the ranking members for this great hearing. i very much appreciate it. i thought it was excellent and just wanted to compliment you on that. and yild just say to the fcc, i would urge you to next open meeting to take up the privacy and take up the bds rule-makings so we could begin to make progress on that. i just urge you to try to put that on the agenda, but thank you mr. chairman for a great hearing. >> thank you senator markey. senator, anything else? there are two questions i want to ask. >> i want to enter into the record a letter that i'd written to the fcc on set top boxes. and also just to make a comment, we had earlier conversation
about hacking the d.c. circuit court. and senator wicker expressed his opinion that he sees it one way and i want to make the distinction that for a senator to express a opinion about the court packing, vis-a-vis is certainly particular. because the senate votes on the confirmation of these judgments, but for members of an independent agency, which is a quasi judicial body is a separate issue. i want that made clear. >> thank you senator nelson. very quickly, i want to ask a couple of questions in the these
are vital for states like south dakota. it's my understanding, however, that there's been very little information since march regarding how the reforms will be implemented and i will tell you that south dakota and i suspect in most of the states that members are concerned that unless more specific information is made available soon, their investment plans will be seriously impacted and i find that, and i think most members of the economy would find that unacceptable. the question has to do, i would like for every commissioner answer the question as to you can commit to ensure that rule carriers receive all information they need to make critical investment plans for 2017 and
beyond. mr. clyburn. >> yes, i think we have rarely do we move as quickly as a persons or entities want us to, we have been very deliberative. for years now really are laser baem on providing service to areas where there's none and to provide efficiency for those dollars that are limited. >> so yes, my staff has been working with the bureau to provide information and expedite the answers that carries and stuff they may need. given my work on the rate of return item. >> yes, mr. chairman, it's not just the question of providing information however. there are a number of petitions that are pending with the commission and we need to address those with dispatch in order for the carriers to know whether or not it's appropriate for them to opt into the model. so those pending petitions are
also important. >> the answer is yes, senator. >> chairman. >> yes, sir. >> thank you. >> and one final point, i don't want to belabor this point, we've covered at length. chairman, i just wanted to respond, my question about 3-2 party line votes are on open meetings votes. and you brought up the effective competition order which was not a 3-2 vote, with you siding with republicans, it was in part unanimous, but it was not an open meeting vote. and the votes that i referred to, it's almost a third of the open meetings votes which is typically where the most important matters are voted on those have been 3-2 party line votes which begin is unheard of at least in relative to modern history. and i just to want ask one last question and it has to do with that particular pattern, but with respect to a different issue. and so i would direct this to
commissioner pie, we've heard that the party line fcc votes are routine over the past years. i've mentioned that. you mentioned in your descent in the ownership review that a bipartisanship is willing to repeal the rule. you went on to say that commissioners were told that this rule would not be repealed unless all agree and one in the end chose to exercise that veto, end quote. so, i'm just going ask, could you elaborate on that particular vote and approach as opposed to on so many issues, chairman wheeler, whose embraced a partisan outcome in this circumstance. >> thank you for the question, it was a rather odd situation since we seemed to have an overwhelming bipartisan majority that agreed that the newspaper broadcast restriction which was originally adopted in 1975 had long since outlived it's
usefulness and the taking a serious look at it. the chairman's office told my staff, look, we support getting rid of this restriction. we believe that most do, but, if any member of the commission objects, then we are not going to support getting rid of the rule. and unfortunately, as i pointed out in my dissent, one office exercised that option and objected. and what i thought was unfortunate was not just -- it ended up becoming policy, this restriction should be removed and most people would agree with that. at least behind closed doors with the fcc, but also just the process is very strange to require ewe namty, there are a number of high profile issues where kmirgs riley and i in particular have suggested changes or made objections and those suggestions or objections are either ignored or dismissed out of hand. my preference would be to move forward in a bipartisan manner, let's move the broadcast ownership together as opposed to these random requirements again.
