RTP's Fourth Branch Podcast

This Deep Dive episode brings you the recording of the second panel from the Pepperdine Law Review's 2019 Symposium "Regulating Tech: Present Challenges and Possible Solutions".

In this panel, the speakers debate varying standards for antitrust rule-making and enforcement. The merits of the Neo-Brandeisian "populist" approach are weighed against more recent "consumer-welfare" standards.

Featuring:
- Geoffrey A. Manne, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics
- William Rinehart, Director of Technology and Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- Hal Singer, Managing Director, Econ One
- Joanna Tsai, Vice President, Charles River Associates
- [Moderator] Babette E. Boliek, Chief Economist, Federal Communications Commission and Professor of Law, Pepperdine School of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

This Deep Dive episode brings you the recording of the first panel from the Pepperdine Law Review's 2019 Symposium "Regulating Tech: Present Challenges and Possible Solutions".

In this panel, the speakers discuss the implications of internet privacy legislation in both California and Europe on innovation, small businesses, and consumer protection.

Featuring:
- Thomas Hazlett, Hugh H. Macaulay Endowed Professor of Economics, Clemson College of Business
- Matthew R. A. Heiman, Senior Fellow and Associate Director for Global Security, National Security Institute
- Justin “Gus” Hurwitz, Associate Professor of Law and Co-Director of Space, Cyber, and Telecom Law Program, Nebraska College of Law
- Chris Riley, Director, Public Policy, Mozilla
- [Moderator] Anna Hsia, Head of West Coast Office, ZwillGen

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

On Wednesday, March 27th, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Kisor v. Wilkie. The Supreme Court granted certiorari in Kisor to decide whether to overrule Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., 325 U.S. 410 (1945), and Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452 (1997). Seminole Rock and Auer are often cited for the proposition that when an administrative agency promulgates a regulation and the regulation is ambiguous, a reviewing court must give “controlling weight” to the agency’s interpretation of the regulation unless the interpretation is plainly erroneous or is inconsistent with the regulation. A number of the Court’s members have cast doubt on the soundness of the Seminole Rock/Auer deference doctrine in recent years. Many observers believe that the doctrine’s days are numbered.

Featuring:
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, NFIB Small Business Legal Center
- Andrew Varcoe, Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates
- [Moderator] Stephen Vaden, General Counsel, United States Department of Agriculture

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

This Deep Dive episode brings you the opening address from the Pepperdine Law Review’s 2019 Symposium “Regulating Tech: Present Challenges and Possible Solutions”. The address was delivered by Donald J. Rosenberg, Executive Vice President, General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary at Qualcomm, who spoke on patent law and the dangers of regulatory capture in the emerging tech sector.

Featuring:
- Donald J. Rosenberg, Executive Vice President, General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary, Qualcomm

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

This teleforum will consider the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s accredited investor standard. This standard is used as a screen to determine the group of investors eligible to invest in offerings that are exempt from most SEC rules on public offerings and which are the primary fundraising tools of hedge funds and private equity funds. The SEC currently uses a wealth and income-based standard, which raises questions about whether limiting investment opportunities to only high-income individuals is sound government policy. Some critics of this standard have urged the SEC to expand the standard to include individuals with financial experience, but who do not otherwise meet the wealth threshold. Other critics have suggested more aggressive reforms. Supporters of the accredited investor standard, however, have advanced proposals to further restrict the group of eligible investors by increasing the income and net worth requirements. The SEC has promised to revisit the accredited investor standard soon, and this teleforum will consider and debate potential reforms to the rule.
Featuring:

Urska Velikonja, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, Georgetown University
J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Innovations in financial technology have enabled financial services to be provided in new ways and by new competitors, but under old rules. One area of tension is the role of federalism in a world where, thanks to the internet, firms can provide services nationwide at their inception. The balance of authority between the states, who traditionally had primary authority over non-bank lenders and money transmitters and the federal government has been called into question, with some advocating for greater federalization in the interest of efficiency and equity, and others resisting citing concerns about state sovereignty and consumer protection. Federal regulators have also taken note, with the Treasury calling for reforms to streamline fintech regulation and OCC announcing it would offer some non-depository fintech firms the opportunity to get a federal bank charter, which led the states to sue. Come hear a discussion on the state of fintech and federalism and the proper path for the future.

