Connecting America: Oversight of the FCC, House hearing transcript (March 31, 2022), GovInfo CHRG-117hhrg60331, PDF
Summary
This is the Government Publishing Office PDF of “Connecting America: Oversight of the FCC,” a virtual hearing on Thursday, March 31, 2022 before the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce (Serial No. 117–78). The witnesses were Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel and Commissioners Brendan Carr, Geoffrey Starks and Nathan Simington, and the record includes their prepared statements and answers to submitted questions. Opening statements came from Representatives Mike Doyle, Robert E. Latta, Frank Pallone, Jr. and Cathy McMorris Rodgers. Members discussed the Affordable Connectivity Program, which nearly 11 million households had signed up for, and the Emergency Connectivity Fund, which had put over $5 billion toward connectivity for schools, libraries and students.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Full text
CONNECTING AMERICA: OVERSIGHT OF THE FCC
VIRTUAL HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATION AND
TECHNOLOGY
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND
COMMERCE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
MARCH 31, 2022
Serial No. 117–78
(
Published for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce
govinfo.gov/committee/house-energy
energycommerce.house.gov
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
60–331 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey
Chairman
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois CATHY MCMORRIS RODGERS, Washington
ANNA G. ESHOO, California Ranking Member
DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado FRED UPTON, Michigan
MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas
JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana
G. K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio
DORIS O. MATSUI, California BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
KATHY CASTOR, Florida DAVID B. MCKINLEY, West Virginia
JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
JERRY MCNERNEY, California H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia
PETER WELCH, Vermont GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
PAUL TONKO, New York BILL JOHNSON, Ohio
YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York BILLY LONG, Missouri
KURT SCHRADER, Oregon LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana
TONY CÁRDENAS, California MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
RAUL RUIZ, California RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina
SCOTT H. PETERS, California TIM WALBERG, Michigan
DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia
MARC A. VEASEY, Texas JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire GARY J. PALMER, Alabama
ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois, Vice Chair NEAL P. DUNN, Florida
NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGÁN, California JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah
A. DONALD MCEACHIN, Virginia DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona
LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware GREG PENCE, Indiana
DARREN SOTO, Florida DAN CRENSHAW, Texas
TOM O’HALLERAN, Arizona JOHN JOYCE, Pennsylvania
KATHLEEN M. RICE, New York KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota
ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota
KIM SCHRIER, Washington
LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
PROFESSIONAL STAFF
TIFFANY GUARASCIO, Staff Director
WAVERLY GORDON, Deputy Staff Director
NATE HODSON, Minority Staff Director
(II)
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY
MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania
Chairman
JERRY MCNERNEY, California ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio
YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York Ranking Member
MARC A. VEASEY, Texas STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana
A. DONALD MCEACHIN, Virginia BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
DARREN SOTO, Florida ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
TOM O’HALLERAN, Arizona GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
KATHLEEN M. RICE, New York BILL JOHNSON, Ohio
ANNA G. ESHOO, California BILLY LONG, Missouri
G. K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina
DORIS O. MATSUI, California, Vice Chair MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
PETER WELCH, Vermont TIM WALBERG, Michigan
KURT SCHRADER, Oregon EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia
TONY CÁRDENAS, California JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah
ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota CATHY MCMORRIS RODGERS, Washington
LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas (ex officio)
FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey (ex
officio)
(III)
C O N T E N T S
Page
Hon. Mike Doyle, a Representative in Congress from the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania, opening statement ................................................................... 2
Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 5
Hon. Robert E Latta, a Representative in Congress from the State of Ohio,
opening statement ................................................................................................ 7
Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 9
Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the State of
New Jersey, opening statement .......................................................................... 15
Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 17
Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Washington, opening statement ..................................................................... 19
Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 21
WITNESSES
Jessica Rosenworcel, Chairwoman, Federal Communications Commission,
Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Committee on Energy
and Commerce ...................................................................................................... 26
Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 29
Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 132
Brendan Carr, Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission, Con-
necting America: Oversight of the FCC ............................................................. 33
Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 35
Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 160
Geoffrey Starks, Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission, Con-
necting America: Oversight of the FCC, Washington, DC ................................ 42
Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 44
Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 168
Nathan Simington, Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission,
Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission ................................... 47
Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 50
Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 173
SUBMITTED MATERIAL
Letter of March 29, 2022, from Wade Henderson Interim President and
CEO and Jesselyn McCurdy, Executive Vice President of Government Af-
fairs, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, to Mr. Pal-
lone., et al., submitted by Mr. Doyle .................................................................. 104
Statement of March 23, 2022, by Michael O’Rielly, MPORielly Consulting
Inc., submitted by Mr. Doyle ............................................................................... 108
Article ‘‘Broadcasters Can’t Have It Both Ways on Compensation for Cre-
ators,’’ by Congressman Joe Crowley, submitted by Mr. Doyle ....................... 111
Article ‘‘Even OTA Radio Doesn’t Buy Its Claims Against Fair Pay for Music,’’
by Neil Fried, submitted by Mr. Doyle ............................................................... 117
Letter of March 29, 2022, to Ms. Cantwell, et al., from 11 Organizations,
submitted by Mr. Doyle ....................................................................................... 122
Letter of March 31, 2022, by Tom Quaadman, Executive Vice President,
Chamber Technology Engagement Center, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to
Mr. Doyle and submitted by Mr. Doyle .............................................................. 124
Letter of May 28, 2010, from Mr. Pallone to Former FCC Chairman
Genachowski, submitted by Mr. Doyle ............................................................... 127
Letter of August 6, 2021, from Members of Congress, to Secretary Raimondo,
submitted by Mr. Doyle ....................................................................................... 129
(V)
CONNECTING AMERICA: OVERSIGHT OF THE
FCC
THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2022
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY,
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:31 a.m. in the
John D. Dingell Room, 2123 Rayburn House Office Building, and
remotely via Cisco Webex online video conferencing, Hon. Michael
F. Doyle, (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Members present: Representatives Doyle, McNerney, Clarke,
Veasey, Soto, O’Halleran, Rice, Eshoo, Butterfield, Matsui, Welch,
Schrader, Cárdenas, Kelly, Craig, Fletcher, Pallone (ex officio);
Latta (subcommittee ranking member), Guthrie, Kinzinger, Bili-
rakis, Johnson, Long, Mullin, Walberg, Carter, Duncan, and Rod-
gers (ex officio).
Also present: Representatives Dingell, Trahan; Joyce, and Pence.
Staff present: Parul Desai, FCC Detailee; Jennifer Epperson,
Senior Counsel; Waverly Gordon, Deputy Staff Director and Gen-
eral Counsel; Tiffany Guarascio, Staff Director; Zach Kahan, Dep-
uty Director Outreach and Member Service; Hank Kilgore, Policy
Coordinator; Mackenzie Kuhl, Press Assistant; Jerry Leverich,
Chief Counsel, Communications and Technology; Dan Miller, Pro-
fessional Staff Member; Joe Orlando, Policy Analyst; Chloe Rodri-
guez, Clerk; Johanna Thomas, Counsel; Caroline Wood, Staff As-
sistant; Sarah Burke, Minority Deputy Staff Director; Michael
Cameron, Minority Policy Analyst, Consumer Protection And Com-
merce, Energy, Environment; William Clutterbuck, Minority Staff
Assistant/Policy Analyst; Theresa Gambo, Minority Financial and
Office Administrator; Jack Heretik, Minority Press Secretary; Nate
Hodson, Minority Staff Director; Sean Kelly, Minority Press Sec-
retary; Peter Kielty, Minority General Counsel; Emily King, Minor-
ity Member Services Director; Bijan Koohmaraie, Minority Chief
Counsel, Oversight and Investigation Chief Counsel; Tim Kurth,
Minority Chief Counsel, Consumer Protection And Commerce;
Clare Paoletta, Minority Policy Analyst, Health; Olivia Shields, Mi-
nority Communications Director; Michael Taggart, Minority Policy
Director; Everett Winnick, Minority Director of Information Tech-
nology; Evan Viau, Minority Professional Staff Member, Commu-
nications and Technology; and Kate O’Connor, Minority Chief
Counsel, Communications and Technology.
Mr. DOYLE. The Subcommittee on Communications and Tech-
nology will now come to order. Today the Subcommittee on Com-
(1)
2
munications and Technology is holding a hearing entitled, ‘‘Con-
necting America: Oversight of the FCC.’’
Due to the COVID–19 public health emergency, members can
participate in today’s hearing either in person or remotely, via on-
line video conferencing.
In accordance with the updated guidance issued by the attending
physician, members, staff, and members of the press present in the
hearing room are not required to wear a mask, although you can
do so if you want to.
For members participating remotely, your microphones will be
set on mute for the purpose of eliminating inadvertent background
noise. Members participating remotely will need to unmute your
microphone each time you wish to speak. Please note that, once
you unmute your microphone, anything that is said in Webex will
be heard over the loudspeakers in the committee room, and subject
to be heard by the livestream and C-SPAN.
Since members are participating from different locations at to-
day’s hearing, all recognition of members, such as four questions,
will be in the order of subcommittee seniority.
Documents for the record can be sent to Joe Orlando at the email
address we have provided to staff. All documents will be entered
into the record at the conclusion of the hearing.
The Chair will now recognize himself for 5 minutes for an open-
ing statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE DOYLE, A REPRESENTA-
TIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENN-
SYLVANIA
Well, welcome to today’s hearing to provide oversight of the Fed-
eral Communications Commission. I am glad to have Chairwoman
Rosenworcel and Commissioners Carr, Starks, and Simington with
us today.
It is great to have you all here, especially now that the President
finally took my advice and made Ms. Rosenworcel the permanent
chairwoman of the Commission. I am sure he had lots of other ad-
vice besides mine. It is an incredible deserved—it is an incredibly
deserved honor, and I think the bipartisan work of the Commission
during this period is a testament to that.
I hope soon the Senate will confirm Gigi Sohn also to bring the
Commission to full strength. Ms. Sohn’s knowledge of communica-
tions policy and dedication to consumer protection are exemplary.
The FCC and the American public will be well served with her
nomination.
And I also want to commend all four of you for your outstanding
bipartisan work to deliver for the American people as you await
your fifth colleague.
The FCC has a broad mission: regulating communications by
wire, radio, satellite, and cable with a mandate to promote competi-
tion, investment, diversity, and security in our Nation’s commu-
nication networks. It is also the congressionally designated body to
regulate commercial spectrum and make spectrum assignments.
The FCC should be applauded for tackling such a wide array of du-
ties with the limited budget and staff it is afforded.
3
Broadband is an essential, necessary service for Americans, for
their jobs, for schooling, for health care, and for civic participation
in our country. With this in mind, Congress made historic invest-
ments through the CARES Act, the 2020 omnibus, and the Amer-
ican Rescue Plan, and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
to connect our schools, students, low-income households, tribal com-
munities, and those in need of health care services. This makes the
FCC’s position as the national regulatory authority on broadband
more important than ever.
Under the bipartisan work of this FCC, enormous strides have
been made in the adoption of the Affordable Connectivity Program,
as nearly 11 million households have signed up. The Emergency
Connectivity Fund has already put over $5 billion toward
connectivity for our Nation’s schools, libraries, and students. And
I commend the Commission for getting this money out quickly and
efficiently.
And now that the FCC has successfully overcome a bid protest,
the Commission can finally move forward with more of its
broadband mapping activities, which will be crucial for the NTIA
to distribute the $42 billion for broadband access in its BEAD pro-
gram.
As with our Nation’s other communication technologies, it is crit-
ical that the FCC ensure that the core principles of the Commu-
nication Act run throughout broadband policy: consumer protection,
competition, universal service, and public safety.
The FCC should use all of its tools to re-establish its consumer
protection authorities over broadband, including by prohibiting un-
fair and unjust practices, and continuing to fight against robocalls
and robo texts.
It should promote competition in the broadband marketplace. so
consumers can benefit from choice and the expanded services and
lower costs the competition brings.
It should pursue universal service by ensuring that all con-
sumers have access to reliable, affordable broadband, and to pro-
hibit practices that hinder broadband deployment.
And it should continue its support of the public safety and com-
mitment to our first responders and law enforcement officials. and
secure our networks from untrustworthy equipment.
Finally, I applaud your recent work with the NTIA on the Spec-
trum Coordination Initiative. Congress designed the FCC as the
overseer of commercial spectrum and tasked it with determining
the highest and most efficient use of spectrum. It has a long his-
tory of basing its decisions on the science and engineering facts
brought before it, and we need to bolster its spectrum management
processes that have made the United States the global leader in
technology.
To that end, I hope we can revisit the lower 3 gigahertz band in
a way to both protect the incumbent users and maximize commer-
cial use as envisioned in the Spectrum Innovation Act. And Con-
gress should re-authorize the FCC’s authority to conduct auctions,
particularly in light of the upcoming 2.5 gigahertz auction that is
so important to 5G and the rural wireless community.
This committee has entrusted the Commission with a great deal
of responsibility, and it is going to take all of us working together
4
to successfully connect all of our communities, protect our constitu-
ents, and ensure the continued leadership of the United States.
Thank you to the Commissioners for coming before us today. I
look forward to hearing your testimony.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Doyle follows:]
5
PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE DOYLE
6
7
Mr. DOYLE. And now it gives me great pleasure to recognize my
good friend, Ranking Member Latta.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT E. LATTA, A
REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO
Mr. LATTA. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I really appre-
ciate this hearing today. And also, thanks to our Commissioners for
being with us today.
And, you know, this is the first FCC oversight hearing held by
the Communications and Technology Subcommittee this Congress.
And again, I want to congratulate you, Madam Chair, for your con-
firmation; Commissioner Simington, for your first visit here with
us; and also, I want to thank Commissioner Carr for coming out
to the district again to see what is happening, especially during
COVID. So I really appreciate it.
Well, it has been a year-and-a-half since the Commission last tes-
tified before us. Much has happened in the communications indus-
try, and we have many important topics to cover today. Since the
onset of the COVID–19 pandemic, Congress appropriated billions of
dollars to the FCC to establish programs to connect low-income
Americans to the Internet for distance learning and telehealth. We
also appropriated tens of billions of dollars across the Federal agen-
cies to expand broadband infrastructure across the United States.
While these programs were necessary at the time to help Ameri-
cans stay connected through the pandemic, it is encouraging that
broadband prices in the United States continue to become more af-
fordable, thanks to the private sector offerings. Recent government
and industry data confirm that, when adjusted for inflation, the
cost of broadband is decreasing while speeds are increasing. In fact,
the $30 per month subsidy that will be available to Americans
through the Affordable Connectivity Program is higher than the
cost of plans being offered by certain broadband providers. That
doesn’t quite seem to add up.
What is clear is why adoption continues to be a problem. If cost
is the primary driver of non-adoption, then, theoretically, every
American who has broadband services offered in their community
should have broadband. But that is not the case. And we need to
seriously consider what role, if any, the government should play in
encouraging adoption, given the numerous private sector programs
that are now in place.
We need to continue to focus on deploying broadband where it
doesn’t exist. As agencies implement programs authorized in the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, it is imperative that we do
not pick winners and losers. And let me say it again: We cannot
pick winners and losers. And existing programs like the Rural Dig-
ital Opportunity Fund are not undermined. With the investment
landscape changing, it is essential for Federal agencies to rely on
the FCC’s forthcoming broadband maps to avoid overbuilding on
federally subsidized duplicate projects.
Given the incredible volume of work the FCC has completed in
establishing new programs in a short period of time, it is critical
that the FCC is transparent, responsible to this committee in a
timely manner. The amount of money that is appropriated is ripe
for waste, fraud, and abuse. Our diligent oversight is absolutely es-
8
sential to ensure that that does not happen. We have already seen
the FCC’s Office of Inspector General publicly raise instances of
fraud, risk in the emergency broadband benefit program. As the Af-
fordable Connectivity Program and other programs are imple-
mented, we will be following this work quite closely.
I appreciate this Commission has continued the work of the pre-
vious Administration by increasing transparency, and has already
accomplished bipartisan work. I hope to see this bipartisanship
continue if and when the Commission gets its fifth Commissioner.
Apart from COVID response, the FCC has many important mis-
sions, from expanding rural broadband through the Universal Serv-
ice Fund, and leading broadband mapping efforts to managing non-
Federal spectrum, and combating unlawful robocalls. In addition to
these ongoing responsibilities, the FCC has several immediate
issues that it needs to address.
First, Congress enacted the Secure and Trusted Communication
Networks Act in 2020 to prevent USF funds from being used for
purchase of hardware or services for communication networks that
pose an unacceptable risk to national security. It also established
a reimbursement program to assist small providers with removal
and replacement of this vulnerable equipment. Unfortunately, the
demand for this—for these reimbursements significantly out-
stripped the initial estimates. And the FCC should keep Congress
apprised of any shortfall that remains once the applications are re-
viewed, as well as how these funds are intended to be spent.
Second, Congress enacted the TRACED Act in 2019 to combat
the scourge of illegal robocalls. Congress, the FCC, and private in-
dustry have made this a top priority, and several advances have
been made, both in the government’s response and in action by
voice providers to stop calls before they even get to your phone. De-
spite this progress, more must be done to ensure that illegal
robocalls don’t slip through the cracks, and that they are blocked
so that legitimate calls are able to get to the Americans who need
them. As Congress looks to build on the tools that the TRACED Act
provided, I encourage the FCC to work with my colleagues and me
to ensure that the proper tools are available to both regulators and
private industry.
I look forward to discussing these important issues before the
Commission, and I want to thank the Commissioners and the
chairman for this hearing today. Thanks for being with us.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Latta follows:]
9
PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT E. LATTA
10
11
12
13
14
15
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman yields back. The Chair recognizes Mr.
Pallone, chairman of the full committee, for 5 minutes for his open-
ing statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR., A REP-
RESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JER-
SEY
Mr. PALLONE. Thank you, Chairman Doyle. This is the first over-
sight hearing of the SEC since Chairwoman Rosenworcel has taken
the agency’s helm. And while it was my hope to have a full five-
member Commission with us today, we are glad to have the four
of you here.
And I want to begin by congratulating the chairwoman on becom-
ing chair of the FCC, the first woman to be named to the position
on a permanent basis, and it is much deserved. And the work the
Commission has accomplished under your leadership has not gone
unnoticed.
As the chief regulator of our communications networks, it is more
important than ever that the FCC prioritize protecting consumers.
Over the past two years, since the beginning of the COVID–19 pan-
demic, broadband and connectivity has proven essential to every-
one’s lives. And that is not going to change. Whether it is telework,
telehealth, commerce, or video calls with friends and family, high-
speed, reliable broadband service is fundamental, not just to our
daily connections, but also economic opportunity and American
global leadership.
Unfortunately, the pandemic has also highlighted the massive
disparities faced by individuals and families without reliable home
Internet access. It is an issue that we on this committee, both
Democrats and Republicans, have talked about for a long time. And
that is why I am proud that we stood together to enact the Emer-
gency Broadband Benefit Program, which is now a long-term pro-
gram known as the Affordable Connectivity Program. And this new
long-term program was created thanks to passage of the bipartisan
infrastructure law. As of today, the Affordable Connectivity Pro-
gram is helping more than ten million households afford monthly
internet service. And working together, I believe we can push that
number even higher.
I am also proud that last year we invested in the educational op-
portunities of students by enacting the Emergency Connectivity
Fund as part of the American Rescue Plan. In today’s classroom,
a home internet connection is just as essential as a textbook or a
pencil, and we should no longer accept that millions of students
must sit in a parking lot to access this fundamental educational
tool.
If I could talk about my home State of New Jersey, over $122
million in funding has distributed—has been distributed to schools
and libraries to ensure that students can connect to the internet
at home, allowing them to take advantage of online learning and
do their homework. And these funds are critical to helping fulfill
the promise of—our nation’s students have a quality education that
can open the door to opportunity and success.