>> mr. chairman. >> rather than relying on hearsay, i think what's important to recognize here is that for eight years there had been a failure at the commission to comply with the statute that required these reviews. the reason that that situation existed was because it had not been possible to get three commissioners to represent a majority on this issue for eight years. working together, we got a majority on this issue.
it was not possible to keep a majority and make the kind of change that commissioner pi talked about. we have been criticized for not having a majority we worked, we got the majority for the first time in eight years, and the exercise then became, okay, how do we because we didn't have the majority. >> this is an issue where you can have done a special rule making where you had bipartisan support, but i guess my observation in this circumstance is that it is contrasted quite sharply from the pattern that i pointed out earlier where we had
3-2 votes on a whole range of consequential issues, and then on this one, a requirement-free anonymity. that strikes me as somewhat odd. but, overall, i want to say thank you to all the commissioners for being here today and i know these are -- you deal with contentious issues, i don't deny that, and deeply held differences of opinion about how to proceed, we deal with that on this committee on a regular basis too. we try as best we can, senator nelson and i, and members on both sides to try and find that consensus. we don't always succeed, but we work very hard to make that happen. and i would hope that at the commission, we could see a similar approach and attempt because of stuff that you're dealing with as i said earlier, incredibly important to our country. and the commissions role was incredibly important to our country and our economy. and the relationship with congress, i think, is incredibly important. we have an oversight role that
we take very seriously. so, we appreciate your remarks today, your answers to our questions, i would just point out for anybody who wants to ask additional questions for the record if you would, we'll get toez to you and if you commit your answers in the next two weeks. we most appreciate it. with that, this hearing is adjourned. president obama today is hosting the leaders of hundreds of native american tribes at the white house. the meeting comes as the planned pipeline in north dakota is drawing protests from hundreds of native americans. the administration recently ordered work stopped on a section of the pipeline, pending
further environmental review. the president's scheduled to speak at the drink ball nation's conference at 3:35 p.m. eastern. we'll have his remarks live here on c-span 3. what's more, we will have a government, of, by, and for the people. >> we are stronger together. and no matter what, remember this, love trumps hate. >> c-span's campaign 2016 continues on the road to the white house. with the first presidential debate tonight live from hofstra university in hempstead new york. beginning at 7:30 p.m. eastern with a preview of the debate. then at 8:30, the predebate briefing for the audience. at 9:00 p.m. live coverage of the debate followed by viewer reaction. the 2016 presidential debate on c-span. watch any time on demand at c-span.org or listen live on the
free c spn radio app. faith leaders held a press dmompbs washington, d.c. to kick off a national tour, calling on religious leaders to take a more active role in politics. and address the policies that disproportionately affect the communities of poorer and low income families. particularly issues like race relations, voter suppression and health care. the national movement repairs of the breach, hosted this hour-long event at the national press club. let me welcome all of you today to the revival time for tomorrow revolution of values and the announcement of the
national higher ground de declaration day of action. on september 129, and i will be talking more about that in just a moment. before we say anything, i want to ask the rechbd, dr. greyland haggler, a good friend and brother, united church of christ, if you would come and open us today with the word of prayer. would you? >> good evening, i want to thank everybody for being here. dr. blackman and dr. barber and dr. forbes, everybody else, clergy that are gathered here today. as we do from our tradition. we thank you first for being gothd and waeching over us, and filling with us a spirit to do right, the spirit to go forward and bring forth your justice and your hope, to lift up mighty
cause so that people are united and blessed in the process of being united because we stand here today for justice, and we stand here today for hope, and we stand here today so that the nation can change it's ways and do that which is ryes you and right. to protect all of those on the margins that care for the poor, to empower those who need to have empowerment so that there is a spirit of justice that becomes pervasive in this land. that we truly live toward the creed that we're called to live towards that all people might find that place of joy and happiness that each and every one might be secure and each and every one might exist in a state of justice and hope. now bless us in all of these endeavors, particularly as we go forth forward september 12th, allow us to feel your sacred and wonderful spirit and allow us to be on fire with the light of
justice and on fire with the spirit that brings about the peace. in all these things we pray, amen. >> at this time, we're going to open with a special promo video that's connected to the revival time for the moral revolution of value and specifically talks about the higher ground declaration day of action.