Featuring:
- Brian Knight, Director of Innovation and Governance and Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- Margaret Liu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel, Conference of State Bank Supervisors

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

January 7, 2019 starts a new leadership era for the Federal Housing Finance Agency, as the new Acting Director from the Trump Administration, Joseph Otting, takes office, with the nomination of Mark Calabria as Director in process. FHFA is the regulator of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks, the combined housing finance assets of which are over $6 trillion, all involving an effective guarantee from the U.S. Treasury. What are the key issues and projects for the FHFA going forward? What can and what should it do to lead reform of Fannie and Freddie — and reform of American housing finance in general? What requires Congress and what might the FHFA, or the FHFA and Treasury, do on their own? Should the Senior Preferred Stock Agreements for Fannie and Freddie be revised? What about the role of the FHLBs? In spite of all the reform ideas, might the housing finance status quo persist?

Ed DeMarco, who was Acting Director of the FHFA 2009-2014 and now heads the Housing Policy Council, will be interviewed by R Street Institute distinguished senior fellow Alex Pollock.

Featuring:
- Ed DeMarco, President, Housing Policy Council
- [Moderator] Alex J. Pollock, Distinguished Senior Fellow, R Street Institute

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

On June 28, 2018, the California legislature enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”). This legislation follows more than two decades of debate about potential federal privacy regulation, a tumultuous year of high-profile privacy incidents, and the implementation of the GDPR in Europe. It also is the most comprehensive privacy regulation that has been adopted in the United States. The CCPA was enacted in a record-breaking 7 days, has staggering breadth, and will have national and international repercussions. On this call, we will discuss the substance of the CCPA (including recent amendments) and the process that led to its enactment, along with how it is likely to affect future privacy regulation in the United States, with Eric Goldman and Lindsey Tonsager, two experts in privacy law who have followed the CCPA closely.

Featuring:

- Prof. Eric Goldman, Professor of Law and Co-Director of the High Tech Law Institute, Santa Clara University School of Law

- Lindsey L. Tonsager, Partner, Covington & Burling

- [Moderator] Justin (Gus) Hurwitz, Assistant Professor of Law and Co-Director of Space, Cyber, and Telecom Law Program, University of Nebraska College of Law

- [Host] Devon Westhill, Director, Regulatory Transparency Project

Sign up for Regulatory Transparency Project updates at https://regproject.org.

On June 28, 2018, the California legislature enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”). This legislation follows more than two decades of debate about potential federal privacy regulation, a tumultuous year of high-profile privacy incidents, and the implementation of the GDPR in Europe. It also is the most comprehensive privacy regulation that has been adopted in the United States. The CCPA was enacted in a record-breaking 7 days, has staggering breadth, and will have national and international repercussions. On this live podcast, we will discuss the substance of the CCPA (including recent amendments) and the process that led to its enactment, along with how it is likely to affect future privacy regulation in the United States, with Eric Goldman and Lindsey Tonsager, two experts in privacy law who have followed the CCPA closely.

Featuring:
- Prof. Eric Goldman, Professor of Law and Co-Director of the High Tech Law Institute, Santa Clara University School of Law
- Lindsey L. Tonsager, Partner, Covington & Burling
- [Moderator] Justin (Gus) Hurwitz, Assistant Professor of Law and Co-Director of Space, Cyber, and Telecom Law Program, University of Nebraska College of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Despite the Federal Communication Commission’s decision in December 2017 to eliminate the common carrier regulations for Internet services — the so-called net neutrality rules the FCC created in 2015 — the net neutrality debate rages on. The Trump FCC preempted states’ authority to regulate the Internet, yet governors in six states have attempted to enforce net neutrality principles via executive order and three states have passed “baby net neutrality bills.” Several more state bills are pending. Can state agencies regulate Internet services? What are the legal and practical impediments? What are the consequences of businesses operating under inconsistent regulations amongst the states and at the federal level? Gus Hurwitz, Brent Skorup, and Geoffrey Manne will discuss this new front in regulation, federalism, and grassroots activism.

Featuring:
- Justin (Gus) Hurwitz, Assistant Professor of Law and Co-Director of Space, Cyber, and Telecom Law Program, University of Nebraska College of Law
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Technology Policy Program, Mercatus Center at George Mason University
- [Moderator] Geoffrey A. Manne, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.