And I have to say, Chairwoman, I think we put out, I don’t know,
you know, out of the district office in New Jersey, I think we put
16
out, like, 10 or 12, you know, press things, or social media every
time a new school, a new library, or whatever gets awarded, be-
cause people are just so into it, and you know, they—it is so impor-
tant to them.
Now, these broadband affordability programs have been imple-
mented by the FCC on a bipartisan basis, as have other actions
over the past year, actions that put the consumer first.
The FCC is increasing pricing transparency by requiring the so-
called broadband nutrition label to allow consumers to quickly and
easily compare service plans.
It also recently adopted rules to help the millions of Americans
who live in apartments and condominium buildings by promoting
broadband provider competition in those buildings, and opened an
examination into how the outrageous practice of digital discrimina-
tion could be prevented. And these are all actions that will help
consumers.
The FCC’s work on behalf of the public also includes its vigilance
in securing our communications networks under the Secure and
Trusted Communications Networks Act and the Secure Equipment
Act.
And we also charged the Commission with implementing the
Broadband Data Act, which will be critical to ensuring we have ac-
curate maps when it comes to distributing the more than $40 bil-
lion that Congress appropriated for broadband in the bipartisan in-
frastructure law.
So, again, I want to congratulate the entire Commission for your
recent victory in the bid protest case that the GAO—that put a
hold on some progress with respect to these maps. And I also want
to note the agency’s good work increasing coordination and collabo-
ration with the NTIA to ensure the Federal Government is com-
petently managing our spectrum, and speaking with one voice on
these important issues.
So the FCC has accomplished so much. I mean, I just—I know
there has been a lot, but when I listed it today I was just even
more impressed.
And of course, there is more to be done, and we do need the fifth
Commissioner. So I hope that seat is filled quickly, and it is past
time that FCC assume its place as the agency with expertise to
oversee broadband service providers, and with the authority to
adopt rules to protect consumers.
So that is what you are doing, and I just want to commend you
again, and thank the four Commissioners for being here today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:]
17
PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR.
18
19
Mr. PALLONE. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman yields back. The Chair recognizes
Mrs. Rodgers, the ranking member of the full committee, for 5 min-
utes for her opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CATHY MCMORRIS RODGERS,
A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF
WASHINGTON
Mrs. RODGERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome, everyone.
I too want to congratulate the new Chairwoman Rosenworcel for
your appointment and chairmanship, and to Mr. Simington on your
first appearance as FCC Commissioner before the Energy and
Commerce Committee.
The COVID–19 pandemic put an unprecedented demand on our
communications network. Overnight, Americans’ lives translined—
transitioned online for work, school, and to stay connected to family
and friends. Thanks to the great work and private investment of
U.S. communication providers, our networks withstood this stress
test.
Since 2017, broadband providers invested more than $300 billion
into upgrading and expanding our networks. Since 2015,
broadband speeds for the most popular service tier have more than
doubled. And according to the most recent FCC data, the digital di-
vide closed by 14 percent between the end of 2016 and the end of
2019. At the same time, the price of service decreased. Companies
continue to offer discounted plans for low-income Americans at
speeds fast enough to support streaming and working from home.
And when the cost of virtually everything is skyrocketing because
of inflation, the inflation-adjusted cost of broadband service has de-
creased by 34 percent since 2015.
On top of this private sector response, Congress acted to help
connect Americans. Congress provided the FCC $450 million to ex-
pand networks and provide devices to enable telehealth services,
and established the $3.2 billion emergency broadband benefit to
keep low-income Americans struggling due to the pandemic con-
nected.
The infrastructure bill then extended the duration of this pro-
gram, known as the Affordable Connectivity Program, and provided
the FCC with an additional $14.2 billion to subsidize broadband
service.
Combined with the reduced offerings by the private sector,
broadband service is free for many low-income Americans. At a
time when people have lost their jobs and were stuck at home,
these bipartisan programs provided necessary relief to make sure
they could stay connected during the pandemic. Now we must
make sure these funds are not subject to waste, fraud, and abuse,
and get Americans back to work and off of these temporary
COVID-era government subsidy programs.
The success of our broadband performance, deployment, and af-
fordability is largely due to the actions taken by the Trump Admin-
istration and Republican FCC to roll back regulations. In 2017,
then-FCC Chairman Pai rescinded the strict net neutrality regula-
tions that were enacted during the Obama administration, which
promoted investment in our broadband networks. It allowed our
20
networks in the United States to withstand the COVID–19 stress
test, while our allies in Europe struggled to keep up, due to their
burdensome net neutrality regulations, which some Democrats con-
tinue to advocate for here.
Rather than expanding government command and control into
the broadband marketplace, let’s learn from this pandemic, and
continue on the path of deregulation. We should not ignore the suc-
cess that private sector innovation yielded, and revert to heavy
handed regulations.
We have the opportunity to work together on ways to promote in-
novation and U.S. leadership in technology. I am excited to be
working with Chairman Pallone on my legislative discussion draft,
the Satellite and Telecommunications Streamlining Act. It updates
and streamlines the FCC’s satellite licensing rules to encourage
satellite investment in the United States.
Satellite technology is a viable solution to providing connectivity
in hard-to-reach areas with speeds Americans need. Let’s encour-
age this and more innovation, and make sure our policies and regu-
lations keep pace.
The FCC is at the forefront of making sure all Americans are
connected. Congress tasked the FCC with updating its broadband
maps to accurately reflect where broadband exists in the United
States and where it does not. Without these maps, and without re-
moving regulatory and other barriers to deployment, the $45 billion
that Congress appropriated for the broadband deployment may be
wasted. We cannot let that happen.
It is crucial that the FCC complete the maps as soon as possible,
and share the data with agencies that were awarded broadband
funds. We need to make sure that the money gets to where it is
needed. We need to make sure recipients can deploy quickly and
efficiently. All agencies awarded broadband funding should use
these maps to get it right.
I look forward to today’s discussion on these important topics,
and look forward to working together with the members of this
committee.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Rodgers follows:]
21
PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. CATHY MCMORRIS RODGERS
22
23
24
25
26
Mrs. RODGERS. I yield back, thank you.
Mr. DOYLE. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair would like to
remind members that, pursuant to committee rules, all Members’
written opening statements shall be made part of the record.
So I would now like to introduce our witnesses for today’s hear-
ing.
First we have Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel, chairwoman of the Fed-
eral Communications Commission, joined by Commissioner
Brendan Carr—welcome—and Commissioner Simington. And join-
ing us virtually is the Commissioner Geoffrey Starks.
At this time the Chair will recognize each witness for 5 minutes
to provide their opening statement.
Before we begin, I would like to explain the lighting system,
since it has been a while since we have all been here together.
There is a series of lights. It will initially be green. The light will
turn yellow when you have a minute remaining. After that we ask
you to start to wrap up your testimony. The light will turn red
when your time expires. And if you continue speaking, there are
trap doors under your seats that will take you down to the Ray-
burn subway, and whisk you out of here.
So I would ask my colleagues also on the panel here to try to ob-
serve the 5-minute rule, also.
So we have witnesses appearing virtually. So I need to ask my
colleagues in the hearing room to mute themselves whenever they
are not directly speaking during their question-and-answer portion
so we can clearly hear all the witnesses’ response.
So, we will start with our chairwoman. You are now recognized
for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. JESSICA ROSENWORCEL, CHAIRWOMAN,
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; HON. BRENDAN
CARR, COMMISSIONER, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COM-
MISSION; HON. GEOFFREY STARKS, COMMISSIONER, FED-
ERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; AND HON. NATHAN
SIMINGTON, COMMISSIONER, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
STATEMENT OF JESSICA ROSENWORCEL
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Good morning, Chairman Pallone, Ranking
Member Rodgers, Chairman Doyle, Ranking Member Latta, and
members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to
appear before you today. And it is a treat to be here in person.
While I have been at this table many times, this is my first time
as chairwoman of the FCC, and it is an honor to serve in this role
at a time when the connections that unite us all, physical and dig-
ital, have never been more important.
I believe that there are four essential values in communications:
universal access, public safety, competition, and consumer protec-
tion. Today I want to tell you what we have done to advance these
principles at the FCC.
First, universal access. The pandemic has proven with total clar-
ity that broadband is no longer just nice to have. It is need to have
for everyone everywhere. In response to this crisis, and with the
27
help of Congress, the FCC did something historic. We set up the
Nation’s largest-ever broadband affordability program. What is now
known as the Affordable Connectivity Program is helping 11 mil-
lion households get online and stay online.
We also made history addressing a problem I call the homework
gap, the especially cruel digital divide between students who have
access to the internet at home and those who do not. You know
who these children are, because you see them lingering in the li-
brary parking lot to catch the free Wi-Fi signal, and you see them
sliding into the booths of fast food restaurants to do their home-
work with a side of fries. During the pandemic the homework gap
became an educational chasm. But with the help of Congress, we
set up the Emergency Connectivity Fund to get these kids services
and devices. And so far it has helped more than 12 million stu-
dents.
In addition, with help from Congress, we have supported uni-
versal access to telehealth technologies, expanding remote diag-
nosing and monitoring of patients in every State across the coun-
try.
Second, public safety. In the aftermath of Hurricane Ida, we pro-
posed new rules for network resiliency. We recommitted to spec-
trum for public safety in the 4.9 gigahertz band. And I have also
proposed, with the support of first responders, that when Congress
re-authorizes the agency spectrum auction authority, it commit the
funds raised from our public airwaves to public safety, with a na-
tionwide upgrade to next generation 911.
We also have made strides when it comes to national security.
We kicked off the Nation’s first inquiry into Open RAN systems.
We launched a first-of-its-kind program to remove insecure equip-
ment from two Chinese vendors from our domestic networks. We
revoked the authorizations of four companies because our national
security agencies determined that they could be subject to exploi-
tation, influence, and control by a foreign government.
We rechartered the Communications Security, Reliability, and
Interoperability Council, and gave it a 5G focus. And for the first
time, this group is being co-chaired by the Cybersecurity and Infra-
structure Security Agency. And last week we updated our covered
list of communications equipment and services that pose an unac-
ceptable risk to national security and may not be used in our uni-
versal service programs. And for the first time, we included a Rus-
sian software company.
Third, competition. To advance competition in our wireless econ-
omy we have moved aggressively to free up spectrum for new 5G
services. Earlier this year we concluded a successful auction of 100
prime mid-band span—mid-band spectrum in the 3.45 gigahertz
band. And just last week I announced we are going to hold another
mid-band auction in the 2.5 gigahertz band. We also identified
spectrum for the first time to support increased competition for
commercial space launch in order to support innovation in our new
space age.
But I recognize that we are not going to be able to do all this
wireless work alone. We need a whole-of-government approach.
That is why, last month, the FCC and NTIA announced a new and,
frankly, much needed spectrum coordination initiative.
28
Fourth, consumer protection. We are creating a broadband nutri-
tion label that is going to make it easy for consumers to compare
and purchase services for themselves and their families. We have
updated our rules to support broadband competition for the one-
third of us that live in multi-tenant units like apartment buildings.
And we are putting an end to exclusive sweetheart deals that are
sometimes cut by landlords that deny consumers their choice of
broadband provider.
Finally, we have prioritized fundamental issues of communica-
tions equity, and started an agency-wide proceeding to address dig-
ital discrimination, aided by our Communications Equity and Di-
versity Council.
So over the course of the year, we have made real progress. The
four of us have turned down the volume and ramped up the work.
Still, I know there is a lot left to do and a full Commission of five
is an important part of achieving those results.
So thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I
look forward to any questions that you might have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Rosenworcel follows:]
29
30
31
32
33
Mr. DOYLE. The chairwoman yields back. Thank you very much.
The Chair now recognizes Commissioner Carr for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF BRENDAN CARR
Mr. CARR. Thank you, Chairman Doyle, Ranking Member Latta,
Chairman Pallone, Republican Leader Rodgers, distinguished mem-
bers of the subcommittee. Thank you for the chance to testify.
And I want to start by offering my congratulations, as well, to
the Chair on her first time to testify as Chair before the committee.
Since we all last testified, my FCC colleagues and I have been
busy delivering on priorities that you and Congress have identified.
We have promoted competition in the broadband market, including
by giving Americans that live in apartments, in public housing
more choice for high speed service.
On spectrum we have worked together on a successful auction of
mid-band airwaves earlier this year, and have another one set for
this summer.
On telehealth, we have extended the lifesaving benefits of this
technology by awarding $550 million to telehealth/telecare pro-
viders. We have taken bipartisan action, as well, to close the af-
fordability portion of the digital divide, standing up a record setting
$24 billion in new, low-income initiatives.
And we have come together to advance our national security, as
well. Over the last five months alone, we revoked the operating au-
thority of four different carriers that posed threats.
Of course, there is more we can do to extend America’s leader-
ship. That is why I included a series of ideas in my testimony on
spectrum, infrastructure, and national security that are ripe for ac-
tion.
Outside the FCC there are some emerging trends that concern
me. I will start with the effort by agencies to deviate from the clear
statutory process that Congress established for regulating our Na-
tion’s airwaves. Congress long ago determined that an independent
expert agency, the FCC, makes the final call on these rules. Yet on
C-Band, executive branch agencies turned Congress’s decision
aside, and broke from this tried-and-true process at the last
minute. They replaced the FCC’s rules with ones dictated behind
closed doors.
It is no surprise, then, that this chaotic approach resulted in 5G
infrastructure laying fallow, and canceled flights. And it is part of
a dysfunctional trend, frankly, among agencies that disagree with
the process that Congress established for reaching sound spectrum
decisions.
As Chairman Doyle and Ranking Member Latta recently indi-
cated in an op ed, we should all stand up for the statutory process.
Otherwise, we are only inviting agencies to engage in additional ac-
tions that can derail U.S. 5G leadership.
Turning from spectrum to the executive branch’s infrastructure
efforts, I am concerned that Federal Government is failing to put
appropriate guardrails in place. By my count, we now have over
$800 billion that could be used for broadband efforts, and those
funds are spread across a range of different agencies. I see several
problems.
First, there is little coordination across agencies.
34
Second, there is an absence of adequate controls in place. Indeed,
one executive branch department told me that they weren’t even
tracking how much money had gone toward broadband.
Third, many of the policies are poised to leave rural communities
behind. And this is because the Administration gave the green
light to overbuild existing high-speed networks in communities
that already have multiple broadband providers.
Fourth, I am concerned that we are going to see record-setting
levels of waste, fraud, and abuse. The FCC’s inspector general al-
ready issued a troubling report about one of our new programs.
And we can’t waste resources here, particularly because of the sup-
ply chain and workforce shortages that are yet to be solved.
Finally, I want to commend the committee members that are
working to hold Big Tech accountable. Leader McMorris Rodgers
and her colleagues have a smart set of bills that would end Big
Tech’s abusive practices, while promoting more speech on the inter-
net.
Reining in Big Tech is key, because we now have a handful of
corporations with state-like influence that shape everything from
the information we consume to the places we shop. These corporate
behemoths are not merely exercising market power; they are abus-
ing dominant positions. They are not simply prevailing in the free
market; they are taking advantage of a landscape that has been
skewed by the government to favor their business models.
Indeed, it is hard to imagine another industry where a greater
gap exists between power and accountability. And that is why Con-
gress needs to act, from 230 reform to transparency to non-dis-
crimination rules, to empowering consumers to make their own de-
cisions about content moderation by letting them choose their own
content filters or none at all. These steps will go a long way in
bringing long-overdue accountability to Big Tech.
So in closing, I want to thank you for the opportunity to testify,
and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Carr follows:]
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman yields back. The Chair will now rec-
ognize, virtually, Commissioner Starks.
You are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF GEOFFREY STARKS
Mr. STARKS. Thank you, Chairman Doyle, Ranking Member
Latta, Chairman Pallone, Ranking Member McMorris Rodgers, and
members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to ap-
pear before you here today.
Congratulations, as well, to Chairwoman Rosenworcel on your
first oversight hearing.
We stand, truly, at an inflection point in history: first, the
COVID–19 pandemic has transformed the way we work, learn, and
connect with each other; second, the challenges of our day make
clear that network security has never been more important; and fi-
nally, the consequences of climate change are becoming alarmingly
clear. The FCC has an indispensable role to play on each of these
fronts. And for my part, I am proud to say that we are helping
make America more equitable, more secure, and more sustainable.
Our longstanding do to divide has morphed into a monstrous
COVID–19 divide. And like so many other aspects of the pandemic,
the lack of access to and adoption of home broadband has rein-
forced existing inequities. In particular, low-income and Americans
of color remain, by a wide margin, less likely to have a home
broadband connection than their counterparts. The 14.2 billion Af-
fordable Connectivity Program is changing that, converting EBB to
a pandemic-focused long-term part of the FCC’s work.
And the chairwoman, along with my colleagues, supported my
proposal to start work on an ACP pilot program to expand partici-
pation by households that benefit from Federal public housing as-
sistance. That is more than five million households that benefit
from Federal rental assistance, and that includes public housing
and section 8, the Housing Choice Voucher program. And I plan to
focus my efforts here where there, I believe, is a clear synergy be-
tween housing and connectivity. If we are helping a family secure
housing, we should be able to help them secure an online connec-
tion in that home.
As we increase access to our broadband networks, we must also
ensure that those networks are secure. I am particularly proud of
the work we have done to remove untrustworthy equipment from
our networks, and deny or revoke telecom operating authority for
every carrier identified by Team Telecom.
But our work is not complete. I have called for the Commission
to work with Congress and the Administration to examine how to
tackle network security threats like foreign-owned data centers. In
cooperation with the relevant executive branch agencies, the Com-
mission should commence an inquiry to identify all U.S.-based data
centers owned and operated by companies subject to the laws and
jurisdiction of adversary states; identify on a confidential basis the
services provided by these data centers and their customers; third,
ascertain whether the data centers present a risk of interception,
tampering, or blocking of U.S. communications and information;
and last, identify any legal authority of the FCC or any other regu-
43
latory body to protect the U.S. communications stored within or
transit these data centers.
For example, executive order 13873 delegates authority to Com-
merce over transactions involving information in the ICT that pose
national security risks. The Commission itself also might have
oversight through its licensing authority for undersea cable landing
sites, given that data centers, as well as those overseas, rely on
such cables to transmit information between the U.S. and the rest
of the world.
Finally, I have to address another issue that will define our
shared and collective future, and that is the environment, and the
important role that I see the telecommunications and technology
sector playing. Here there are at least, I think, four ways that we
can drive impact.
First, we continue to optimize the efficient use of spectrum, a fi-
nite resource, while at the same time enabling devices that draw
less power. Spectral efficiency and saving energy are a must have
here, doing more while using less.
Second, 5G and the use cases we envision are in manufacturing.
Precision agriculture and energy could contribute 20 percent to-
ward U.S. emissions reductions by 2025.
Third, public-private partnerships are already hard at work, in-
cluding the infrastructure legislation’s 500 million in DoT awards
to support the ongoing efforts by smart cities to use wireless IoT
sensors to reduce traffic congestion and energy usage.
Fourth, industry-led initiatives will continue to play a significant
role, from reducing or eliminating carbon emissions associated with
their operations to increasing the use of renewable energy and
minimizing electronic waste.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Starks follows:]
44
45
46
47
Mr. STARKS. Thank you so much for inviting me today. I was
looking forward to joining the committee in person, but, unfortu-
nately, like many, I have a sick child here at home, and so it neces-
sitates that I join virtually. But thank you, and I look forward to
your questions.
Mr. DOYLE. Thank you, Commissioner, and I hope your little one
is feeling better.