>> there are over 2,000 scriptures in the holy text. they talk about how nations should lift up the poor, children, immigrants the sick, the bruised, and any who have been made to feel unacceptable. these things are at the center of a moral consideration we all to divide and conquer strategy of extremism. >> we are here to promote moral values in our nation. our silence has contributed to the place that we are in right now. our refusal to speak out across party lines, across racial lines, across gender lines. against what we know to be wrong. the faith community has been come police sit in this
cover-up. >> where is our moral voice? where is our willingness to stand up and say, enough? >> so these prothetic leaders are resurrected to continue the movement, but that's only after this kind of public execution, this public crucifixion at the hands of the oppressives. >> the way to change what's happening in our society is by letting our hearts be broken open by that anguish and the truth. and having it broken own anticipate there's room for everyone. >> america might make it. >> we must shock this nation. with the power of love.
we must shock this nation with the power of mercy. we must shock this nation and fight for justice for all. we can't give up on the heart of our democracy, not now, not ever. vote together. organize together, fight for the heart of this nation. >> thank you some of. [ applause ] this promo is being released today, and let me just welcome all of you in the grace of god and the spirit of love. i first want to say how humbled
i am to be walking with all of these clergy to represent thousands around the country. i see my good friends with fight for 15, fciu and others who have been a part of this work, particularly all the way around the september 12th action. the higher ground moral declaration that i'm going to talk about has now been signed on by 2,585 clergy across this country representing christians, muslims, jews, and other faith. we've also had persons who are not necessarily faith, but who believe in a moral, ark in the moral universe and nearly 11,000 citizens and act vais viss have signed on with representation from all 50 states. it has been my life's privilege to travel across the country for those who may not know by tv, my name is reverend dr. william j.
barber ii and paths of the greenly christian church and also authored the fusion politics and the rise of a new justice movement. that is a part of the story of the moral monday movement where tens of thousands literally have joined nogt one southern state, and then in other states dloosz country, but particularly north carolina and over 1,000 people have engaged in civil disobedience in january and february of 2014 over 80,000 people showed up. and the largest march for civil rights and justice and equality in the south said selma. but be all that as it may and even the work with the naacp as pith, it's been my life's privilege and i've learned so much by traveling with reverend dr. james falls jr. who's here today, the senior minister at
the riverside church in the city of new york. served as senior minister at the pulpit for more than 18 years. he's a nationally and internationally known speaker, preacher, teacher, and was named of one of the most 12 effective preachers in the english-speaking world by newsweek magazine and he is the president and founder of healing, healing of the nations and also the drum major. it's been such a privilege. he told me not to do, i'll leave that alone right now. today is a special day, amen. i've been privileged to travel with dr. tracy blackman who is the active executive director, minister of the ucc justice and witness ministry. she was appointed to the position by a unanimous vote, ucc board in october 2015. he's also the 18th installed and
first woman pastor of the 156-year-old chris the king united church of christ in ferguson, missouri. she has gained international and nooshl recognition particularly around her fight for social change when michael brown was shot in ferguson. and is one of the prothetic bosses in the world. it's been a privilege to serve with sister simone campbell since 2004, most of us know her as nuns on the bust. she's a religious leader, attorney, and poet with extensive experience in public policy and advocacy for systemic change and she lobbies on issues of economic justice, immigration reform, and health care. legs to this table, the reverend
dr. lilz theoharris. continuing the work that he began when talking about the poor people's campaign. and of course today, we opened up with our good friend the reverend dr. haggler and brothers and sisters who are here, i call them the d.c. contingency. so the revival time for a moral revolution has been coordinated by repairs of the breach, healing of the nation and the center. we also have great support has been great in the support, the ucc church, disciples of christ, quakers, the reform jews, and other jewish bodies. muslims from the fight from 15
and from other bodies throughout the sam proctor conference have all been great supporters, auburn university. seminary and the list continues to grow. why are we here today? on monday, september 12t:00th, t 11:00 a.m. in every time zone, clergy will lead a higher ground, moral day of action outside of city hall in the district of columbia, it'll be in state capitals and here in the direct of columbia, it will be at their city hall because, as you know, we're still fighting for states like here in the district of clurm ya which continues to be one of the great moral challenges in our country. people who have taxation without representationation. now they'll make three declaration, one, faith
