I would like to welcome Chairman Martin; I think it is very important; particularly we look forward to hearing some comments concerning your meetings in Harvard and Stanford.  Senator Kerry said that this is a problem seeking a solution, from my point of view it is a preferred solution seeking some justification.  I certainly hope that the FCC as well as the Congress will be careful about taking this first step and going back to intensive regulation of the internet.  That’s what net neutrality means to me.  Eventually there would be an extension of regulation to the point where it would be interference with the dynamics of this internet and its future.  I do believe that there are many comments out there for instance, I would like to file for the record the article entitled network neutrality: False Promise of Zero Price Regulation by C. Scott Hempfield and a group of people at Columbia University.  It does seem to me that this discussion that is going on is good for the system.  But to take action on it, either by the Congress or the FCC at this time I think is highly unwarranted.  The action that Senator Kerry mentioned that was called to attention, the public indignation, the outcry from the industry showed that the system will right itself if someone really tries to interfere with the free access and really fair treatment of everyone using the internet systems.  So I do not believe that this is a time to try and put into law or a regulation a concept of net neutrality is not validated yet.  If something comes along that really deserves attention, it will be broad enough and a great enough incentive for us to stop this political division over the concept of net neutrality.  It is a political division now, and it is getting more so and it is unfortunate because I do not think that the communication law ought to come about because of political division in an election year.