We will now recognize Commissioner Simington for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF NATHAN SIMINGTON
Mr. SIMINGTON. Thank you, Chairman Pallone, Ranking Member
Rodgers, Chairman Doyle, Ranking Member Latta, and distin-
guished members of the subcommittee. It is a privilege to appear
before you today. I would like to join you and the rest of my col-
leagues in congratulating the chairwoman in her first appearance
here as permanent chairwoman. And, of course, it is a particular
honor for me, because this is my first opportunity to testify before
the subcommittee at all, and I will watch out for the Rayburn sub-
way.
Serving on a divided Commission has been an education for me
in the fundamentally non-partisan nature of the work of an expert
agency. Working on fair allocation of regulatory fees or construction
of spectrum auction rules is simply outside of partisan consider-
ation. And while at the FCC I have tried to base my own approach
on the professionalism of our great agency staff, today I am going
to focus on three forward-looking issues: efficient use of spectrum,
device security, and the space economy. The opportunities they
present must be captured, and their challenges must be met. And
the FCC has a unique mission and mandate for all three.
First, access to and efficient use of spectrum. The FCC and NTIA
must balance the interests of commercial spectrum users and Fed-
eral spectrum incumbents. Generally, licensed commercial users
prefer and get the most value from full power, exclusive use li-
censes. Generally, when coordinating with the commercial sector,
Federal incumbents prefer and feel best able to fulfill their obliga-
tions with spectrum sharing, and look toward dynamic spectrum al-
location.
Both types of users, however, benefit from clearer rules and cer-
tainty for their operations, and the FCC can improve things for all
spectrum users by creating a clearer protection rights regime. The
FCC should examine how and when receivers are protected from
interference, while specifically defining what interference con-
stitutes, so that safe harbors can be created.
An interference limit policy would provide certainty to radio sys-
tems operators and receiver manufacturers and, therefore, benefit
the end users, which today means every American.
Increased signal strength from transmitters can provide im-
proved reception, but increasing power levels requires receivers in
adjacent bands to be able to reject unwanted signals outside their
frequencies. We can look for efficiencies at the Commission in a
band by band fashion, where spectrum is densest, or where protec-
tion of high-value services is of greatest importance. My office has
been examining this issue for over a year, and we want to sincerely
48
thank Chairwoman Rosenworcel for the forthcoming introduction of
a notice of inquiry.
We must boldly re-examine the status quo in interference protec-
tion. Today we have dense co-location of wireless edge devices, and
it is getting denser fast. The 5G revolution isn’t just about an im-
proved consumer experience on the cell phone. To get technological
advances that we want in public safety, medicine, and industry, we
need to put those services on 5G. We are going to switch on billions
of new wireless devices over the next decade. Those devices are
going to be operating in dense spectrum neighborhoods. So the
rules of the road on interference protection have to be crystal clear.
But we also have to be clear about the security challenges of
using wireless devices at greater scale, which leads me to my sec-
ond issue: device security. The FCC is not a cybersecurity agency,
but our mission includes protecting the availability of wireless
spectrum, a scarce and fragile resource, for the use of the govern-
ment and the public. Traditionally, we have fulfilled this role by re-
quiring that wireless transmitters pass a battery of FCC tests, and
operate within narrowly confined parameters.
Creating scientific standards for what constitutes harmful inter-
ference will further protect users of spectrum from harmful inter-
ference. But even if every transmitter and receiver in America is
designed to meet stringent performance standards, another prob-
lem still remains: these devices are increasingly not static circuits,
which could be expected to behave consistently for the life of the
device.
As more and more static devices are retired, they are being re-
placed or upgraded with software-controlled devices, often running
multiple operating systems from different providers. These systems
are inherently more vulnerable than a wired system, or a single-
purpose system to a cyber attack. And those attacks can turn a de-
vice that performed perfectly well on our workbench into a signal
jammer.
I worry especially about the ability of any attacker to hijack mul-
tiple wireless devices at once, thereby crafting a remote denial of
service attack by a mass signal jamming. Addressing wireless secu-
rity for the new wireless era will protect Americans against domes-
tic and foreign threats as we use more and more wireless services.
Last, I would like to touch briefly on the space economy. The
FCC can help with the robust growth of the launch and satellite
service sectors by requiring thoroughgoing orbital debris mitigation
standards. As you all know, the FCC has an open procedure—pro-
ceeding here. But I was pleased to see the bipartisan legislation
shared by Chairman Pallone and Ranking Member Rodgers that
clarifies the FCC’s authority to craft and implement such rules.
Because the FCC licenses and grants U.S. market access to sat-
ellite operators, thus representing something like 50 percent of the
present economic opportunity for the worldwide space economy, we
have a unique opportunity to lead the world here at a time when
other nations have not been carrying the ball. We should capitalize
on this to lead a new international consensus, in my view, for safe
commercial satellite operation in space.
Chairman Doyle, Ranking Member Latta, Chairman Pallone,
Ranking Member Rodgers and members of the subcommittee, I
49
want to thank you again for holding this hearing, and for the op-
portunity to testify, and I look forward very much to answering
your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Simington follows:]
50
51
52
Mr. DOYLE. Thank you very much. The gentleman yields back.
We have now concluded openings. We are going to move to mem-
ber questions. Each member will have 5 minutes to ask questions
of our witnesses. I would ask all my colleagues that—let’s do our
best to adhere to that 5-minute rule. And I will start by recognizing
myself for 5 minutes.
Commissioner Rosenworcel, especially in this economy, people
are struggling to make ends meet. And I think it is important that
we have a strong advocate for consumers in the FCC, which is why
I am so glad that you are the Chair. As we have heard from today’s
testimony, broadband connections are essential, and it is also es-
sential broadband consumers are able to understand and receive
the benefits that they are paying for.
Chairwoman, I introduced an important bill that I sponsored last
Congress, the Television Viewer Protection Act, which, among other
things, requires more transparency around consumers’ TV, phone,
and internet bills. Can you tell me how the implementation is
going, from your perspective? Are the companies complying with
the provisions related to equipment surcharges? Is the FCC still
getting complaints about these issues?
Give us an update on where you see this.
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Thank you for your—the question, and your
work on the Television Viewer Protection Act.
When we went back and we looked on the record on this subject,
what we found is the agency had done a lot of work to make sure
that small providers of video services could develop buying collec-
tives to negotiate for the carriage of channels. But we hadn’t done
a lot of work when it came to the consumer-focused provisions you
are describing about transparency, and also making sure that, if
you order a service, the company shouldn’t make you get some
equipment you don’t intend to use.
We have certainly seen press reports suggesting that is still
going on. So in December of this year, we sought comment on these
issues, because we want to develop an up-to-date record. If that is
happening, we want to fix it, and we want to use the Television
Viewer Protection Act to do so.
Mr. DOYLE. Great, thank you.
Commissioner Starks, we have signed around 11 million house-
holds for the—up for the Affordable Connectivity Program. And I
want to say I am very encouraged by the pilot program you are
standing up to help families in low-income housing receive the ben-
efits of the ACP. Can you tell us a little bit more about your expec-
tations for the program and its ability to reduce the digital divide
for these families?
Mr. STARKS. Well, thank you so much for the question, Mr.
Chairman.
I have long said it is clear that we need to meet this—the discon-
nected where they are. And there are a lot of great things hap-
pening around the FCC on ACP, but I am glad to join with you in
highlighting the focus on beneficiaries of Federal housing pro-
grams, including residents, as I mentioned, that are in public hous-
ing on section 8.
You know, Congress made public housing beneficiaries eligible,
but we have seen a very small share of them enrolled. And so there
53
is a particular nexus between housing and connectivity. I have seen
it myself. I will never forget when I met with a mother of three
who lived in the George Washington Carver Homes in Selma, Ala-
bama. She told me how she was able to complete an online degree
program, keep her kids safe and off the streets while they finish
their homework. And so we need to bring that transformative expe-
rience to millions of families. And I am hopeful that we can focus
some efforts here on the five million families that are in public
housing.
Mr. DOYLE. Great, thank you very much. And I agree, we have
got to do more to get the word out. I hear that in Pittsburgh, too,
that a lot of people just simply don’t know about the program. So
we have got to give some thought to how we can get more informa-
tion out.
You know, I was really glad to see the Spectrum Coordination
Initiative with NTIA Administrator Davidson in your announce-
ment yesterday regarding updating the 2003 memorandum of un-
derstanding. I think we have to do everything we can to bring back
normalcy to our spectrum management processes, and avoid fights
like we have been seeing.
So, Chairwoman, what are your expectations for the initiative,
and what other steps do you think need to be taken? And what,
if anything, do you need from Congress?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Thank you for raising this issue. We have got
to do better when it comes to spectrum coordination. We truly need
a whole-of-government approach. So very shortly after Alan David-
son was appointed to his role at the NTIA, I reached out and we
set up this initiative to make clear that we have goals, and those
goals include working closely together.
With respect to Congress, I want to make sure that you pay at-
tention to our work and if you see areas for improvement, you let
us know what they are. But I would also like you to reinforce the
NTIA Act. That is the law you passed to set up NTIA, to make
them the overseer and advisor of Federal spectrum interests. I
want NTIA to continue to be able to speak for Federal spectrum
interests, and not just the agencies themselves. So elevating NTIA
and its authority in the discussion, just as Congress intended, is
really important going forward.
Mr. DOYLE. Thank you very much. And to set a good example for
my colleagues, I am yielding back ten seconds.
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Latta.
Mr. LATTA. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks again to our
witnesses for being with us today.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, according to the publicly available
data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, inflation-adjusted
broadband prices have dropped approximately 15 percent since
2010. In fact, according to the FCC’s own data from the Urban
Rates Survey, the inflation-adjusted change in the most popular
broadband tiers has decreased 34 percent since 2015. Our Ameri-
cans are getting more broadband for their buck.
Chairwoman, do you agree with the FCC’s data that consumers
are getting better broadband service offerings for comparably lower
and affordable prices?
54
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Well, what I would like to do is take advan-
tage of the new legislation that you have offered us in the Infra-
structure Investment and Jobs Act, which expressly tasks us with
doing a study on what prices are for the plans that are being or-
dered by anyone who is on the Affordable Connectivity Program.
And I think that that is going to provide an opportunity to provide
updated data. I truly hope that it reflects exactly the kind of data
you just shared with me.
Mr. LATTA. Well, thank you. I would like to acknowledge and
also thank the industry for their efforts to provide broadband serv-
ice at affordable prices, while continuing to upgrade and expand
their service offerings prior to the Federal subsidies being enacted.
I was disappointed to see a letter sent by my Democratic col-
leagues on this committee to NTIA Assistant Secretary Davidson
urging him to expand the scope of the BEAD program, impose bur-
densome requirements like open access, rather than focusing on
the task at hand, and incentivize private investment to make sure
all Americans are connected.
The FCC’s broadband maps will be crucial for agencies distrib-
uting broadband funds, especially with respect to the $42.5 billion
that the NTIA will be distributing to the states through its BEAD
program. The FCC is also actively awarding funds for the Rural
Digital Opportunity Fund.
Chairwoman, in March 2020 you testified before the Senate that
the FCC could radically improve its broadband maps within three
to 6 months. Congress provided $98 million to the FCC to imple-
ment its mapping activities in December 2020. And since you have
been leading the FCC, it has been about 2 years since you have
made the statement to the Senate, and yet we still, unfortunately,
don’t have maps.
The FCC recently announced the deadline for providers to submit
mapping data to the FCC is September 1st. How long after that
date do you contemplate that we are going to have complete maps?
And, you know, do you commit to getting these maps done before
the end of the year?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Well, the answer to your final question is ab-
solutely yes. We will have maps in the fall.
I want to unpack a few of the other things that you mentioned
there. You mentioned comments that I made in March of, oh, pre-
pandemic days. That was a reference to the maps that we used to
inform our Rural Digital Opportunity Fund. As you may know, we
have had a lot of problems with the preliminary awards in that
program because the last Administration awarded rural broadband
funding to the Pentagon parking lots, the parking lot at LA Inter-
national Airport, and a whole bunch of traffic medians.
The bottom line is that we have got to do better than that. And
so we have taken advantage of the law that this committee worked
on, the Broadband Data Act, which requires us to build better
maps. And I think you and I can agree the best time to do that
would have been 5 years ago. But the second best time is right
now, and my goal is to build the kind of maps that are not just
good for the moment we are in, but provide a framework and a
structure that people can use 5 to 10 years from now, when they
sit in this same seat.
55
So we are following that law to a tee. We are dotting every I. We
are making sure that we do everything that you requested. We
have brought in a broadband and data architect. We have acquired
systems for—to make sure we have the capacity to manipulate this
data. We have beta-tested those systems with wireless broadband
maps and new propagation models. And we also acquired—we set
up a contract for a broadband location fabric, which is required
under the law.
As Chairman Doyle mentioned, we got slowed up in that process,
because Federal contracting rules required us to put our pencils
down for 100 days. But we were victorious earlier this month, and
now it is all systems go. The broadband data location fabric is
being built. And in June of this year carriers will start filing their
data with us, and we will convert that data into maps in the fall.
Mr. LATTA. Well, thank you very much.
Commissioner Carr, just real briefly, you know, as we look, are
there any other things that we could do to help in making sure
that we don’t have an over—federally subsidized overbuilding by
our agencies?
I don’t feel like we have had in the past—we don’t want that
competition out there.
And I am sorry, I have got about 12 seconds.
Mr. CARR. I am concerned about it, because Treasury recently
laid out rules for hundreds of billion dollars of ARPA funds that
green light the use of them for overbuilding. We still have too
many communities in this country with zero megabits per second,
so we need to prioritize there. Some of that can be corrected at the
State level, when they receive the funds, but I would also encour-
age Congress potentially to look at passing legislation similar to
the Infrastructure Act, which included a prioritization scheme that
is not present in the ARPA funds.
Mr. LATTA. Well, thank you very much.
Sorry about going over, Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman yields back. The Chair recognizes the
chairman of the full committee, Mr. Pallone, for 5 minutes.
Mr. PALLONE. Thank you, Chairman Doyle. I wanted to ask the
Chairwoman Rosenworcel.
I know you have been meeting with students and teachers across
the country as the FCC has implemented the Emergency
Connectivity Fund from the American Rescue Plan. But could you
just give us a little more description of how this program has made
a meaningful difference for students who previously lacked home
internet?
I know you have talked about it, but I would like to hear a little
more.
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Thank you. You know, in pre-pandemic days,
we called it the homework gap, because there were these kids who
had internet access at school, but they went home and they
couldn’t do the schoolwork they had been assigned because they
had no broadband. And during the pandemic, that gap really be-
came a huge crisis, because we had students in every State across
the country locked out of the virtual classroom.
56
And so, with the help of Congress, we have committed to fixing
that. As a result of the Emergency Connectivity Fund, we have
made a meaningful dent in the homework gap. We have helped
more than 12 million students get devices and connections at home.
And we have been able to do that by supporting libraries and
schools in every State across the country.
I think, when we look back, we will look at that law and this mo-
ment as the one where we decided that, just like every student
should be able to have paper and a pencil to do their schoolwork,
they also need internet access.
Mr. PALLONE. Thank you. Let me ask Commissioner Stark.
We know that the cost of monthly internet services is too much
for a lot of people to afford. And that is why, again, on a bipartisan
basis, we created this emergency broadband benefit, which was
turned into a long-term Affordable Connectivity Program in the bi-
partisan infrastructure.
So, Commissioner Stark, can you describe why it is so important
that economically vulnerable households can access reliable inter-
net service, and how this ACP helps with that, if you would?
Mr. STARKS. Yes. Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman.
You know, all the advanced infrastructure in the world won’t
help if ordinary Americans cannot afford to buy broadband service
it supports. For tens of millions of Americans, we know—the data
shows—that the price is just too high. Almost 47 million Ameri-
cans, 18 million households remain offline just because they can’t
afford their internet connections. And millions more have had to
make a difficult sacrifice in order to keep their broadband on.
And, you know, I have said no family should have to choose be-
tween keeping the lights on and a broadband connection, but we
know that they do. The fact of the matter is that you have so many
folks, especially through the pandemic, who need their kids edu-
cated, who have lost their jobs, are looking to get job—additional
job training. And making sure that they have something that can
power their household is absolutely essential. And the once-in-a-
generation investment that you all have made is critical.
Mr. PALLONE. Thank you. Let me just—I want to commend—I
guess all I am doing today is commending the FCC, which is kind
of unusual for—I don’t always do that with all the agencies that
come in here.
But I wanted to commend you on the swift action it took to ad-
dress the instances of fraud by providers in the program that was
uncovered by the inspector general, and exactly how that system
is supposed to work. But I will go back to Chairwoman
Rosenworcel.
Can you say a few words about why the inspector general alert-
ing system and corresponding FCC action is important to maintain
program integrity in a program like the ACP?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Sure. Congress gave us 60 days to set up the
Nation’s largest-ever broadband affordability program, and also
asked the inspector general to take a close look. So this is working
exactly as intended.
The inspector general saw that we had set up a streamlined
process for community-eligible participation schools, which are
schools with very high percentages of students on the free and re-
57
duced lunch program. And they suggested to us that the process we
had set up created a loophole, and that we were seeing spikes in
demand in those locations that looked out of the ordinary.
And so, upon learning on that, we immediately shut that portal
down, required more documentation, referred any bad actors to our
enforcement unit, and we also reached out to every single sub-
scriber who had signed up for the program through that portal to
re-certify and re-verify them. And in that process we have identi-
fied some companies and some agents who have been problematic,
and we will hold them to account.
Mr. PALLONE. Thank you so much.
Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now recog-
nizes Mrs. Rodgers, the full committee ranking member, for 5 min-
utes to ask questions.
Mrs. RODGERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, I thank you for your support of the
draft legislation we are working on to modernize the satellite com-
munications licensing process.
In 2020, approximately two-thirds of the investment in space
startups took place in the United States, and we want to encourage
that innovation. What challenges is the FCC facing with the cur-
rent satellite licensing process, and how can Congress help?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. This is a really exciting time for space tech-
nology. We had $10 billion of investment in the United States in
the space sector last year. We launched more than 1,700 satellites,
which is more than we ever have in human history.
Now, the challenge we face with all this activity is to make sure
our regulatory structures keep up. And I think, on that score, we
do have work to do, because they were built for an era when sat-
ellites were sent up only occasionally. We didn’t have large systems
with constellations, with thousands of satellites. We just had a
handful.
So what we are going to have to do is come up with more people
who can work in our agency on satellite policy, faster turnaround
times with shorter deadlines, and more thoughtful approaches to
some hard issues like orbital debris. And that is certainly some-
thing that I hope that we can work together with this committee
on, and do some work on a bipartisan basis at the agency.
Mrs. RODGERS. I look forward to it, too, also, thank you.
To all the Commissioners, starting with the Chair: at her second
confirmation hearing, FCC Commissioner nominee Gigi Sohn re-
sponded to a question from Senator Moran stating, ‘‘At the last
hearing I expressly disavowed any support for the FCC imple-
menting rate regulation,’’ and then went on to say they, the FCC,
tried to do it in cable in the 1990’s, it didn’t work out well.
I would like to ask, do you support rate regulation?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. I support consumer protection, but don’t be-
lieve that that is the place that we should go in order to manage
the broadband industry on a going-forward basis.
Mrs. RODGERS. Thank you.
Mr. Carr?
Mr. CARR. No, I don’t. I think here it is important, too, to be
clear that there is two forms of rate regulation. There is rate regu-
58
lation we call ex-post, meaning tariffing on the front end, and then
there is application of just and reasonable standards on the back
end. And I think, when we talk rate regulation, we should be clear.
I am against both forms of rate regulation as to broadband internet
access service.
Mrs. RODGERS. Thank you.
Mr. Simington?
Mr. SIMINGTON. I am—I would like to echo my colleagues’ senti-
ments. I am opposed to all forms of rate regulation.
And in particular, I would like to ask the question what exactly
it would even mean to tariff a broadband connection. I don’t think
there is any analogy from telephone service.