leaders,ed a vo contacts, activists, and people who have been hurt and impacted by regress i have extreme policies and extremism in our political system will old rallies outside of state capital buildings and city malls to deliver the higher ground moral declaration and it is a moral policy framework to respective governors, u.s. senators, presidential candidates and candidates for officer and major parties. you can find this higher ground declaration at www.moralrevival.org, and i'll talk more about this. the goal is to have clergy and impacted persons and activists to march together to these state capitals to symbolic reasons that is the center power accept in the district of columbia to make the moral declaration by having impacted patients talk about how extreme politics have hurt them and then each clergy
will actually read this declaration. it is nation wooud petition calling our government, our political systems to higher ground. number two, the second declaration will be communities of our faith and deep moral consciousness will be called on to go to the polls this november and beyond and vote for candidates that have the highest capacity to advance, moral public policy agendas and then number three, the third moral declaration will be on to call on religious leaders on two weekends prior to the presidential elections and to call on faith leaders to preach and teach in their churches, their synagogues, and their mosque and other places of worship with a focus on economic liberation for all people, ensuring that health care access for all, criminal justice
reform, and ensuring that historically marginalized have equal production under the law. the higher ground moral day of action is being coordinated in over 25 capital cities we're working in conjunction as i said with the anchor groups where we're traveling to do the social justice rerivals. also with many of the members of the fight for 15 was one of the strong movements in our country and in a section that brings people together, cross, race, class, gender. they will include montgomery, alabama. little rock, arkansas, denver, colorado, hartford, connecticut, washington, d.c., tallahassee, florida, atlanta, georgia, springfield, illinois, annapolis, indiana, frankfurt, kentucky, baton rouge, louisiana, boston, massachusetts, st. paul,
minnesota, jefferson city, missouri, concord, new hampshire, santa fe, new mexico, carson city, nevada, albany, new york, columbus, ohio, harrisburg, pennsylvania, columbia, stk, nashville, tennessee, austin, texas, richard, virginia, madison, wisconsin, groups of clergy, 50 to 100 clergy with 50 to 100 activists and impacted to be the anchor groups. others may join, but that will be the anchor groups that will go to the state capitals, make the moral declaration. will actually march around or on the area of the state capital is loca located, and this will be delivered through hand copies and e-mails to senators, sitting senators, candidates for the senate, sitting governs, candidates for others at the hire ground moral day of action as i said is a part of the rerival, time for a moral revolution of values which is a
national multi. state tour to redesign moral any american politics. the revival challenges leaders of the faith and moral courage to be more vocal in opposing harmful policies that this impacts vulnerable communities. as i noted earlier, the higher ground moral declaration has already been signed and now by more than 2,000 clergy and more than 10,000 people of faith across this country who understand that we need to advance a moral agenda. that agenda includes kmok si and voting rights, poverty and justice, workers rights, education, health care, environmental justice, immigrants rights and xenopho a xenophobia, lgbtq rights, war mongering, and how we adjust the issue of extreme military richl. we are very clear that the time has come to challenge the
limited view of morality on the religious right or so-called evangelicalism. we understand that any notion of evangelical to be a biblically consistent, must begin with the critique of systems that create poverty, injustice, inequality, and declares that certain people are less than other people. somebody must stand up and say it doesn't matter which party is the in power who has a supermajority once elections are over. there are some things that transcend political margins and mere majority politics and the narrow categories of liberal versus conservative and democrat versus republican. there are some things chartered because they're wrong, extreme, and immoral. but before elections are over,
people of faith people who have deep moral conscious must be engage. we cannot judge them by a photo op here or there. we must look at policy. policy, and how that policy lines up. when we look at, for instance, in the jewish text, isaiah chapter 10 says woe unto though who plejt and rob the poor of their rights and make men and women their prey. or we go for instance to the new testament, jesus' first sermon where he laid out the kind of concerns we ought to have in the public square. he talked about the poor, the sick, the blind, the broken, the hurting. everybody who has been made to feel different. made to feel strangers, he said we must declare the year of the lord, and in the closing of jesus' life, he said nations would be judged by how we treat the least of these. the poor, thes hungry, the
thirsty, those in prison. and so we believe we must expand and define in the public square. we can no longer just accept when we talk about moral issues, the praying in school, where you stand and where you stand on home sexuality, where you stand on the second amendment and property rights and tax cuts. we believe from our deepestings are values and our deepest constitutional value, because even our constitution does not begin with the things i just listed. our constitution says that our deepest moral principles, first of all is an understanding of we, not simply about i in mind. and then secondly, the establishment of justice, the providing for the common good, and the enshurns of domestic tranquility, those are the great moral tenants of our constitution and faith and justice and love and mercy and e kwaultd of the great faith.
someone must say it is extremely morally indpfsable for us to make it harder for people to vote. it's extremely immoral notal to address sis semiic racism and pay workers a living wage and guarantee labor rights in a country that declared equal protection under the law. it is extreme, 100 years after teddy roosevelt talked about health care for all. and more than 2,000 years after setting up free health clinics never required or left with a payer do pay. it is extreme for politicians to get elected and free health care after they get elected, but fight to ensure that all people get health care. it is extreme to raise taxes on the poor and make college students pay more interest for
loans while we cut taxes for the wealthiest in our society. it is extreme, 62 years after brown versus the board of education to see high poverty schools be the major challenge in our country and to underfund public schools on the one hand while we set up voucher schemes to fund private corporations on the other. it is extreme, morally indefensible, inconsistent to pledge one nation under goj, with liberty and justice for all, but then to fight against for the lgbtq community for imgraduates in our country and to seek to put laws in place regarding immigrants instead of being welcoming to them, we see politicians seeking to put laws in place that if they were in place 100 years ago, their own ancestors would not have been able to be immigrants in this country. it is extreme to care more about
the second amendment and how we can proliferate the ability for people to get assault weapons and guns than we fight to ensure people can get a voter card. something extreme when you can gate gun easier than a voter card. s extreme to claim that the legitimate discontent against police brutality and killing of unarmed blacks is anti-police, and somehow just a black thing when we see black, white people, latinos, jews, christian, all marching and declaring black lives matter. it's extremal to castigate certain religions for political purposes. it's extreme not not to love the palestinian child and the jewish child. and we believe it is it is a necessity for this destiny of our democracy that we realize that we need a revolution of values. we must raise our value
discontent knowing that whether we're heard now or heard later, history has shown that moral, so the seeds of change and justice that echblg chully blossom on the landscape of our democracy. lastly, one year before his assassination at the pulpit for 18 years, dr. king called for a -- said it was time to break silence. about materialism, and racism. this was after the civil rights act, after the voting rights act of '65. he knew that the work in this country. the moral work was far from over. he said then that silence was betrayal. we declare today if silence was betrayal in '67, then a higher ground declaration is a necessity today. lastly i want to read one other scripture that even comes from
the kworn. you heard me quote the jewish text and from luck forward or even in the connor, it says the believers, both men and women are in charge of and responsible for one another. they're all enjoy the doing of what is right and forbid the doing of what is wrong. wherever you look, our deepest faith traditions or even in our constitution, there is this call for a higher ground moral declaration. we believe that the conversation we ought to be having right now in this country, whether it's presidential, gubernatorial, or senator, is where do candidates stand on these issues? prolabel, antipoverty, antiracist policy that build up economic democracy through full employment, living wages, alleviation of unemployment.
adjust transition away from fossil fuel then make sure that the people who have worked there are not thrown aside. labor rights, affordable house, direct cast transfers and social safety nets and other support for all families struggling to get by. fair policies for immigrants and critiquing policies around war mongering that undermine our moral standing and our ability to address domestic issues. number two, equality in education. that should be a focus. where do you stand if you're running for president or you're running for government? where do you stand on equality and education? by ensuring every child receives a high quality well-funded, constitutional, diverse public education access to university, equitable funding for minority colleges and universities. where do you stand if you want the people's vote? do you believe health care for all is a moral issue?