Mrs. RODGERS. OK, Mr. Starks?
Mr. STARKS. Yes, yes. For my part, going forward, I have not en-
visioned rate regulation as part of our broadband regulatory
scheme.
Mrs. RODGERS. Thank you.
Commissioner Carr, you have been a vocal proponent of using
the FCC to advance the deployment of next gen technologies. One
of my biggest concerns with the FCC using title II of the Commu-
nications Act to regulate is that it unnecessarily restricts innova-
tion.
In the past, Republicans on this committee have put forth a
menu of legislative options that protect consumers while enabling
innovation in network performance such as virtualization, network
slicing, or faster speeds. What would the impact of title II regula-
tions have on these emerging technologies, and do they run the
risk of ceding leadership to China if we restrict innovation by over-
regulating the broadband market?
Mr. CARR. Yes, they do. I think it is important to distinguish, on
the one hand, consumer protection, net neutrality rules, where
there is a lot of common ground, and title II as a legal framework.
We need to look no further, as you indicated in your opening, to
Europe. When COVID–19 hit, it was a global stress test of our
internet ecosystem. Traffic surged around the world. In Europe,
regulators there had to ask streamers like Netflix to degrade the
quality of the service because they thought that the networks, the
continent’s networks, would break.
We didn’t see that here in the U.S., because we had the right
regulatory framework in place that incentivized investments be-
fore, but also, to your point, actively. There was node splitting
going on. There was adding of capacity, there was managing of the
network to ensure that it worked.
And to your point, we need innovation in the network going for-
ward, so we don’t want to put a straitjacket of title II in that situa-
tion.
Mrs. RODGERS. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to enter a letter you sent to the FCC
Chairman Genachowski, where you expressed concern with the
FCC using title II of the Communications Act to reclassify
broadband as a telecommunications service, saying that any action
that needs to be taken in this space ‘‘is a job for Congress.’’ I would
agree, and hope that we can work together on that, going forward.
Mr. DOYLE. Without objection, so ordered.
59
[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
Mrs. RODGERS. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act ex-
tended FCC auction authority for seven years for purposes of auc-
tioning spectrum in the lower 3 gigahertz band. Notwithstanding
the 2.5 and 3.45 auctions, what would the impact to the FCC’s on-
going operations be if this is not—it expires?
And I think my time has actually expired, so hopefully someone
else will ask this question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will yield
back.
[Laughter.]
Mr. DOYLE. I thank the ranking member. The Chair now recog-
nizes Mr. McNerney for 5 minutes.
Mr. MCNERNEY. I thank the Chair, and I thank the Commission
for your work, and congratulate the chairwoman.
These past couple of years have highlighted why it is so impor-
tant to make sure that everyone who wants reliable broadband ac-
cess at home is able to get it.
However, for too many people in my district, the cost of monthly
service is really just too high. I am proud that Congress has made
our historic investment to help low-income Americans afford
broadband through the Affordable Connectivity Fund, which is
helping over 1.2 million Californians.
It is also very important for students to have reliable broadband
access in their homes. The Emergency Connectivity Fund has
brought over $10 million to schools and libraries in my own dis-
trict, and I commend the Commission for your efforts on this pro-
gram.
I also want to voice my support for a meaningful FCC authority
over broadband internet service providers. We need a Federal agen-
cy to ensure that consumers are protected and communities aren’t
left behind.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, in your testimony you discuss the im-
portance of Wi-Fi in closing the homework gap. As co-chair of the
Wi-Fi Caucus, along with Ranking Member Latta, I have long ad-
vocated for spectrum to help such concerns. But spectrum is a fi-
nite resource, and there is hardly any, if any, greenfield spectrum
bands left. Given that most spectrum bands have existing users
and operations, how can the Commission and Congress make more
spectrum available, including low band spectrum for commercial
use?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Well, thank you for the question. The future
of our wireless economy depends on a lot of people in this room get-
ting together and identifying spectrum bands that we can commit
to new commercial uses, both licensed and unlicensed. That is
going to create—that is going to take creating incentives for Fed-
eral actors that have existing allocations and need to be pushed to
use less of their airwaves than they do at present. And it is also
going to take some creative activity, thinking about hierarchies of
spectrum rights, as the agency did in the CBRS and 3.5 gigahertz
band, as well as new technologies that allow for real-time and dy-
namic access.
These are really exciting things, but it is going to require a lot
of policy, regulatory, and legislative work to make them happen.
Mr. MCNERNEY. So how do you know so much stuff?
60
But Chairwoman Rosenworcel, the FCC’s general auction author-
ity expires at the end of September. And I am going to ask the
question that the ranking member was asking. At our recent hear-
ing, all witnesses expressed how important it is for Congress to ex-
tend its authority. I agree. What would be the impact if Congress
fails to extend FCC’s general auction authority in advance of the
expiration date?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Well, over the course of our history, the FCC
has raised more than $233 billion from its spectrum auctions. We
have led the world when it comes to reallocating airwaves and
doing creative things with them. I want that to continue.
I would recommend to this committee, however, that when you
re-authorize our spectrum authority, that you consider this: you
might take that spectrum authority and take the dollars that are
raised from the first set of auctions from those public airwaves, and
commit them to public safety so we could have a nationwide pro-
gram to upgrade 911 in every State in the country. First respond-
ers support that. And I think you have an opportunity to make a
meaningful difference when it comes to emergency calls.
Mr. MCNERNEY. I thought you were going to say that.
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Yes.
[Laughter.]
Mr. MCNERNEY. Last month the Commission published the no-
tice of inquiry, as identified by Commissioner Simington, seeking
comments on securing the internet’s global routing system, known
as the Border Gateway Protocol Against Vulnerabilities.
More recently, the Commission took further action to secure
American networks from bad actors by including three additional
equipment and service providers to the list of untrusted commu-
nication equipment services under the Secure Trusted Communica-
tions Network Act. This has been discussed already a few times
this morning. This is an important development for network secu-
rity.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, do you anticipate further action from
the Commission in either of these areas? And is there a bigger role
for Congress to play here?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. The answer is yes. I think that our security
threats are constantly evolving, so we will have to stay on top of
them. And to the extent that existing legislation, which requires
our coordination with national security authorities, causes any
problem, this will be the committee we come to first to talk to
about that.
Mr. MCNERNEY. Thank you. In my remaining time I want to dis-
cuss the Lifeline that has been so critical for my constituents.
Commissioner Starks, can you talk about the importance of the
Lifeline Program, even with the Affordable Connectivity Program,
especially for vulnerable populations?
You only have about ten seconds before Chairman Doyle hits the
gavel.
Mr. STARKS. Yes. Well, you and I see eye to eye. There are, you
know, over six-and-a-half million Americans on Lifeline right now.
It is a critical program to make sure that folks stay in touch with
family, with jobs, with health.
61
And the other thing that I would add is that Lifeline can be in
addition to an ACP benefit. So we can have somebody who gets a
Lifeline phone in addition to a, for example, a home ACP connec-
tion.
Mr. MCNERNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman yields back. The Chair recognizes Mr.
Guthrie for 5 minutes.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thanks for that, and
thanks for everybody being here today, and Chair Rosenworcel, for
your first as chair of the committee—of the Commission.
Rip and replace—I want to ask you this question, Chair
Rosenworcel, on rip and replace. There is 181 applications for 5.6
billion. Congress estimated the need at 1.9 billion, and appro-
priated that much. So a 3.7 billion shortfall. Is there a review of—
when will you complete your review, and know if that is a real
shortfall?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Yes, thank you for this question. It is impor-
tant that we have the funds necessary to take this insecure equip-
ment out of our networks and replace it with secure equipment.
On June 15th, under the law, we will have an assessment of
those 181 applications that have been filed with us. So I can’t offer
you preliminary information before then, but I can tell you this. I
have been studying why we have this shortfall. Congress appro-
priated $1.9 billion. We have demand of $5.6 billion. And here is
what I have learned. There are three reasons.
The first reason is that the $1.9 billion program that Congress
set up was based on a voluntary data collection done by my prede-
cessor. And many of the companies that filed in that voluntary
data collection also sought funding. We got a lot of other companies
that sought funding who never filed with us before.
Second, Congress expanded the universe of eligible companies.
The FCC was assuming only carriers with less than two million
subscribers. Congress expanded it to carriers with 10 million or
less, and added educational institutions.
And finally, when we say we have a fund, and we suggest that
they should apply in order for us to support whatever technologies
or equipment they want, it is not uncommon for—to have appli-
cants ask for funding for things that the law does not allow.
So those three reasons contributed to the $5.6 billion you are ref-
erencing. And by June 15th, we will be able to speak with author-
ity on how much the demand truly is.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Good. Does the law allow recovery for, like, legal
fees, permitting processes? Is that part of the services in the law?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. I believe there is some of that, but it is more
limited, and I would like to go back and actually get back to you
on that so I am more precise.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Thanks. My understanding is some—and maybe
Commissioner Carr will also kind of move this around a little bit—
my understanding is that some of the permitting process costs
could have been part of the 5.6 billion. And thanks for your answer,
because that was helpful, Chair.
But also—so I have introduced the TRUSTED Broadband Act,
which would exempt carriers from the burdensome permitting re-
quirements of NEPA and NHPA solely for removing dangerous
62
equipment and replacing it. How would that be helpful? Would that
be helpful in this cause, in moving forward, Commissioner Carr?
Mr. CARR. Very much so. Thank you, Congressman, for that leg-
islation.
I agree with the Chair that the first step has to be to define how
much fat is in that request. And then, once we do that, we obvi-
ously need to make good on our commitment to providers.
And to your point, if we can streamline the process of regulations
and other red tape that is unnecessarily driving up the cost, we
should do that. And so I commend you for that legislation.
In fact, more broadly, when you look at all the money we are
spending on infrastructure right now, there is sort of an absence
of rationalizing NEPA and NHPA regulations. And if you are doing
that, you have basically stepped on the gas and the brakes at the
same time, if you are not streamlining the infrastructure rules, and
just putting money into the process.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Thanks. That—so, Chair Rosenworcel, back to you.
I have—one of the biggest issues that I hear, actually, in my dis-
trict—maybe not the biggest in the Nation, but I hear—is the
robocalls. And I know we passed the robocall bill, and one of my
frequent persons who has brought this up to me says, ‘‘Well, you
said you passed a law, and I am still getting robocalls.’’ He just got
elected to the State senate. So he is going to have to answer some
of these when he gets—when he deals with some of this, as well.
But, you know, it is a top concern.
And so one of the requirements of the TRACED Act was for the
FCC and Department of Justice to establish a working group to
identify barriers to the enforcement of robocall violations. However,
the most recent FCC—annual FCC TRACED Act report reported
that the FCC lacks knowledge about the Justice Department’s col-
lections beyond two major referrals by FCC.
So the question would be, how do you view the success of the
FCC and DoJ enforcing criminal violations on robocalls, and kind
of what would we expect in the future?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Sure. Look, robocalls are annoying, and it is
a non-stop effort to try to prevent them, stop them, and hold those
who make them to account.
If I could point something out, I feel like this committee did a
lot of really great work on the TRACED Act, but it is time for the
next version of that law. And if I had some requests, I would say
there are two of them.
The first is that the Supreme Court recently reached a decision
on the definition of autodialer. And while it wasn’t a robocalling
case, it had the effect of reducing the FCC’s authority over
autodialers, generally, which reduces our authority to go after
robocallers.
The second thing—and this goes straight to what you mentioned
about the Department of Justice, and I noticed that this was true
with my predecessor, and it is true with me, as well—we continue
to enforce against bad actors, and you keep on telling us to ratchet
up the fines, which we do. In fact, under my leadership we issued
a $225 million fine against a robocaller, the largest in our history.
But then we take those fines, and we hand them over to our col-
63
leagues at the Department of Justice. And I think the best I can
say is that we hope and pray that they take them to court.
I think that, instead of just continuing this process, which pre-
dates my arrival, I think that this committee should consider giv-
ing us the authority to take those bad actors to court. I would like
to hold them to account, and I bet that every one of my colleagues
would agree with the expansion of our authority like that, and I
think it would have meaningful impact, were we able to do more
of that, on the number of robocalls consumers actually receive.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Well, thank you for that, and I am——
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman’s time has expired. The Chair now
recognizes Ms. Clarke for 5 minutes.
Ms. CLARKE. And thank you so very much, Chairman Doyle and
Ranking Member Latta, for holding this important oversight hear-
ing, and to our esteemed panel of witnesses for participating.
Technology has revolutionized the way consumers view television
programing by enabling access to linear and on-demand pro-
graming through multiple distribution platforms. This trans-
formation can be beneficial to small, independent programmers at-
tempting to break into the marketplace.
However, independent programmers contend that multi-channel
video programing distributors, or MVPDs, create barriers to entry
by imposing certain unconditional and unreasonable contractual
provisions that restrict competition and innovation, which effec-
tively reduces consumers’ access to diverse content. In 2016 the
FCC proposed rulemaking that would prohibit certain types of con-
tract provisions, but that proceeding was stalled under the previous
Administration.
So my first question is for our chairwoman, and let me just add
my voice to all of those who have congratulated you on assuming
the Chair of the FCC.
Good morning, Chairwoman. Can you tell us, does the FCC plan
to continue with proceedings to remove marketplace obstacles that
could keep diverse and small independent programmers from
reaching consumers?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Yes. Well, thank you for that. We need to
find ways to get independent voices on the screen. And a lot of
independent creators have a difficult time getting carried on our
major video systems right now. And I know the FCC had a pro-
ceeding on this in 2014.
And I think the thing we are going to have to do is start a new
proceeding so it is up to date and actually reflects the way that
people watch right now, because that has certainly changed in the
last few years, as we seek to find content on any screen handy.
But we also need to find pathways for independent creators to
be able to reach us.
Ms. CLARKE. Well, thank you, Chairwoman. I also thank the en-
tire Commission for its work establishing the Emergency
Connectivity Fund and the Affordable Connectivity Program, crit-
ical programs that keep Americans connected. Your efforts in this
space have not gone unnoticed. Nearly 11 million households, in-
cluding over 730,000 New Yorkers, have enrolled in the ACP, and
in addition to help—getting help with their monthly internet bills,
64
also now have access to strengthened consumer protections under
the new program rules.
Additionally, the Comprehensive ACP Consumer Outreach Tool-
kit has helped partners and local communities increase awareness
of the program to reach all eligible families. So, Commissioner
Sparks—Starks, can you expand on your testimony, and share how
the FCC plans to broaden its outreach efforts to increase participa-
tion in the programs like the ACP and ECF, as well as ensure
funds continue to be available, especially for those who remain
unconnected?
Mr. STARKS. Yes, thank you, Congresswoman. This has long been
a priority of mine.
In particular, one of my very first trips actually was to visit pub-
lic housing in New York. And I saw the myriad challenges at the
time, from the provider side to, of course, the household side, as
well. And so a lack of access to and adoption of broadband has rein-
forced existing inequities.
We know that nearly 29 percent of Black households, 35 percent
of Latinx households are disconnected. And, you know, Congress,
very clearly—one of my efforts is on the public housing side. And
Congress made clear that public housing folks are eligible. The
Commission said that innovative approaches are needed here, in-
cluding expanding awareness to beneficiaries, offering assistance to
digital navigators.
And so I am in contact with housing authorities there in New
York, and would love and, of course, always eager to continue to
work with you on public housing and connectivity needs there in
your district.
Ms. CLARKE. Well, thank you so much, Commissioner. Well, you
know, it is so apparent that, particularly during this time where
everyone has had to get online, just the inequities that exist. So it
is important that we drill down and get this work done.
I have introduced several bills that tackle the issue of diversity
in media, including H.R. 5836, the Enhancing Diversity Data Act,
and so that the FCC would once again collect EEO workforce diver-
sity data; as well as H.R. 5056, legislation to establish tax credits
to incentivize carriage of diverse and independent programing.
Chairman Rosenworcel, can you provide any updates on the
FCC’s EEO proceeding?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Yes. We have an obligation under the law,
under section 334 of the Communications Act, to collect informa-
tion about the diversity of broadcast companies employment. And
that is an obligation has been largely ignored by the agency since
2004. But last year we started a proceeding to get it going again.
And I have been surveying the record and talking about it with
Commissioner Starks, and expect to talk to my other colleagues
about it soon.
I hope that we can correct the fact that for 15 years we have not
done anything on this matter, and we have a duty to do so under
the law.
Ms. CLARKE. Thank you, I yield back——
Mr. DOYLE. The gentlelady’s time has expired.
Ms. CLARKE [continuing]. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DOYLE. The Chair now recognizes, virtually, Mr. Kinzinger.
65
You are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. KINZINGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And to the Chair-
woman and Commissioners, thanks for being with us today.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, I was pleased to see that last week
the FCC announced it would conduct an auction of 2.5 gigahertz
spectrum, critical mid-band spectrum that can be used to provide
much-needed broadband capacity, particularly in rural areas, be-
ginning on July 29th. The FCC’s authority to conduct auctions ex-
pires about two months after that.
So the question is, given the need for Congress to act quickly to
extend auction authority to provide certainty to the FCC and to the
potential bidders in the 2.5 gigahertz auction, do you support a
clean, short-term extension of the FCC’s spectrum authority—spec-
trum auction authority, so that the FCC can complete its ongoing
spectrum auction activities?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. I support an extension, but would, under all
circumstances, prefer a long-term extension. I think that is better
for the wireless economy and our consistent ability to be able to
make these airwaves available for commercial purposes.
Mr. KINZINGER. OK. Commissioner Carr, let me ask you. The
FCC has been working with NTIA and Federal partners for years
to make the lower 3 gigahertz spectrum available for commercial
use. What is the status of identifying spectrum within the 3
gigahertz band for commercial use, and what work remains?
Mr. CARR. Well, thank you, Congressman. The lower 3 gigahertz
is really our next best slug of mid-band spectrum. I think it is
going to be a key boost to America’s 5G leadership. That is why a
year ago I put that on my spectrum calendar as one of the prime
bands we should be looking to move on this year and next year.
The challenge now is, with one of the infrastructure laws that
was passed, DoD has a provision that stops us from moving for-
ward on that until at least 2024. And then, after that, they have
maintained, effectively, a veto on our ability to do that. So one
thing we need to do is address that, so we can continue to work
toward freeing up the lower 3 gigahertz.
And while we are doing that, I think we need to sort of continue
to fill in with our spectrum pipeline, given the challenges that may
exist with lower 3. And that is why I have identified a number of
additional bands, from 3.5 to 6 gigahertz to UNII2c that we should
be sticking in the pipeline as, you know, backups or additions to
lower 3.
Mr. KINZINGER. OK. Let me stick with you on another one.
As part of the RAY BAUM’S Act, Congress passed my Rural
Wireless Act, which directed the FCC to consider whether to estab-
lish a process for carriers to disaggregate or partition portions of
their license that they may not use. The idea was to consider the
benefits of providing smaller carriers with an opportunity to work
with larger carriers to put that spectrum to good use.
The FCC has proposed the Enhanced Competition Incentive Pro-
gram to achieve this, but it has not yet been implemented. So how
do you envision this program benefiting smaller companies?
And more importantly, how do you see it benefiting rural and
tribal customers?
66
Mr. CARR. Yes, this is a frustrating issue. We license spectrums
over—spectrum over broad geographic areas, and we expect car-
riers to build out. And sometimes they can meet their buildout obli-
gations by not reaching rural or less densely populated parts. So
any idea that would create incentives for that spectrum to do some-
thing other than sit fallow, instead of connect families, is a great
idea. And I think that is part of what your legislation goes to,
which is how do we disaggregate that spectrum and give another
provider that is willing to invest money and put it to use the
chance to do so.
So I think that is a very good idea that we need to keep pushing
forward on.