expanding medicaid. insuring medicare and social security, then moving towards universal transparent equitable health care for all and providing that. see environmental protection as a moral issue. do you see protecting women's health? do you understand that there is a problem that people people can buy lead-free paint, but not lead-free water? do you understand, do you believe that fairness in the criminal justice system by addressing the continuing inequalities and inequities that operate in that system against black, brown, and poor white people? basketball fighting is a moral issue? voting rights and expanding voting rights and protecting voting rights and women voting rights and labor rights and also freedom and immigrant rights and
never backing up on the fundamental equal protection under the law are moral issues? if you don't think they're moral issues, don't debate it. but say whether you believe these are immoral issues. can't be both ways. we believe our moral tradition have a firm foundation upon which to stand against extremism. and it's time that we claim higher ground, higher than left versus right. higher than simple debate. we understand that some things are not about partisan debate. they are about what is right and what is wrong. every politician makes a big deal.
that's all right. that's right. that happens to the best of us. we're prophetic people that believe in dancing and standing up what is right. well, that's a sign. and normally we'd have a song. the book of kings said that the profit cannot speak until what wrote the song? if we repent these charges? we will be able to rise. but this book finally, you know, every politician wants to put their hand on a holy bock and they swear themselves into office. the reason is because people went through and marked every scripture that has to do with how you treat the poor and the children.
you can't even find the scripture. some you only find one or two. one of those trump this one. you must love your neighbor as yourself. and treat them. it's time for more moral reset in this country. and that's why the revival is calling for a higher ground moral declaration on september 5. i want to ask dr. fulls and dr. blackman in that order to come and take questions from members of the media. thank you so much. god bless you. [ applause ] >> brothers and sisters. in a few days, america will be
commemorating the horrible and tragic events of september 11, 2001. when the twin towers and the world trade center came crashing down from the brutal attack of terroris terrorists. during the days of shock, grief, vulnerability, and fear, which follow followed i recall hearing the singing god bless america, at broadway place, baseball games, and numerous public assemblies. as the song goes, and you can remember hearing at the baseball game -- ♪ as we raise our voices, in a solemn prayer ♪ ♪ god bless america, land that i love ♪ ♪ sand beside her and guide
her ♪ ♪ through the night with a light from above ♪ ♪ as we come, today std first day after labor day to the home stretch of the presidential election campaign, our nation needs to be singing that song and praying that prayer in earnest out of the sincerity of our troubled hearts. once again, 2016, 15 years after 2001, fear, anxiety and assorted vulnerabilities hang like the dark, gray clouds, hanging over new york skyline.
hanging now all over our country. villages and urban centers. and the cloud, well, the cloud of well, terror, foreign and domestic threaten our sense of safety and well being, the cloud. also, this is a cloud too for some people, a new demographic with demands for equity and justice. and those clouds make the future seem tragedile and uncertain for many. and makes democracy seem like a too costly, risk-laden experiment with an unrealistic
yew taupe yan ideal. and desperate, economic, and political interests threaten to spread the social contract untieding the terms contained in it that made the united states one body, but is now making it look more like body parts, we need to pray, god bless america, land that we love. stand beside us, and guide us through the night for the light from above. but to prey god's blessings and
to remain indifferent adversarial, to moral and spiritual values of justice, mutual respect, compassion, and care for the poor, the disadvantaged, the other, and to pray and be indifferent and adversarial reveals what we've been working on, a serious character defect. moral degeneracy and spiritual anemia. there are signs all around us that we need a moral revolution of values in our nation. dr. king suggested that we have become captive to the triple evils of racism, materialism, and military richl.
now, anybody with eyes that are open, we see more clearly than ever before how truly prophetic dr. king was in his description of our national malaise. take for example, racism. folks, just think of the outrageous his terra occasioned by the presence of a black family in the white house. just -- and it's lasted for the entire two terms. racism, just think of the passions fueling the current
immigration, costic conversation. or consider the police community manifestations of brutality and the resulting mistrust. and mounting video evidence and daily data supported statistics that there is remarkablistic malignancy in every system and aspect of the american way of life. i think we're going to need a moral lack. and materialism, what is it in america that's not for sale? assorted favors, sex, the
political process, politicians, preachers, football players, and their heads, body parts, market share prisoners both life and death for hire. in god we trust. is it really true that in gener general, money is god in our nation? money has more influence than regards to our values, our political affiliation, our social arrangements, market values mean more than morals or our mamas.