Mr. KINZINGER. OK. And my last question, back to Chairwoman
Rosenworcel, the Alternative Connect America Model, or ACAM
Program, was established in a bipartisan basis in 2016. And while
there has been some significant program successes, technological
standards continue to increase. And therefore, we have to ask our-
selves if the policies are keeping up.
A petition was filed at the Commission in October 2020 request-
ing that the FCC re-evaluate the program standards, and if a deci-
sion was made to make updates to then initiate a new notice of
proposed rulemaking.
What are your thoughts on the success of that program, and
what do you see as the future of the program?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Thank you for the question. We need to up-
date it, we need to modernize it, and we need to develop a rule-
making based on the petition you described.
And if I could go back for 1-second to what you were asking Com-
missioner Carr, I just want to point out that in late November we
issued a rulemaking on the Enhanced Competition Incentive Pro-
gram, and received our final comments on it this month. My hope
is that we will be able to move ahead with that effort to partition
and disaggregate spectrum licenses to serve more rural and tribal
communities. So that is underway.
Mr. KINZINGER. OK, great. I thank everybody.
And, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back my 23 seconds.
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman yields back. The Chair recognizes Mr.
Veasey for 5 minutes.
Mr. VEASEY. Mr. Chairman, thank you. And I am happy that we
are here talking about this today. I mean, it is something that we
honestly can’t talk about enough, and glad that we have Commis-
sioners from the FCC here to talk about this important program.
I think that all of us realize that, with COVID–19 especially, it
made us understand just how much we needed to make sure that
all parts of America are connected, because being connected is just,
in reality, just a part of modern life. Again, this is something that
we really recognized in the early stages of the pandemic.
I was happy to work on the Emergency Broadband Benefit Pro-
gram, which has now been renamed the Affordable Connectivity
Program under the bipartisan infrastructure law that was passed,
and I am glad that we were, again, just able to connect so many
people to our new digital economy that we all really function in.
And I wanted to ask Chairwoman Rosenworcel. Today we have
over 10 million households enrolled in the ACP, and more than a
67
quarter of a million of those live in Texas. Schools and libraries in
the district that I represent have received over half-a-million dol-
lars through the Emergency Connectivity Fund. And I have heard
from constituents and even people from outside of the district that
live in other parts of Dallas and Fort Worth that this is really mak-
ing a difference in their lives.
And the one thing that I am worried about is, as we try to bridge
the digital divide, and try to bring more of these services into peo-
ple’s home, that there was a GAO report last year finding that the
Lifeline-eligible consumers are often discouraged when signing up
because it can be a difficult and challenging process.
How can we mitigate these challenges as we work to connect the
next 10 million Americans in the ACP?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Thank you for the question. And more impor-
tantly, thank you for the work that you did to develop this program
in its early days.
As you can see, there is huge demand. We now have 11 million
households that are relying on it. The challenge for the FCC is two-
fold right now.
First, we have to make it easy and simple for those who need the
support to sign up, while at the same time having appropriate
guardrails for waste, fraud, and abuse. And we are going to be con-
stantly iterative, trying to make sure that we find the way to do
this properly.
And the second thing that is really important is making sure
that we have outreach partners at the local level. We can preach
about this program at the agency or from Washington, but what
matters most is when people hear about it in their communities
from people they trust. So developing partnerships with State and
local actors and institutions is really, really important.
Mr. VEASEY. Thank you very much.
And Commissioner Starks, I know that one of your key priorities
is increasing participation in the ACP by households that benefit
from Federal public housing assistance, or FPHA. We know that
FPHA beneficiaries were eligible for the EBB, but unfortunately,
only a small fraction of those actually enrolled in the program.
Can you talk a little bit about both the short-term and long-term
benefits of connecting FPA beneficiaries to broadband?
Mr. STARKS. Yes, sir. Thank you for the question, Congressman.
You know, to your point, how are we going to get more folks con-
nected, how are we going to push past that 11 million households
that are already enrolled, I think the pilot—the public housing
pilot program that I am leading is essential. I am working with the
chairwoman and my colleagues who have all endorsed this as a
place for us to continue to look.
In particular, you know, I would offer up that we are fortunate
that HUD has a great leader in Secretary Fudge, who understands
the importance of these issues. I have partnered, in particular,
with Secretary Fudge back when she was a Congresswoman. Our
offices are working together even as we speak.
And so we are fortunate that HUD also has an existing pro-
grammatic effort to build on their Connect Home Program there in
HUD. It has provided a platform for public-private partnerships to
68
have access, and, you know, they are working now with over 100
cities.
So I see a lot of great potential for collaboration. We are working
hard, and we do need to keep pushing to get more and more house-
holds connected to this essential program.
Mr. VEASEY. Thank you very much.
And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back my 20 seconds. Thank you.
Mr. DOYLE. I thank the gentleman, he yields back. The Chair
recognizes, oh, my suffering Pittsburgh Pirate buddy, Gus Bili-
rakis.
You have 5 minutes.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Help is on the way, Mr. Chairman, help is on the
way.
This question is for the Commissioner. I am not sure exactly
which one, but anyway, during the Trump Administration the FCC
began the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund to provide support for
broadband in areas that were completely unserved, and define
unserved—lacking access to speeds less than 2.53 megabits per sec-
ond.
I believe this is for Commissioner Carr. Since then, an additional
$50 billion has been appropriate several agencies broadband de-
ployment. So, Commissioner, again, however, not all agencies are
using the metrics. For example, the USDA Reconnect Program pro-
vides Federal funds to serve areas lacking 100 up and 20 down
megabits per second.
Again, for Commissioner Carr, what are the risks we have with
having different agencies making funding awards based off dif-
ferent criteria?
Mr. CARR. Well, thank you, Congressman, for the question. This
is a challenge. This is like going to the scarecrow in The Wizard
of Oz and asking for directions, and it ends up pointing in all sorts
of directions. We have got various agencies with divergent stand-
ards that they are applying, and it is a problem.
One thing we can do is, obviously, complete the process of the
FCC’s broadband maps. We can drive everybody, every funding de-
cision through an accurate, complete map that will help to make
sure we avoid at least subsidized overbuilding.
We need to make sure we have a prioritization scheme, so that
unserved areas go first. And where we have made a commitment
to people to build out pursuant to RDOF, we shouldn’t be having
other funds come in over top and undermine the business case for
those RDOF-supported builds, again, particularly where we have
too many parts of the country that still have zero megabits per sec-
ond.
So there is a lot that we need to do right now to improve coordi-
nation, I think.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you. We are already hearing examples of
agencies awarding Federal funds for broadband deployment
projects in areas that have received RDOF funds, making it uneco-
nomical for companies that receive RDOF funds to build out and
serve that area.
Commissioner Carr, again, what is the FCC doing, or what
should it do to ensure that the RDOF auction is not overbuilt by
other sources of Federal funding?
69
Mr. CARR. Well, in my view, we should make it ineligible for
other providers with other Federal subsidies to come in over the
top of RDOF winners.
One thing we could do, though, is we could look at, for instance,
what I call top-off funds, which is if you are given RDOF dollars
to bring speeds of X to this community, if you want to go get other
dollars to bring speeds of X times two to that same community,
then the RDOF winner could be well positioned to do that.
But again, fundamentally, we can’t have subsidized providers
from other buckets of money coming in over top of RDOF recipi-
ents.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you. The next question is for Chairwoman
Rosenworcel.
The Industry Traceback Group was recognized under the
TRACED Act for leading private-sector efforts to crack down on il-
legal robocalls. ITG has helped identify gateway providers that
bring illegal robocalls into the U.S. from abroad and get a handle
on these fraudsters.
However, has the ITG been to these efforts—how important has
it been?
I mean, this is a big problem, that breakup you mentioned ear-
lier. But this is—our constituents ask us questions all the time. I
know we have passed previous legislation with regard to the
robocalls, but they don’t seem to think it has worked.
So if you could address that, and then I have a followup for Com-
missioner Carr, please. Thank you.
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Sure. Working with the Industry Traceback
Group, we have been able to identify that more and more of these
calls are coming from overseas. We don’t have clean data on that
yet, but it is enough to suggest to us that we have got to make sure
that gateway providers that take in junk calls from overseas reg-
ister in our robocall mitigation data base. We are working on up-
dating our rules to make that happen right now, and that is a di-
rect byproduct of us working with the TRACED Act, which—and
the Traceback Group that was created by it.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Yes, and I will tell you. I mean, I get them all the
time from overseas. So, in any case, it is a big problem.
Commissioner Carr, do you have any recommendations on how
we can build on this momentum to find new ways to just for
robocalls?
Mr. CARR. I thank you. I want to reiterate what the Chair said.
I mean, one, we have accelerated the deadline with which smaller
providers need to comply with STIR/SHAKEN. We have started a
proceeding to look at the gateway providers because, as we have
talked about, a lot of these calls are coming from overseas boiler
rooms.
So there is more that we need to do after completing that to get
at those calls jurisdictionally. Then I am sure we will be back to
see what we can do.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thanks——
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman’s time has expired.
Mr. BILIRAKIS [continuing]. Appreciate it very much. Thank you.
Mr. DOYLE. OK. The Chair recognizes Mr. O’Halleran for 5 min-
utes.
70
Mr. O’HALLERAN. Thank you, Chairman Doyle and Ranking
Member Latta, for holding this meeting today.
First of all, I want to thank the chairwoman, or—the chair-
woman for the hard work that she and the Commission and the
leadership put into two funds, the Emergency Connectivity Fund—
you know, in Arizona the schools and libraries have been awarded
$150 million, including more than $20 million in Arizona’s 1st con-
gressional district to close that homework gap. But also, it is the
knowledge gap, the resources gap, research, imagination gap. It is
much more than just a homework gap.
And second, the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program, which
recently transitioned into the Affordable Connectivity Program. Ar-
izona has nearly 240,000 households enrolled in the ACP. I appre-
ciate the outreach the FCC has done to tribal communities on the
program. Tribal communities have had some of the highest uptake
rates for EBB and ACP, and we should be doing all we can to reach
out to these households, who are among the most left behind in
broadband access in our entire country, and in the adoption rate.
We have been talking about broadband maps for years. The FCC
and we have talked about it just recently. The FCC starting [sic]
proceedings on broadband maps five years ago, and we still haven’t
had one yet. Chairman Rosenworcel, I know you have made this a
priority, and have worked hard to try to get around some of the
issues involved, and that the agency recently got the green light to
move forward after there was a protest on the selection of a vendor
to help create these maps.
We are all anxious for the maps to be completed, but we need
to ensure they are accurate. With that in mind, can you give us an
idea of the next steps the agency is taking to deliver these maps
quickly?
And can you describe how you are working with the NTIA, as the
maps will be critical to the implementation of the broadband fund-
ing from the bipartisan infrastructure law, and the fairness
throughout the process?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Absolutely. As a result of the GAO giving us
the green light finally, we have a vendor that is building our
broadband location fabric, which is a geo-coded set of every
buildable location in the country. Once we get that fabric, we are
going to allow our carriers to beta-test it, get used to it, to play
around with it, because we are going to need them to start filing
data with us starting in June of this year.
By the way, that is 2,500 carriers, nationwide. So we need to
make sure that they know how to use the system so we get good
information.
Once we collect all that data, we are going to build maps in the
fall, and then we are going to start a challenge process to let
states, localities, tribes, and consumers take a look at our maps
and tell us if—what they think we got wrong, and then make the
carriers respond to that. So there is crowdsourcing that will figure
into this effort, too.
And then, finally, I want you to know we are making every effort
to work with our colleagues across government. As you know, we
have more broadband programs than ever before, so we got more
coordination challenges than ever before. We have a memorandum
71
of understanding with our colleagues at the Rural Utility Service.
We have one with the Department of Commerce. And I am working
right now to see if we can also set one up with the Department of
Treasury, because I want everyone to have all of the data and in-
formation that we are collecting, because that will—I believe it will
be the best in the Federal Government.
Mr. O’HALLERAN. Chairwoman, I—and thank you, first of all.
Thank you.
You know, my frustration—and it was mentioned the other day
to you—about agencies in general, not your agency, but agencies in
general, and the—how the public can look at us and say, ‘‘Why isn’t
government working?’’ Because it takes so long for this stuff to get
addressed. And we have to find a way to get around that, and I
know you are trying.
I also wanted to commend the work of the Commission on
robocall scams. And the TRACED Act of 2019 and—stop unwar-
ranted and illegal robocalls. But I am—I just want to get this off—
I am in full agreement with your thought process that we need—
you need the ability to collect these fines. I know the Justice De-
partment is a busy place, but they need to get their job done, too,
and they can’t do it with their workload that they have going on,
also.
Chairwoman, what barriers are you seeing with enforcement of
the Act, and particularly considering the recent Supreme Court rul-
ing, and what—will the—how will that hinder you, actually? You
mentioned that earlier.
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. I appreciate that. Scam artists move really
fast. We are going to have to, as regulators and legislators, find
ways to keep up with them and their robocalling ways. Two things
we could use help on from this committee.
First is making sure the definition of autodialer reflects tech-
nology today. The Supreme Court decision was a decision that re-
sulted in them defining autodialer like it existed when the Tele-
phone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 was passed. We have got
to fix that.
Mr. O’HALLERAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield, and I hope
we work faster.
Mr. DOYLE. I thank the gentleman. The Chair now recognizes
Mr. Johnson for 5 minutes.
Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And Chairwoman Rosenworcel, congratulations on your new role.
I haven’t talked to you since you became chairwoman. Congratula-
tions.
You know, we are we are seeing great progress with low Earth
orbit satellite systems helping to expand connectivity across the
Nation, as well as significant improvement, innovation, and leader-
ship by U.S. companies in this space. There is a lot of interest in
deploying new systems in addition to those that are already de-
ployed. Congress is focused on updating the FCC’s tools and au-
thorities to streamline the process for this innovation and invest-
ment to ensure robust competition in that marketplace.
Does the FCC share our goal of supporting a streamlined process
for encouraging that needed robust competition and innovation
going forward?
72
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Yes, we have to update our policies. I agree.
Mr. JOHNSON. OK, great. What should the—for Commissioner
Simington, what should the law and the regulations regarding
space safety and spectrum coordination look like in order to pro-
mote a competitive operating environment for these low Earth orbit
satellite systems?
Mr. SIMINGTON. This is a complicated question, because our sat-
ellite spectrum allocation regime looks back to earlier days, and is
thus a sort of an unlicensed regime where there is an incentive to
get your proposals out there as early as possible, and then to
amend them repeatedly, which leads to a process that can be very
opaque to outsiders, and a little bit unpredictable, and leads to ex-
tensive, extensive commentary on the record.
So, for example, with the SpaceX third modification last year, we
had more than 200 ex-parte filings. Probably the Chair could give
you the exact number. The—just the list of filings took up a whole
page of the order.
So, as far as improving this, we need an improved system for al-
locating spectrum to the satellite world. And I think it is not just
as simple as saying auction it, but we should probably think about
some sort of transferable rights regime, or develop some sort of al-
ternative to ensure that the space spectrum is fully used.
As far as space safety, the United States is in a unique position
to use our dominant market size, as a gigantic consumer of sat-
ellite services, to require that space safety laws and compliance
with American space safety ideas should be mandatory for compa-
nies seeking to do business here, regardless of where they launch
and retrieve satellites. And that is a unique opportunity for the
FCC to step in and take a role there.
One way to make this a contributor to the U.S. economy, instead
of just a regulatory drag, would be to determine where the real
costs lie and where the real risks of satellite lie. So, for example,
orbital debris is much more persistent and dangerous at high alti-
tudes with large satellites than with the slow—I am sorry, with the
low and small satellites that you see in constellations operating in
LEO. Likewise, the possibilities for advanced coordination tech-
nologies to be used to make LEO satellite constellations extremely
safe remains unexplored and regulatory incentivized.
So there are a number of things we could do along those lines.
Mr. JOHNSON. OK. Well, thank you.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, with the tens of billions of dollars now
going forward toward broadband deployment, we must make sure
that regulatory barriers do not stand in the way of closing the dig-
ital divide once and for all. We have already heard concerns from
some providers that access to existing infrastructure, such as poles,
may impact RDOF awardees seeking to deploy in under-served and
unserved areas.
What is the FCC doing to ensure that there are no barriers to
the success of the RDOF program?
What action has the FCC taken to address these barriers to ac-
cess?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Sure. You know, we have soaring rhetoric
about connecting all. We are rarely talking about utility poles, but
they might be the most important part on the ground. You need ac-
73
cess to them if you want to deploy to unserved and under-served
areas. And we have learned from some of the providers that the
cost of securing that access can be as much as one-third of their
deployment costs. That just sounds too high. A lot of that is in the
bureaucracy of cooperating and getting approvals.
So this month we started a proceeding to identify how we can
bring those costs down and have better policies when it comes to
pole attachment and pole replacement, and how those costs will be
shared among providers. So we are looking at that closely right
now.
Mr. JOHNSON. OK. I am also concerned with supply chain and
labor shortages, ma’am, that spans a—to coin a word, the spectrum
of industries in America, we got issues there.
From your discussions with the NTIA, do you believe the states
will be able to successfully roll out broadband deployment in the
current supply chain situation?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. It is something we have to monitor closely.
Mr. JOHNSON. OK, all right.
Mr. Chairman, I have more questions. I will submit those for the
record.
[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
Mr. JOHNSON. And I will yield back.
Mr. DOYLE. I thank the gentleman. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair recognizes Ms. Rice for 5 minutes.
[Pause.]
Mr. DOYLE. You need to unmute, I believe, Ms. Rice.
[Pause.]
Mr. DOYLE. Ms. Rice, we can’t hear you. If you can hear us,
please unmute.
What do you think?
[Pause.]
Mr. DOYLE. We will come back to her. The Chair recognizes Ms.
Eshoo for 5 minutes.
Ms. ESHOO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this all-important
hearing.
To the Chairwoman, bravo and congratulations. It is really won-
derful to see you in action.
And to each of the Commissioners, thank you to all of you, be-
cause I think you are working very well together, and there are so
many important policies that you are making headway on. So
bravo, and thank you.
I want to start out with an issue that most people don’t think
of that the FCC deals with, and that is national security. We know
what Mr. Putin is doing, the tragedy of Ukraine. I think each one
of you knows that, in response to eight letters that I sent over to
the FCC over, what, some four years, the result of that is that the
FCC has updated its regulations last year so that the American
people will know when Russia is paying for propaganda broadcasts
on airwaves owned by the American people.
I can’t underscore how really deeply disappointed I am that
American broadcasters are now suing the FCC. They are arguing—
get a hold of this—they are arguing that these bare minimum
transparency requirements are too onerous. Ultimately, they are
delaying implementation of the rules. Now, what is so onerous
74
about the following? All they have to do is say that their content
is paid for by a foreign government when it is, period. So I don’t
know if any of the broadcasters are listening in today. Come on.
We have a collective responsibility here, as Americans. And right
now Americans are listening to Radio Sputnik, and they may not
know that it is propaganda, is paid for by the Kremlin. So this is
unacceptable, and everyone should be behind these really simple,
easy rules.
Thank you for what you have said, Madam Chairwoman, about
robocalls. We will work with you to draw up legislation on the au-
thorities that you need, and also that the FCC should be able to
collect these fines that are placed on these bad actors.
Now, we know that Russia is known to couple kinetic war with
cyber attacks, including exploiting various hardware, software, pro-
tocol-level vulnerabilities. I am really pleased to see the FCC
launch an inquiry about strengthening the security of BGP. It is
a critical internet traffic routing protocol, and I think it is really
very important, but it is an under-appreciated issue.
So, Madam Chairwoman, can you just briefly tell us about the
issue, and what the FCC is doing on BGP security?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Well, thank you, I appreciate the question.
Our effort to look at Border Gateway Protocol came out of con-
versations we had with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Secu-
rity Agency. We are coordinating more closely than ever, and they
identified it, and we confirmed that it is an essential part of the
internet’s global routing system, but there are significant
vulnerabilities when traffic is exchanged between networks. So we
started an inquiry to try to understand that better, ask questions
about it, because we do not want to create opportunities for theft
or espionage at those connection points.
And I do want to thank my colleagues. When I called them and
discussed these issues with them, and told them that it was serious
and we needed to move in a fast manner, all four of them did.
Ms. ESHOO. Great. I just want to squeeze something else in.
To all of my colleagues, both sides of the aisle, we have an oppor-
tunity to address, once and for all, the NextGen 911. There are
over 6,000 PSAPs in the country, in every community. This is an
arm for law enforcement, as well as health emergencies in all of
our communities.
So with the auctions, there will be money. And I think that we
need to all do this together to make sure that, once and for all, that
our PSAPs are funded appropriately so that the emergencies in
every single one of our communities be addressed by NextGen 911.
And with that I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DOYLE. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair recognizes Mr.
Long for 5 minutes.
Mr. LONG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And Chairwoman Rosenworcel, there is a petition the FCC is
considering that would allow a bureau to reinterpret the word
‘‘classroom’’ to mean households, expanding the E-Rate program
dramatically.
The FCC also did not seek comment on the actual rules making
the Affordable Connectivity Program permanent, but rather sought
comment on questions about how those rules should look.
75
As the stewards of America’s tax dollars, my colleagues and I al-
ways—are always concerned that the funds we appropriate will be
used efficiently. However, far too often we see government squan-
dered away money through waste, fraud, and abuse. While we can
disagree on the structure and size of various programs, I know you
understand that every dollar misspent is another dollar that never
goes to the intended purpose.
While I am pleased that you have continued the tradition of
Chairman Pai that he started to make the items in the open meet-
ings agenda available 21 days in advance of a vote, I am concerned
that a number of significant FCC actions are being considered
without the opportunity for the public to comment on specific rules.
Rather, the FCC seeks comment on public notice, instead of the ac-
tual proposed language of the regulation.
Even worse, some proposals ask for the FCC bureaus to dramati-
cally expand programs by reinterpreting terms, as I mentioned ear-
lier, to delegated authority.
Will you commit to allowing the public to review proposed rules?
And will you commit to not abusing the delegated authority process
to expand the existing programs?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Any substantial expansion would require
that my colleagues all vote on it and we complete it at the Commis-
sion level.
Mr. LONG. Can you repeat that? I didn’t——
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Any substantial expansion of any program
would require that my colleagues and I agree on it, and vote on it
at the full Commission level.
Mr. LONG. OK. Thank you. I have been fighting a cough and cold
for ten days now. I am about over it, but I am having a hard time
a little bit.
Commissioner Carr, while all funding programs must be admin-
istered carefully, the enormous scale and rapid rollout of the
COVID relief programs created prime opportunities for the bad ac-
tors to exploit government funding. Unfortunately, we are already
seeing this happen. The FCC inspector general recently detected
fraud in the Emergency Broadband Benefit program.
Commissioner Carr, I would like to thank you for your work to
ensure that the funds going through the FCC are actually reaching
their intended recipients: American families who are truly in need.
Last fall you expressed serious concern that the massive levels of
broadband dollars being appropriated by Congress could result in
headline levels of waste, fraud, and abuse. Can you explain for us
the steps that you would like to see taken to ensure substantive
oversight of these programs?
Mr. CARR. Well, thank you, Congressman, great to see you again.
I think everybody here probably remembers 2008, the last time
we had a massive infusion of broadband stimulus dollars of around
then an unprecedented 7 billion. Well, now, by my count, we have
over $800 billion. What we saw after the 7 billion was just story
after story of waste, fraud, and abuse. And the time to act is now
to make sure that we don’t sit here two years from now and say,
where did the $800 billion go, because my committees are still
unconnected?
76
So we do a couple of things. One, require everybody to go
through the FCC’s map. That is going to help. Two, make sure we
prioritize unserved areas first, make sure we close that digital di-
vide before we add additional providers. Three, we need better
tracking and measurements. I wrote letters to all the executive
branch agencies that have funds. I said, ‘‘Where are your
broadband dollars going?’’ The ones that responded, one of them
just said, ‘‘We aren’t even tracking how much of this money is
going toward broadband initiatives.’’
So we aren’t in a good spot right now in terms of controls in
place, and the window is quickly closing to fix that.
Mr. LONG. OK. And I would like to thank all three of you for
coming in today.
And you are going to miss me next year on this committee be-
cause, you know, having an auctioneer on here, I talk fast. I want
to yield back 54 seconds.
Mr. DOYLE. Well, I will tell you what, Billy, that wins the prize
today.
OK, now we are going to try Ms. Rice again, and hopefully her—
she is able to come through.
Ms RICE. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman——
Mr. DOYLE. So, Ms. Rice, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms RICE. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. I am sorry for my
technical difficulties. Thank you all so much for coming today.
You know, in just less than a year, just under 11 million house-
holds have enrolled in the ACP, including nearly three quarters of
a million households across New York, and thousands in my dis-
trict. Americans are desperate for affordable broadband, and the
FCC has stepped up to make this program a success. All of us on
this committee, I know, want to make sure it continues to grow
and reaches the tens of millions of eligible households that have
yet to enroll.
My congratulations to you, Chairwoman Rosenworcel, and I
would like to ask you—I am aware that the FCC has already had
400 virtual events to promote ACP awareness and enrollment.
Have you noticed any enrollment trends you can share with us?
Are there types of communities or consumers where we have
been especially successful, or where uptake is lagging?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Thank you. We have reached 11 million
households, and it has been a lot of work. We have held more than
400 different sessions. We have worked with boys and girls clubs,
with faith institutions, with the NFL players, the Miami Dolphins
Foundation. We have worked with the Navajo Nation. Anyone who
comes to us with a good idea, we will develop a program to get the
word out.
So the one thing that has become apparent is that people need
to hear from trusted actors in their local communities. And so if
anyone on this committee has ideas about how to reach people
where they are, we are open to them. We are iterative. We want
to reach people and make sure they hear about it from people they
trust.
Ms RICE. So the Commission’s proposed rulemaking for ACP
bookmarked about $100 million for promoting the program and en-
77
couraging enrollment, and that includes paid media campaigns,
grants to community, outreach partners.
Commissioner Starks, you have emphasized the importance of
outreach to and partnerships with communities of color, individuals
with disabilities, and the poor, all groups that are less likely to
have quality broadband connections than the general population.
How can we make sure that these grants actually get to commu-
nity organizations that are best situated to reach those households?
And why are these grants—to community-based organizations in
this effort——
Mr. STARKS. It is——
Ms. RICE [continuing]. To increase, you know, the enrollment?
Mr. STARKS. It is a great question, Congresswoman, and thank
you so much for raising it.
You know, increasing participation in any government program,
especially a new one, is truly a complex problem. And so, you
know, as mentioned by Chairwoman Rosenworcel, you know, in-
creasing awareness of ACP is assuredly a first step, as you men-
tioned. In setting up ACP, we affirmed, you know, $100 million set
aside to advance these digital equity goals.
So here is what I am looking for, you know. I want to make sure
we follow through with that. And so when we are making grants,
we do need to identify those organizations, community-based orga-
nizations with a proven track record of working with low-income
people, communities of color.
When we are contracting with experts to conduct focus groups,
for example, develop advertising campaigns, I think we should en-
sure that they have expertise with, again, diverse communities,
low-income communities, you know.
And when we buy advertisements, another part that is going to
be part of our programmatic foray here, we should make sure we
are spending—that flows to diverse ownership workforces con-
sistent with our media diversity goals.
And so there really are a lot of ways where we can meet the mo-
ment here with digital equity, as well as making sure we are focus-
ing and getting the most number of people so that we can increase
that 11 million number.
Ms. RICE. So I would encourage you all to work with State and
Federal—other Federal agencies and State agencies, as well, be-
cause, as my colleague, Mr. Veasey, pointed out, many of the ACP-
eligible individuals or households qualify for the program automati-
cally because they already participate in a program like WIC,
SNAP, Medicaid, et cetera. But they don’t know they qualify, or
they—for this program, or they run into trouble when they try to
prove their eligibility. So I would just encourage the Commission
to focus on that, and partnering with as many Federal and State
agencies as we can to kind of fill in that gap there that may exist
with people we already know or identify to other agencies.
And thank you all so much for coming. We wish for your success.
Your success is America’s success.
And Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you very much.
Mr. DOYLE. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Hudson, 5 minutes.
Mr. HUDSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioners, it is good to see you here today.
78
One of the things I hear all the time from my constituents back
home in North Carolina is the lack of adequate access to
broadband. This hearing is important to my constituents and to all
of our constituents.
You, the FCC, are on the precipice of making decades-long deci-
sions which can propel our Nation into the next century by giving
our children the ability to learn from anywhere; disrupting tele-
communications strongholds by China; providing lifesaving treat-
ments through telehealth, telemedicine; and making places like
Carthage, Sanford, and, yes, Barbecue, North Carolina the epi-
center of global commerce.
In order to achieve this vision we must win the global race to 5G.
With auction authority set to expire in September, I ask you, Mr.
Chairman, to continue working with members on this side of the
aisle to produce a bill extending the FCC’s authority.
The upcoming 2.5 auction has ample mid-band spectrum, which
will vastly expand mobile connectivity in rural North Carolina.
My first question is for Commissioner Carr. We have discussed
my concerns about the potential for waste if governments don’t
prioritize funding to connect unserved communities that lack access
to broadband, and my concern that guardrails on recent funding
bills could have been a lot stronger. In my view, government-sub-
sidized overbuilding will create distortions in the marketplace, and
allow the government to pick winners and losers, with unserved
and difficult-to-reach communities getting the short end of the
stick.
How do we ensure coordination between the various agencies and
governments who have an unprecedented level of funding? Does
this come down to a single map?
What else can Federal, State, and local officials do to ensure this
doesn’t happen, and we do not overbuild programs like RDOF that
are already being deployed?
Mr. CARR. Well, thank you, Congressman, for the question and
your work leading on this.
The single most important thing we can do right now is to make
sure that there is no overbuilding with these Federal dollars. It has
been a lot of work to make sure that we have enough Federal funds
allocated to end the digital divide in this country. And the good
news is that I think we are there with the amount that has been
appropriated, if we put it into the communities that are still
unserved.
We cannot afford overbuilding and waste this potentially
generational opportunity to eliminate the digital divide. So we have
got to get our maps done. We have got to drive everything through
that. We need greater coordination across agencies. We do have
some agreements right now, but they don’t cover all agencies or all
funds within the agencies that it covers.
And so these are some of the steps that we need to take, because
we can’t sit here three years from now and not have gotten billions
of dollars’ worth of bridging the digital divide.
Mr. HUDSON. Absolutely, I agree.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, congratulations on your position, and
it is a real pleasure to have you here today.
79
The FCC has taken significant steps in recent years to identify
and make available spectrum for commercial use, including for 5G
deployment, and that is critical to ensuring the U.S. leads over
China. I understand the FCC is currently examining the potential
of 5G in the 12 gigahertz band through extensive engineering re-
views, and some want to use the 12 gigahertz band for terrestrial
use, but there is disagreement over whether this will cause harm-
ful interference to existing satellite systems.
What is the status of the FCC’s technical review?
Will you commit to complete your review in a timely manner, es-
pecially if we find that coexistence is possible between satellite and
terrestrial use in this case?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Sure. One of the most complex dockets we
have involves the 12 gigahertz band. So you went right there.
The 12 gigahertz band historically has had fixed satellite sys-
tems in it. It has had direct broadcast satellite, and it has had mul-
tichannel video data distribution systems. And now we might want
to add mobile broadband to the mix. As you might imagine, that
is going to take a lot of technical work to make sure that the air-
waves can accommodate all those different uses without harmful
interference.
And some of the data we have on our record points to different
interference-to-noise ratios that are copied from the International
Telecommunications Union, but are 30 years old. We have satellite
policies we are going to have to update. And once we identify harm-
ful interference, we will have to model what it looks like, and try
to come up with standards for where satellite terminals can be
compared to 5G systems.
These issues, to be candid, will take time, but they take time be-
cause they are really important, and we need to do them well.
Mr. HUDSON. Right. Well, I appreciate that. And the last ques-
tion, in North Carolina and across the Nation, small rural
broadband providers are, in some instances, alone in servicing their
communities. They don’t have large staffs to work on grant applica-
tions, other paperwork requirements. What steps does the FCC
take to ensure that its regulations do not impose disproportionate
burdens on smaller broadband providers?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. We always take steps to consider small pro-
viders in all of our proceedings. We recognize they may not have
the resources needed to fully participate. And, as you acknowledge,
when it comes to broadband they may be the companies and indi-
viduals we most need to deploy in some of our most remote locales.
So we have got to be mindful of that in everything we do.
Mr. HUDSON. Well, thank you very much.
Mr. Chairman, I am not as good as Billy, but I will yield back
12 seconds.
Mr. DOYLE. I thank the gentleman. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Soto for 5 minutes.
Mr. SOTO. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you to our FCC
Commissioners for being here.
We just had Secretary Cardona from the U.S. Department of
Education in central Florida today. We know that our kids have
been through so much, our teachers have been through so much,
and connectivity has helped us through it, through distance learn-
80
ing. But we also saw gaps in connectivity, especially in our rural
areas. And while we work with NTIA on rural broadband infra-
structure, it also will be critical for cell phone service that we work
with the FCC to improve this connectivity.
So I want to thank you all for the great work you have done on
the Emergency Connectivity Fund and the Affordable Connectivity
Program. Places in rural areas like Frostproof, Florida, Saint
Cloud, Lake Wales, and in Kissimmee benefit greatly by this access
to cell phone service.
I wanted to also talk about the digital divide directly. I got to
speak early on with you, Commissioner Starks, about the amazing
work that you all have been doing in the FCC. So it would be great
to get an update for my constituents, including my wife, who is an
assistant principal here in Osceola County, on the work that you
all are doing to help with that digital divide and homework gap.
Mr. STARKS. It is a great question. Thank you, Congressman.
And for your wife’s efforts for your continued efforts, you know, eq-
uitable education requires internet access, and many schools, orga-
nizations have worked hard to close the gap. But despite that, you
know, reports have said, you know, going into the pandemic, nearly
a year there, that you still had over 12 million students who re-
main digitally disconnected, under-served.
And so last year, even I made it a point to hear from students
myself. I met with students in Detroit, Michigan at Brenda Scott
Academy, a disproportionately high reduced-lunch folks and stu-
dents. And they talked about, you know, how they were trying to
learn on their devices, on a cell phone. The most striking moment
was a student who told me that she needed a better internet, and
that was plain and simple.
The ECF has done an enormous amount of work, and is con-
tinuing, and so the commission staff who stood up this program de-
serve a lot of praise, as well.
Mr. SOTO. Well, thank you, Commissioner.
Chair Rosenworcel, thank you for your leadership, and congrats
on your chairwomanship.
In central Florida we have Cape Canaveral, where there is
NASA, SpaceX, Blue Origin, and satellite internet has become a
major part of connectivity. We see that with StarLink across the
United States, and also with the crisis in Ukraine. Unfortunately,
sometimes we see speculators that are proposing to repurpose the
12 gigahertz spectrum that these satellite operators use. It would
be great to hear of your continued support for this critical spectrum
use by satellite systems to help with the very isolated areas in both
Florida and in areas across the world.
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Thank you. You really do have this space age
happening in your backyard in Florida. We want to make sure at
the FCC that it continues to be viable, too. We have a proceeding
on the 12 gigahertz band that involves a lot of satellite systems,
and now possibly the introduction of mobile terrestrial use.
This is a complex proceeding, as complex as any proceeding be-
fore the agency. We are combing through engineering documents.
We are trying to identify if the—having these services coexist is
viable, what interference might be harmful, how we should model
it. That work is all underway. I can assure you that we have our
81
best engineers assessing this right now, and we can continue to
keep you updated as we proceed.
Mr. SOTO. Thank you, Chairwoman.
And I want to end just by stressing the importance of the Rural
Digital Opportunity Fund program. This is critical for areas like
South Osceola and Polk County in my district. And together we
will close this digital divide, this homework gap, and the need to
improve access for rural businesses in Florida’s 9th congressional
district, in central Florida and across the Nation.
And with that, Chair, I yield back.
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman yields back. The Chair recognizes Mr.
Walberg for 5 minutes.
Mr. WALBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the
Commissioners for being with us today.
Getting spectrum into the marketplace quickly is essential for
connecting Americans across the country. We remember back dur-
ing the Trump Administration, the FCC freed up an unprecedented
amount of spectrum by taking an all-of-the-above approach, includ-
ing for both licensed and unlicensed operations in low, mid, and
high-band frequencies.
Chairman Rosenworcel—and again, congratulations for your
chairship—in 2018 you called for the FCC to maintain a spectrum
calendar to increase transparency about how and when the new re-
sources will be made available to the public. I agreed with the mer-
its of this idea, but I haven’t seen a follow-through on that call yet.
Are you still committed to putting out a spectrum calendar?
And if so, what bands, beyond the already scheduled 2.5
gigahertz auction, would you place on the calendar either for auc-
tion or making available for the unlicensed?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Sure. To be clear, in 2018, in the Mobile Now
Act, this committee and Congress required us to publish an
annualized calendar, which we did in September of last year.
As you have acknowledged, we have already auctioned the 3.45
gigahertz band, and we now have the 2.5 gigahertz band in our
sights for July.
Going forward, I would ask this committee’s help on two fronts.
First, the Spectrum Pipeline Act from 2015 requires NTIA to
identify 30 megahertz of spectrum below 3 gigahertz for auction. I
would like you to make sure that that actually comes to fruition.
And then I know you are working hard to try to identify how we
might be able to have access to 200 megahertz of spectrum in the
3.1 to 3.45 gigahertz band, which—the auction of those airwaves
was delayed by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
So those would be two of the bands that I have in my sights, but
two of the bands that I also need this committee’s help to bring to
commercial market.
Mr. WALBERG. We hope we can do that.
Chairperson Rosenworcel, turning to oversight, Congress created
a $7 billion Emergency Connectivity Fund, as we have talked
about, to help schools and libraries stay connected to their students
during the COVID–19 pandemic. The FCC has distributed over five
million connected devices through the ECF.
82
My concern is that—does the FCC have a system in place that
has kept track of where these devices went after they were sent to
the schools and libraries?
And what safeguards are currently in place to make sure that
the devices purchased through the Emergency Connectivity Fund
are not duplicated across other programs?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. It is absolutely imperative that we prevent
waste, fraud, and abuse in this program and any other program.
But I would love to followup with you with more specifics to make
sure that I give you precisely the rules that apply to this program,
and not one of the other ones that I have in my head at this mo-
ment right now. So we will followup with you on that.
Mr. WALBERG. We will look forward to that.
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. OK.
Mr. WALBERG. Because I think we agree, we have too few re-
sources to waste, and that includes our kids. I am glad most of
them are back in school in the classroom now.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, my final question is I want to fol-
lowup on an answer you gave to Leader Rodgers’s question earlier
about rate regulation. I just want to make sure that there aren’t
any hidden asterisks in your statement when you say, ‘‘no rate reg-
ulation.’’ Are you including within that a commitment not to apply
section 201 and 202’s just and reasonable provisions to broadband
rates, either before or after the fact?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. There is no asterisks.
Mr. WALBERG. No asterisks. I am glad to hear that.
And, Mr. Chairman, I am going to return 56 seconds.
Mr. DOYLE. Wow. I will tell you, you guys are making our side
look bad. I thank the gentleman for yielding back.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Butterfield for 5 minutes.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Can I
add his 56 seconds to my time?
OK——
Mr. DOYLE. No, you may not.
[Laughter.]
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. My request is denied. But thank you, Mr.