and greed. i used to talk about greed in regards to money buying elections and gun legislation and money determining attitudes regarding health care and prison strirl complex or international alliances, but you and i were at the seminary and the roman catholic priest, father wright, quoted a scripture, i had to go home and look it up myself. since being revival, it's okay, i know this is the club where you talk politics and stuff, but there may be a moral convention. there may be a moral dimension. i couldn't believe this. i don't think people read this in the book, but it says right here in matthew 5 db yeah, i see
it right here. oh yeah -- >> they want the microphone. >> you want to hear me on the mike? matthew 5:21 and 22, it said, you have heard that it was said of those in ancient times, usual not murder. talking violence now. murder. and lord knows it's in the streets. we keep talking about black lives matter, white lives matter, jewish live matters, muslim lives matter, old folks lives matter, i like to think so. old folks lives matter. whoever murders shall be liable to the adjustment. if you are angry, anger all over the place every time you turn on the television, radio, anger, and there are people who so glad
that some of this anger express midanger, anger, anger with a brother or sister, you're liable to judgment. and then the priest said, and if you insult or brother or sister, you will be liable to the council, and if you say you fool, you will be liable to the hell of fire. you call the folks fools, you may go to hell for that said. but anyway. that's enough maybe for me to accept there are two other things i want to say then i'll be through. the problem is that a whole lot of folks don't know what to do about voting. voting is god's way of telling
us how important we are. we are made in the image and likeness of god. and even god says what we name things will even matter. therefore it's important for us to understand that this is no -- this is not simply political process at work that when the issue of voting comes, we are determining whether we believe the snake on the ground or the god that made us. we've got make up our minds. and so reverend, i don't know how we get this done, the reason we are going across the country day by day and looks like september, the whole month of september and october, the whole month is because i've discovered that while there is an election november 8th, and everybody -- if anybody doesn't vote, it's because they ain't paying
attention to god. they'd rather follow the guidance of a snake than to pay attention to god that says you are my child and i put voting power in you, and anybody that messes with it ain't nothing but a snake anyhow. but more than that, every day there is a referendum. that's why we have to go every day. i wish i could gate break. every day we have to go because there is folks, a referendum. it's a moral referendum. and it doesn't wait until november 8th. and the way you vote on november 8th is going to be based on what you do about the moral referendum and that happens every day you get up. because every day we get up. we are faced with the decision, god made the universe said it was good and then arranged for it to be held together. and there were folks trying to pull it apart. and every day you get the
opportunity to cast your vote in the moral referendum. ask you this question then i'm sitting down. we are god's children. >> yes. >> you seek to live your life without paying attention to what matters to god. in regards to how we treat one another. in regards to how we spend our money. in regards to how we form our alliances. you make a vote every day. does it matter more that what god thinks about it? the other is god made us as one people. >> that's right. >> question, some folks try to do what we call sue do subspeechuation, a big word for saying that we are one species, but some are more human than others. and others have taken some human beings or treat other people as second class citizens. every day you get up you will
see folks parseles out human beings and putting some in a lower category, lower stuck. you have got to make a move every time you see it. am i for that or am i with it? finally god had a dream, it wasn't just dr. king that had a dream. dream was the kind of world that god wanted to see. every day you get up and walk out of your house, you're going to look on the world, and you've got to vote. is this the kind of world i want to be in? or is the world i want to be a part of and the world i'm planning to work for, the world that the creator dreamed from the dawn of creation? i'm going to leave you today, i'm going the trab station back to new york. every time i get a chance, i'm going to vote, today. and if i can vote right each day
between now and november 8, i'm not worrying who to to vote for when i get there. >> that's right, that's right, that's right. >> uh-huh. >> that's exactly right. [ applause ] >> you see why it's my privilege? dr. black. >> good morning. dr. forbes reminds me that the last time i was in the press club, i was here with the rabbi who enlightened me by sharing with me that in the hebrew language, the korld cold, translates voice and it is also the word that translates vote. that every time you hear the word voice in hebrew scripture that you could easily say that god is voting. that god was voting, that creation was good. thhe