Chairman, for convening this very important hearing today. And
thank you to our guests today. And thank you for the incredible
work that you do at the Commission.
And let me also say good afternoon to my colleagues. I am not
in the committee room. I wish I could see all of you. But hopefully,
we will be back to normal very, very soon.
Chair Rosenworcel, we chatted a few days ago, and let me just
congratulate you and thank you on your incredible service, not just
since you have been on the Commission, but your service before
you joined the Commission. I know your resume, and I know you
have been very dedicated and committed down through the years.
And I just thank you so very much. I am confident that you are
going to really make a significant mark on the work of the Com-
mission.
And to the other Commissioners, Commissioner Starks, you and
I are friends and have been for years, and Commissioners Carr and
Simington, it is just good to see all of you. But let me just get right
to the point.
83
Like Congresswoman Rice said a few moments ago, this is very
important. The Affordable Connectivity Program, ACP, is incred-
ibly important. And I just thank you for your leadership to ensure
the success of the Affordable Connectivity Program and the Emer-
gency Connectivity Fund. These are two very important initiatives
in my State.
In North Carolina, over 400,000 households are enrolled in the
ACP, and schools and libraries in the State have been awarded
some $150 million in funding, with over $17 million of that in my
congressional district. That is a big deal. These are real, meaning-
ful benefits for my constituents. And I hope that all of you will con-
tinue to work together in ensuring the success of these important
programs.
I want to commend the Commission’s work on pole replacements
and dispute resolution. I wrote to the FCC last year urging you to
act on this important issue. So I appreciate the Commission taking
steps like this so that unserved households, like those in my dis-
trict, can get online much faster.
So let’s start with question No. 1, and I will start with the Chair.
I would like to move on to my bill, the Expanding Broadcast Own-
ership Opportunities Act, which focuses on bringing back the FCC’s
minority tax certificate program. And you and I have talked about
it over the years. It is designed to incentivize diversity of owner-
ship in the broadcasting industry.
Let me ask you, Madam Chair and Commissioner Starks. Both
of you have been outspoken about the positive impacts of this pro-
gram. I would like to offer the opportunity for all the FCC Commis-
sioners to eventually embrace this idea, and to understand the po-
tential benefits of reinstating the tax certificate program.
Madam Chair, if you would, speak very briefly to this.
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Sure. I embrace it fully, wholly, and com-
pletely. History demonstrates it was the single most effective tool
we had to increase the diversity of ownership of media properties
in the United States.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. And Commissioner Starks, can you add to
that, please?
Mr. STARKS. Yes.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Go ahead.
Mr. STARKS. I emphatically and foot-stomp it, as well. Fourteen
hundred full-power commercial broadcast television stations, less
than six percent owned by women, less than three percent are mi-
nority-owned. And the minority tax certificate program speaks for
itself with the great results that it achieved.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Thank you.
And back to our chair, Madam Chair, my bill, the Data Mapping
to Save Moms’ Lives Act—that is a mouthful, but we have talked
about it before—it directs the FCC to use its data mapping tool to
track maternal mortality and severe morbidity rates. Making the
connection between maternal mortality rate and broadband access
is crucial to identifying areas that lack support, especially in Afri-
can American communities, where the maternal mortality rate is
unacceptably high.
Can you discuss this with us in the few seconds that we have
left?
84
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Sure. The United States is the only industri-
alized economy with an increasing level of maternal mortality. It
is a quiet crisis. There are new telehealth technologies that can
help women during their pregnancies and produce better outcomes
for them and their children. We have got to figure out how to use
broadband connections to make those better outcomes happen, and
I think your bill and the data we collect pursuant to it would help
with just that.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. And Commissioner Starks, can you use the
last 20 seconds to talk to us about modifying the commission’s FM
booster rules?
Mr. STARKS. Yes. Thank you for the question, Congressman.
This proposal garnered 21 civil rights organizations’ support. You
know, small radio station operators frequently are also small busi-
ness owners. I heard from them how hard it was for them to
weather the pandemic, as well. So I see great potential in this
geobroadcast technology improving local radio experience, news,
weather, emergency, as well as positioning small broadcasters and
broadcasters of color to compete for listeners and advertising dol-
lars.
And very last, I would like to say, Congressman Butterfield,
thank you for your long dedication to public service. Your legacy of
excellence is something that I follow, and particularly in the media
and telecom space.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. I am grateful. Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman’s time has expired. The Chair recog-
nizes Mr. Duncan for 5 minutes.
Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you. And Mr. Chairman, I don’t know if the
Democrats are practicing baseball yet, but you look awful alert to
have gotten up so early, if you all are.
I want to thank the Commissioners for being here. After over 500
days of not having an oversight hearing, I am glad we are finally
doing that.
We have talked a lot today about the need for expanding rural
broadband connectivity, accurate mapping, and interagency co-
operation to ensure we aren’t double-building in the process. So I
want to echo these concerns, and the need to build out the rural
networks, rural broadband, rural networks. I think there needs to
be a huge percentage going to rural America, instead of inner cit-
ies, where there may already be existing networks, and not just
keep spending billions of tax dollars repeatedly on the same inner-
city neighborhoods.
We have also talked a lot today about spectrum, and the scarcity
of spectrum, and the need for continuing and expanding auction
authority to make more spectrum available, and ensuring that the
spectrum we make available is usable for industry. I also want to
echo those concerns, but this ground has pretty much been covered
by the time you get to me.
So, Commissioner Carr, I want to ask you, in your testimony you
mentioned the need to push back against the abuses of Big Tech.
And I especially want to focus on anti-discrimination provisions
that you mentioned. What do you think we in Congress need to do
to protect First Amendment rights of conservative content creators,
local businesses, local broadcasters, and others who feel they have
85
been trampled on by Big Tech, keeping the importance of that and
multiplicity of information sources that you mentioned in your tes-
timony in mind?
Mr. CARR. Thank you, Congressman. Thanks to you for your
work on this issue of reining in Big Tech. I think, first and fore-
most, we have to fundamentally overhaul section 230. There are
portions of section 230 that are pro-speech, that create incentives
to leave speech up, particularly political speech. And there is por-
tions of section 230 that today have been misread by courts, as Jus-
tice Thomas have walked through, to give them, internet compa-
nies, carte blanche to remove any speech that they want. That is
not the intent of Congress in section 230. And I think Congress
needs to amend section 230 in a way that is going to promote more
speech.
But 230 reform alone isn’t going to be enough. That is why we
need to impose some basic transparency obligations on Big Tech.
Right now it is a total black box. Some speech is left up, some is
taken down. There is no consistency at all. I think we need some
basic non-discrimination that could take a lot of different forms,
whether it is treating like cases alike, or looking at legislation in
the Senate that Senator Wicker has that talks about trying to pro-
tect speech that is political in nature from discriminate takedowns.
And I think there is steps we can do in terms of user empower-
ment. Right now, the whole point of section 230 was to give a little
bit of balance between content moderation that websites do and
empowering—giving users tools to engage. And right now, that bal-
ance has shifted too far.
And I think one step that we could do would be to empower users
to make their own content moderation decisions. If you want Fox
News to filter your feed before you see it, maybe plug that in. If
you want MSNBC’s to do it, plug that in. There can be third par-
ties that offer ways to do content filtering, or someone can just
choose the Wild West version.
But if we give people more power to make those decisions, I
think that is a pro-speech reform that we would be better off, be-
cause then we can have, you know, robust, wide open political de-
bates, which we are better for, because that is how we solve prob-
lems in this country. It is not by keeping ideas off the table, but
by having robust discussions about them.
Mr. DUNCAN. I would love to see this committee or the full com-
mittee deal with 230 protections, and have Big Tech come back in,
where we could delve into that.
I will move on. Mr.—Commissioner Simington, I know you are a
big proponent of looking at regulation of receivers as a way to in-
crease efficiency of how we use spectrum, based on its scarce re-
source. How would you address the concerns of industry about the
potential burdens of such regulations? And what are the benefits
of ensuring that government users of spectrum have to upgrade
their standards to be more efficient?
Mr. SIMINGTON. This is a great question, because the difficulty
of taking receiver standards up in the past has always been that
it is a much, much, much more difficult question than physical as-
sessment of transmission.
86
You can put a transmitter in a box and test if it is emitting ac-
cording to spec. For a receiver, you have to field test it, and you
have to field test it under a wide variety of interference conditions.
It is an exponentially more complicated problem, much more like
a large research lab’s R&D function than something that the Com-
mission is capable of doing. And that is exactly what we don’t want
to do here.
So hopefully, industry is being assured right here, right now that
we are not going to cram burdensome regulations down on them.
Instead, the idea is going to be to assess what constitutes an ac-
ceptable threshold of interference between every band and service
right here, right now, and then to be able to compare and contrast
them to understand where it is that receivers’ improvements could
lead to the availability of bands for commercialization, or to other-
wise greater spectral efficiency.
I think that is the last free real eState we are likely to find in
the spectrum, but it is very valuable. So hopefully, that is how we
will get there.
Mr. DUNCAN. Yes——
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman’s time——
Mr. DUNCAN [continuing]. Thank you.
Mr. DOYLE [continuing]. Has expired.
Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you, I yield back.
Mr. DOYLE. The Chair recognizes Ms. Matsui for 5 minutes.
Ms. MATSUI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for having
this hearing today. And I want to welcome the Commissioners, and
especially congratulate Chairwoman Rosenworcel.
And I also want to say it sounds like we are having a produc-
tive—you know, before it even got to this point now today, so you
have already done productive work already.
I have a question regarding receiver standards. While recent dis-
putes have highlighted the importance of spectrum governance and
coordination, it also reinforces the need to take a meaningful look
at the role receivers play in supporting or hindering more intensive
use of airwaves. I know the FCC will be examining this important
issue soon.
I am also working on draft legislation that I believe can com-
plement this effort by assuring the Federal Government isn’t buy-
ing outdated or inefficient technology.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel and Commissioner Simington, can you
describe the relationship between Federal receivers and the spec-
trum pipeline, and do you think legislation addressing Federal re-
ceiver supply could complement the FCC’s work?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Thank you for the question and your interest
in spectrum policy, generally.
Traditionally, we have had discussions about just transition
when it comes to spectrum. But if we want to be efficient, we also
have to think about the other end. We have to think about receiv-
ing. For that reason, working with Commissioner Simington, we
have a notice of inquiry we will consider next month on this sub-
ject.
But I think what you are raising in legislation is really impor-
tant. Making spectrum receiver efficiency part of government pur-
87
chasing will change the market for receiver equipment because gov-
ernment purchases at a greater scale than anyone else.
I think that that was a subject of an old executive order, and it
is an idea we need to revisit right now.
Ms. MATSUI. OK, thank you. Mr. Simington, do you have a com-
ment?
Mr. SIMINGTON. Yes. I just wanted to express my appreciation for
your work on the proposed Spectrum Coexistence Act. I have,
frankly, I have heard it quietly said by people at major executive
branch agencies that focus on spectral efficiency, in terms of agency
and government procurement, is exactly how to improve relation-
ships with the FCC.
Ms. MATSUI. OK, thank you.
A reliable pipeline of valuable mid-band spectrum is a funda-
mental part of keeping the U.S. ahead in the race to the next gen-
eration wireless technology. To help keep our pipeline robust and
predictable, I recently called on NTIA Administrator Davidson to
finish the 2019 study on the 7 gigahertz band.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, you recently highlighted the impor-
tance of spectrum in the 7 to 15 gigahertz range for 6G. How would
completion of the study help industry prepare for the future?
And can you describe its potential for commercial use?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Yes, thank you. So we are already going
there. We are talking about 6G. And it feels early, but there are
other nations that are already doing this, so I think we should
start targeting some airwaves.
At Mobile World Congress I mentioned, as you suggested, that
spectrum between the 7 and 15 gigahertz bands should be our tar-
get. So that NTIA study you mentioned that I believe is ongoing
is really important.
Ms. MATSUI. OK. Thank you very much.
In California wildfire season has grown from a seasonal concern
to almost a year-round threat. In the face of more frequent and se-
vere wildfires, hurricanes, and tornadoes, I introduced the bipar-
tisan Emergency Reporting Act, which passed the House earlier
this Congress. I am glad to see the Commission taking action to
improve network outage reporting to help us prepare for and re-
spond to emergencies.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, what steps is the FCC taking to
strengthen the resiliency of communications networks during emer-
gencies?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Thank you. You know, whether it is snow-
storms in Texas or wildfires out West, we have got once-in-a-life-
time weather events happening with increasing frequency.
After Hurricane Ida hit land in Louisiana, Commissioner Carr
and I went and studied the communications damage and we came
back and immediately started a proceeding to consider how we
should, you know, update our wireless cooperative resiliency frame-
work that helps keep wireless service running after disaster, what
kind of notification is necessary for 911 and first responders in a
disaster, and what reforms we can make so that our power compa-
nies work better with our communications companies.
That is a discussion that is still ongoing, but I really do appre-
ciate that Commissioner Carr decided to participate in that, and
88
has been really thoughtful in trying to find ways to advance it, con-
sistent with the kind of concerns you just described.
Ms. MATSUI. OK. Well, thank you very much.
And Mr. Chairman, I will yield back—well, I guess—I was going
to yield back 1-second.
[Laughter.]
Mr. DOYLE. You are right on time, Doris, thank you. The Chair
recognizes Mr. Cárdenas for 5 minutes.
[Pause.]
Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Cárdenas, you are—you have 5 minutes.
Mr. CÁRDENAS. Hello, this is Cárdenas. I have 5 minutes?
Mr. DOYLE. Yes, you are up.
Mr. CÁRDENAS. OK, thank you so much. I was having problems
with my iPad. Thank you very much. I appreciate this opportunity,
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, so that we can have this oppor-
tunity to work with and speak to the FCC Commissioners, and all
the wonderful work that is going on around the country, and imple-
menting legislation that we have all passed and are very excited
about.
I would like to highlight, first of all, the accomplishments of the
Emergency Broadband Benefit Program, the Affordable
Connectivity Program, as well. EBB and ACP are great examples
that demonstrates what a partnership between Congress, the FCC,
and the internet service providers, the private providers that can
lead to including making this program a reality for so many con-
sumers. Public-private partnerships can and do work. The FCC
successfully implemented this program, and the private sector
stepped up to participate and help consumers by offering free and
low-cost broadband to ensure that every family has access to reli-
able, affordable, high-speed internet to stay connected and to close
the digital divide.
For example, this morning I just found out that Charter an-
nounced 100 megabit speed for under $30 a month. That means—
and also with no equipment, no installation charges, et cetera. That
means that, with $30 a month ACP credit, we will be able to see
families across America be able to afford to have access to the
internet at a speed that is—so that people can do their homework
and then get their work done.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, it is good to see you. I love working
with you. And thank you so much for making yourself so accessible
to so many communities around the country, especially in my dis-
trict. How do you think the FCC can build on this success, so that
all households and communities can benefit from the personal and
economic benefits of high-speed broadband internet?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Thank you for the question, and thank you
for the work you are doing to get out the word about the Affordable
Connectivity Program in your own district.
We are partnering with anyone and everyone who has a good
idea. We have worked with the Department of Education to send
out emails to everyone with a Pell Grant in this country. We have
worked with the Department of Labor to make sure that in State
unemployment centers there is information about these materials.
And my colleague, Commissioner Starks, is spearheading an effort
89
to work with Federal housing authorities to make sure that they
too learn about it.
The bottom line is that our program is up for iteration at any
moment in time when people on this committee or anyone else has
a good idea about how we effectively get the word out so people
hear about it from people they trust. So keep us posted. We would
love to have your ideas. Keep them coming.
Mr. CÁRDENAS. Thank you. And thank you for all the work that
you are doing across departments. I know people accuse govern-
ment of being too siloed, so thank you for demonstrating that it can
be done. And thank you for the success that the FCC has had
working across different agencies and departments.
When it comes to spectrum, two issues are very clear: first, we
need more spectrum available for commercial use; and second, with
little greenfield spectrum left, we need to use all available tools to
determine the most efficient use of spectrum in every band.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, you and the FCC have really show-
cased this ingenuity working with DoD, NTIA, and the wireless in-
dustry to develop a successful sharing framework in the CBRS,
otherwise known as Citizens Broadband Radio Service, thereby al-
lowing commercial operators access to critical mid-band spectrum,
while protecting DoD operations in the band. We should consider
how sharing regimes like this one can be used in other bands, in-
cluding 3.1 to 3.4 gigahertz, and band that—lower portions of the
37 gigahertz band.
With spectrum being scarce, a scarce resource, what other types
of innovative sharing regimes are you considering to help ensure
we are getting the most efficient use out of every megahertz of
spectrum?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Going forward, it is not going to be easy. We
are going to need creative spectrum policies like what you just
mentioned in the CBRS band. And we are also going to need new
technologies, continued use of automatic frequency coordination, so
that we have dynamic, real-time information about when airwaves
are available and when they are not.
The United States has always led on these issues. And going for-
ward it is something that I think we should continue to pursue,
and it is going to be a feature of our spectrum policy for the fore-
seeable future.
Mr. CÁRDENAS. Leading is a source of pride, but, more impor-
tantly, it is about economics and leading the world like we have in
the past.
I would love to ask Mr. Starks a question to expand on housing
and access to—when it comes to public housing, et cetera, but I
apologize. Hopefully you have an opportunity to expand on that.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. DOYLE. OK, I thank the gentleman. The Chair now recog-
nizes Ms. Kelly for 5 minutes.
Ms. KELLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was a proud supporter
of the American Rescue Plan Act and its creation of the Emergency
Connectivity Fund. This legislation was targeted at helping us
close the homework gap that has been talked about. The ECF is
helping students and teachers across the country access what is
now a basic educational tool: the Internet. Already, schools and li-
90
braries in Illinois have been awarded over $200 million from ECF,
of which over $7 million has been awarded to my district, which
is urban, suburban, and rural.
The Affordable Connectivity Program is another important pro-
gram enacted on a bipartisan basis that is helping to connect the
unconnected. Over ten million consumers have signed up for the
program, and it is helping over 335,000 Illinoisans pay for
broadband service each month.
However, we know that nationwide there are over 38 million
households eligible for ACP that aren’t signed up yet. Marginalized
communities, including people of color, immigrant populations, and
non-English-speaking communities are disproportionately discon-
nected, and are less likely to be aware of ACP.
Chairwoman, how does the FCC plan to engage with hard-to-
reach communities to ensure they are aware of the programs and
ultimately enrolled?
And let me give my congratulations to you.
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Thank you. I have said it before, I will say
it again: We need trusted actors in communities getting the word
out.
One of the things that we are doing right now is running a pro-
ceeding to identify how to spend the outreach dollars we have with
local institutions to make sure that they have the resources they
need to amplify this program and reach people where they are.
I will also add that, as an act of transparency, on a monthly
basis we publish statistics for this program on a zip code basis. So
every office that serves on this committee can look at that data,
and try to understand if there is an area within their district
where they feel that more progress can be made, you should let us
know. We will study that data with you, and try to identify a way
forward.
Ms. KELLY. Thank you so much, I appreciate it.
Commissioner Starks, do you have any additional thoughts on
how the FCC can engage with hard-to-reach communities?
Mr. STARKS. It is a great question, Congresswoman. As I have
mentioned, the pilot program, particularly with public housing—I
agree with Chairwoman Rosenworcel, making sure that our com-
munity-based organizations—advertising is going to be important.
One additional thing that I would offer up to you, Congress-
woman Kelly. You know, seniors are, in particular, a group that I
think would benefit also from additional focus on ACP. Just one
out of three seniors, you know, one out of three seniors lacks a
home broadband connection. Nearly 13 percent of seniors live at or
below the poverty line. And so there is a way that they need to be
part of our targeted reach out.
You know, I would also say, based upon the numbers thus far for
ACP, seniors only account for, you know, maybe about 10, 12, 15
percent of folks that are currently enrolling. And so the last thing
that I would say here, obviously, when you are talking about dig-
ital divide with seniors particularly, issues of digital literacy come
into play. Making sure that seniors have the confidence in both set-
ting up and using their internet connections is going to be a big
part of that reach-out, as well.
91
Ms. KELLY. Thank you so much. Through the Infrastructure In-
vestment and Jobs Act, we are investing $65 billion to help ensure
that everyone has access to reliable, affordable, high-speed inter-
net. We know everyone is waiting on the FCC’s broadband maps
so this important work can get underway. But we have seen prob-
lems in the past when we spent limited Federal dollars to build out
our broadband networks without first having accurate service
maps.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, congratulations on recently winning
the bid process you all faced getting the maps underway. But with
that, can you tell us why it is important that the Commission not
sacrifice accuracy for speed in developing these maps, especially
when this historic investment is at stake?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. For too long at the FCC we have had maps
that don’t work, that overState service. And as a result, when we
have Federal dollars, we don’t always send them to the right
places. So we have got to put a premium right now on getting it
right, because we are spending more money on broadband deploy-
ment than ever before. And we are going to also put a premium
on sharing our data with every single part of the Federal Govern-
ment that is giving out funds for broadband. We want to make sure
that we are coordinating like never before, as well.
Ms. KELLY. Thank you. I just want to close by saying I am eager
for the fifth Commissioner to be seated, so you will be at full capac-
ity.
And I want to express my support for the agency acting to re-
establish its authority.
I yield back two seconds—or one now.
Mr. DOYLE. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair recognizes
Mrs. Fletcher for 5 minutes.
Mrs. FLETCHER. Thank you, Chairman Doyle. And thanks to you
and Ranking Member Latta for convening today’s hearing on the
Federal Communications Commission and its role regulating com-
munications across the country.
And thank you to Chairwoman Rosenworcel, and congratula-
tions, as well. Thank you to Commissioners Carr, Starks, and
Simington for joining us today, and for your testimony. It has been
very helpful, I think, for all of us to hear these perspectives and
cover these range of issues.
And I join all of my colleagues who have expressed their appre-
ciation for your efforts to expand broadband deployment to all com-
munities, rural and urban. That includes your leadership, in addi-
tion to all of your work in administering the two historic afford-
ability programs that we have discussed today, the Affordable
Connectivity Program and the Emergency Connectivity Fund.
In particular, schools and libraries in Texas’s 7th congressional
district that I represent have been awarded more than $4 million
through the ECF, and I know this will open doors and opportunity
for so many young people in my district. So we are very appre-
ciative of those efforts.
And Chairman Rosenworcel, I wanted to take a minute to touch
on this. I really support your approach to incentivizing commu-
nities and providers to work together toward the shared goal of
broadband deployment everywhere. And that is why last year I in-
92
troduced the Broadband Incentives for Communities Act to provide
critical resources to cities and counties to enhance their zoning and
permitting functions.
Based on the experiences in my district in Houston, where we
have rolled out 5G, where we have a lot of folks who have a lot
of experience here, we have seen that those can be real challenges.
And so to enable the cities, counties, communities that are permit-
ting this expansion, we put together this bill to help facilitate that
process. And given the billions of dollars provided for broadband
under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, we should make
sure that local jurisdictions that are interested in expanding crit-
ical broadband and 5G services have access to the resources that
they need to manage the process, as well as clear incentives to
move quickly.
So I would welcome the opportunity to work with you on this
issue by making this concept really a critical part of our ongoing
Federal support for fixed and wireless broadband deployment. And
that connects a little bit with, I think, your approach, Chairwoman
Rosenworcel, about kind of a carrots-and-not-sticks approach for
communities when it comes to broadband deployment. Can you talk
a little bit more about your approach and strategy, and why you
think that that is how we should move forward with broadband de-
ployment?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Sure. You know, there are two things I know
to be true here. First, that we have a massive infrastructure
project underway in the United States right now to bring high-
speed broadband to everyone, everywhere. And the second thing I
know to be true is that we have a tradition of local control in the
United States. We have got a Tenth Amendment, and we have got
people who want to have a say in what is happening in their own
backyard. So we have got to figure out how to manage both of those
two realities at the same time.
And I think what you are describing is spot on. We should make
sure that, when we are developing programs with Federal funds,
we condition those funds on having a reasonable and streamlined
process for things like permitting and rights-of-way. And if we do
that, we will both be able to build out this infrastructure and honor
that tradition of local control, and do it in a reasonably speedy way.
I think that is a win-win across the board.
So I very much appreciate the approach you just described, and
we would be happy to work with you on it further.
Mrs. FLETCHER. Wonderful. Well, thank you so much. I very
much look forward to the opportunity to do that.
And with the minute or so I have left, I also just want to touch
on the theme of resiliency for our communications networks. In re-
cent years in my district in Houston we have seen many types of
disasters, from the winter freeze that everyone observed last year,
to three 500-year floods three years in a row that knocked out
power and hindered communications access. So I would love to get
your thoughts and input on how we ensure network resiliency of
existing networks, and how we promote resiliency in the construc-
tion of new networks. On just that for 30 seconds or so.
93
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. We have an outstanding proceeding just on
that issue. And it was the byproduct of a trip that Commissioner
Carr and I took after Hurricane Ida.
We are looking at updating the wireless cooperative resiliency
framework. We are looking at making sure that first responders
and public safety authorities get timely notice of outages. And we
are looking at improvements we can make for coordination between
telecommunications companies and power companies, because com-
mercial power is so important for modern communications.
Mrs. FLETCHER. Well, thank you so much for that.
I will ask the other Commissioners to respond for the record,
since we won’t have time.
[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
Mrs. FLETCHER. And I will yield back with 2-seconds, Chairman
Doyle, thank you very much.
Mr. DOYLE. I thank the gentlelady. The Chair recognizes Mr.
Pence for 5 minutes.
Mr. PENCE. Thank you, Chairman Doyle and Ranking Member
Latta, for allowing me to join this subcommittee hearing today.
And thank you to the Commissioners for being here.
As many of my colleagues have discussed today, rural commu-
nities are left at a disadvantage because of a lack of access to
broadband service. Certainly, in my Indiana 6th district, that is the
case. Too many of my constituents throughout southeast Indiana
remain unserved, not under-served, totally unserved by broadband
providers. That means access to telehealth, online education, re-
mote work opportunities, and social connections with family and
friends are simply out of reach.
If we are going to close the digital divide with Federal resources,
the FCC should prioritize, in my opinion, parts of the country that
remain unserved before upgrading existing networks in covered
areas like my Indianapolis.
Unfortunately, the delayed process for improving outdated
broadband service maps is still an issue for providers in my dis-
trict. Currently, consensus block data will show coverage across my
district, but all I have to do is drive from Columbus, my hometown,
to Richmond or Rushville, and I can tell you where I have no serv-
ice.
Meanwhile, broadband infrastructure has not escaped the infla-
tion and supply chain disruptions that ripple across the country. In
my district materials for broadband infrastructure, such as fiber
and other communication equipment, still face upwards of 12-
month backorders.
Last summer I wrote to the Department of Commerce with 17 of
my colleagues to consider opportunities to address these shortages
and secure materials necessary to close the digital divide.
Mr. Chairman, I request unanimous consent to insert this letter
for the record.
Mr. DOYLE. Without objection, so ordered.
[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
Mr. PENCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I encourage the Commission to find ways to share expertise with
relevant agencies to alleviate delays and release broadband maps
94
so that Federal funding can reflect the needs of southeast Indiana
and all of rural America.
Madam Chairwoman, I was pleased to see my bill, the
Broadband Interagency Coordination Act, signed into law in 2020.
I understand the Commission has recently updated interagency
agreements to include additional agencies regarding broadband co-
ordination. However, it is also my understanding the FCC does not
have an interagency agreement with every agency involved in
broadband support programs.
The IIJA requires your Commission to establish a deployment lo-
cations map to provide an overview of federally funded broadband
deployment projects across the country. Can you explain the inter-
agency process that your Commission is conducting to implement
this law?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Sure. It is important that we coordinate, be-
cause we have a chance to make generational change with these
funds, and we are only going to do it if we are all working together.
And to that end, consistent with the law you described, in June of
last year we signed a memorandum of understanding with the De-
partment of Commerce and the Department of Agriculture to make
sure that we share our data with them so that we can make sure
our efforts work together, and not in opposition.
I have already notified our colleagues at the Department of the
Treasury we would like to do the same with them. They have a $10
billion fund. They are not mentioned in the legislation, but we are
casting far and wide, and trying to make sure that we can all work
off the same information, the same data sets, and make good deci-
sions together.
Mr. PENCE. Well, I was interested—you know, I would have iden-
tified Treasury. Thank you for doing that. Are you optimistic that
you are going to get everybody at the table together?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. I am persistent.
Mr. PENCE. You are——
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. That might be better.
Mr. PENCE. You seem like you do, so good.
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Yes.
Mr. PENCE. Well, thank you very much——
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. It can happen.
Mr. PENCE. Thank you all for being here.
And Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Mr. DOYLE. I thank the gentleman. Let’s see, Mr. Welch, you are
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WELCH. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, I just want to say to everybody that your job is so
important, especially since there has been such significant appro-
priations, basically bipartisan, to help on broadband.
Mr. Carr, you said something. Your tone concerned me a little
bit, but your concern I share. This money, OK, in a lot of ways, is
the easy part. We need resources in order to get the capacity to
have broadband in rural America. But it is—the hard, hard, hard
work is actually getting it done, getting each house wired. So I
share that concern.
But the tone part of it worried me a little bit, because we are
going to be depending on you and your organization to keep an eye
95
on this as it is being implemented. And I just want you to know
I share that concern, but I look to you and your colleagues and the
Chair to make certain this money results in folks in all of our dis-
tricts having the broadband that they absolutely need. Are you
with me on that?
Mr. CARR. Yes, absolutely.
Mr. WELCH. All right. So this has got to be a cooperative effort
is what I am saying.
Mr. CARR. Yes.
Mr. WELCH. I mean, you all got to be together on this, and it just
would—I would want to shoot myself if I saw that this became a
blame game before we even got rural America wired. So thank you.
Thank you for that.
Congratulations, now-Chairwoman Rosenworcel. I want to ask
you about 911. Our colleague, Anna Eshoo, has been a huge cham-
pion of modernizing 911. And one of the challenges we have in
Vermont is we have got these antiquated systems. You know, peo-
ple are in back rooms, and there is bubblegum on the chair. You
know, it is just—and we need it. It has got to work, but we need
some funds. And you have got a spectrum auction that we are
going to be considering re-authorizing.
And I think Anna—Congresswoman Eshoo’s thought is maybe we
could use some of that money, not just to go back to the Treasury,
but to upgrade the 911 services that we have around the country
and, again, all of our districts. I would ask you to comment on that.
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Yes. Thank you for that. I appreciate it. I
think it is an important idea.
I think you have an opportunity to make history. We have got
more than 6,000 911 call centers all across this country. You know,
the odds are you might only call them once in your life, but it will
be the most important call you ever make. And many of those cen-
ters are not upgraded for the digital age. But if you were to re-au-
thorize our spectrum auctions, we take the revenue from public air-
waves and dedicate it to setting up a nationwide fund to update
911. I think that is within this committee’s power, and it would be
a great thing to do.
Mr. WELCH. Yes, well, I hope all—but, Commissioner, you will
have a discussion on that. But that certainly would be helpful to
Vermont.
Another question that I would ask each of you to answer, there
is more and more VIoP
[sic]—you know, the phones are over the internet, and that is
happening in Vermont, it is happening all around. When they
weren’t over the internet, then there was regulatory authority if
consumers had complaints. Now there is no regulatory authority if
consumers have complaint for the voice over internet. I think there
should be.
And I just ask—I don’t have much time, but ask each of you—
I will start with you, Mr. Simington, whether you would be in favor
of us making certain—actually, you can do it, have authority to ad-
dress legitimate consumer complaints if they have problems with
their voice over internet.
Mr. SIMINGTON. It is certainly within Congress’s power issue to
require us to address anything of that nature, yes.
96
Mr. WELCH. I think it is within your power. I think you could
do it, as well.
Mr. SIMINGTON. Well, I have got no objection. And, as some of
my colleagues have mentioned earlier today, we are moving up the
timeline for VoIP in response to the TRACED Act exactly for that
purpose.
Mr. WELCH. Thank you.
And Mr. Carr?
Mr. CARR. Thank you, Congressman, for the question. I am very
open to taking a look at VoIP, and making sure we have the right
regulatory framework around it——
Mr. WELCH. Right.
Mr. CARR [continuing]. Given what that technology is, to make
sure we protect consumers.
Obviously, consumers have other services they have a certain ex-
pectation on, and it is not entirely clear to me that—why we should
have such a gap with VoIP, as well.
Mr. WELCH. Thank you.
And Chairwoman Rosenworcel?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Yes. Communications is an essential service.
It needs oversight from the FCC.
Mr. WELCH. OK, thank you. Well, I certainly support that, and
I appreciate you working together on it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. STARKS. For my part, Congressman——
Mr. WELCH. Sorry, that is right, Mr.—I am sorry.
Mr. STARKS. No, no, no, no worries. The only thing that I would
additionally add is that, you know, we adopted an NPRM seeking
comment on a wide variety of resiliency issues, including VoIP
services. And that may be another way that we can start to help
think through this.
Mr. WELCH. OK. Thank you.
I yield back.
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman’s time has expired. The Chair recog-
nizes Mr. Carter for 5 minutes.
Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank all of you for
being here. This is extremely important.
And I want to give a shout out to Commissioner Carr. He has
been to my district before, and I appreciate that. I appreciate it
very much.
I want to ask you, Chairwoman Rosenworcel—we have rolled out
some programs. Every time you roll out relief—and you need to be
very careful. All of us understand that, and it needs to be delicately
dealt with. However, we have not dealt with something like we
have with this COVID pandemic in the past, and that is the enor-
mous and quick rollout that we have had.
Therefore, we—you know, there is always going to be problems,
there is always going to be bad actors, and there is bad actors in
everything. There is bad actors in pharmacy, bad actors in health
care. And so it is just part of it.
But I know that we are going to see and discover later on, as
this—as time goes on, that there were a lot of bad actors, and that
probably we are going to discover that. But unfortunately, we have
already seen it. We have already seen it happen. The FCC inspec-
97
tor general recently detected fraud in the Emergency Broadband
Benefit program.
What were the OIG’s findings on that? Can you go over that for
me very quickly?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Sure. We had to get this program up and
running in 60 days. And you also, I think, you know, in a smart
effort, asked the inspector general, ‘‘Take a close look at it,’’ be-
cause you get a program up and running fast, you have got to
make sure there are no loopholes.
They identified a loophole, which is that we had a streamlined
process for registering households that have children in commu-
nity-eligible participation schools with high numbers of kids on the
free and reduced lunch program. And immediately upon learning
that we shut down our portal for collecting that—those applica-
tions, we added additional documentation. We referred bad actors
to our enforcement bureau, and we also made sure that we reached
out to every single provider and every single subscriber that had
signed up through that portal to re-certify and re-verify them. And
we have got ongoing enforcement activity to take—to hold to ac-
count anybody who caused problems using that portal.
So to be candid with you, I think the system worked as intended.
We got it up and running fast. We found a problem, and we ad-
dressed it with speed.
Mr. CARTER. Commissioner Carr, what lessons do you think we
can learn from this, from these findings?
And how can the FCC tighten eligibility in the enrollment proc-
ess so that we reduce waste, fraud, and abuse?
Mr. CARR. Thank you, Congressman, for the question. Great to
see you again.
You know, look, I think part of the concern that I had, and part
of maybe the energy driving behind my concern is I really think we
are headed toward a problem here. We are going to waste a lot of
funds. And I wrote letters last summer to four different executive
branch agencies—Treasury, Education, Commerce, Agriculture,
about, hey, could we work together, can we coordinate to make sure
we don’t waste this opportunity? And I didn’t even get responses
from all of the agencies.
And so the frustration that I have is that we are trying on the
front end to solve this before it is too late. And it is not clear to
me that we have the guardrails in place. So again, one, we have
to have these maps at the FCC that we drive this through; we have
to avoid overbuilding; we have to have tracking controls in place,
so that agencies know where their funds are going, and one of the
responses that I did get didn’t give me a lot of confidence that we
are doing that; and we need to empower our inspector general with
the tools that they need to ferret out waste, fraud, and abuse.
And in fact, there is a request even to get a Senate-confirmed IG
at the FCC. I don’t know if that will be better or worse, but that
is another step that could be taken.
Mr. CARTER. Right, good. Thank you for that.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, let me ask you. The Affordable
Connectivity Program and the Emergency Connectivity Fund, they
both provide funding for devices and internet connectivity, some of
which can be used to purchase a hotspot or a connected device. In
98
instances where an eligible low-income household is also eligible for
ECF funds, how is the FCC ensuring that these two programs are
not duplicating one another?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. We actually have rules in place to prevent
that from taking place. So we developed the ECF program to make
sure that we check on that during our enrollment process to pre-
vent just what you are describing.
Mr. CARTER. So you are pretty confident that that is not going
to happen?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. We have rules in place. We will monitor it
over time. I understand what you are saying. You know, we don’t
have infinite resources. We want to reach as many people as pos-
sible with these——
Mr. CARTER. Sure.
Ms. ROSENWORCEL [continuing]. Programs, and that is why we
have a rule to that effect. But it is something we will certainly
monitor over time for the reasons you describe.
Mr. CARTER. Good. Commissioner Carr, I wanted to end with
this. Even before the pandemic, the broadband providers had pro-
grams to assist low-income customers get or stay connected to the
internet. Since then these programs have expanded, they have im-
proved service, and they have become more widely available, which
is good.
Combined with Federal subsidies, many service plans are free to
consumers, yet we still see people who are not adopting these serv-
ices. Going forward, we need to examine the impact these Federal
programs like the Affordable Connectivity Program and Lifeline
have on adoption rates to determine if they can—if they continue
to be necessary. So I hope that you all will pay close attention to
that, as well.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I will yield back.
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman yields back. The Chair recognizes
Mrs. Dingell for 5 minutes.
Mrs. DINGELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for having this
hearing. And I am going to cut to the chase, since we have votes.
This hearing has highlighted that broadband and spectrum ac-
cess remains a necessity to participate in today’s economy and, as
the chairwoman and Commissioners have emphasized, offer edu-
cational opportunities, medical services, and provide new avenues
for cutting-edge public safety advancements.
I want to focus on developments in communications technology
and its potential uses in roadway safety.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel my questioning has to do with the
FCC’s ongoing 0.9 gigahertz proceeding. In—the Commission’s ini-
tial report and order from November 2020 designated the upper 30
megahertz of this band for intelligence transportation systems, or
ITS. It furthermore stated that the C-V2X was the technology that
should be utilized for ITS.
The Commission asked for further comment on implementing C-
V2X and winding down DSCR
[sic] last spring. We are now one year removed from that public
comment period and two years removed from the original R&O,
and I understand much work remains for those State and local
99
DoTs and/or automakers who want to deploy this potentially life-
saving technology.
Based on the current record before the Commission, how is C-
V2X expected to advance automobile safety in this country?
And most importantly, will you work with those automobile
stakeholders who want to deploy the C-V2X technology in the 5.9
gigahertz band?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. The quick answer is yes. We are in conversa-
tion with them right now. I know that they want early access to
that 30 megahertz of spectrum, and they have a petition before us
requesting access. It is my understanding they are going to be up-
dating that petition. We are waiting for that, and I hope we can
proceed.
That is the technology that is, of course, the successor to DSRC,
and I think it has lots of potential in that 30 megahertz of spec-
trum. So we want to be able to stay in contact with them, and stay
in contact with you, and see if we can make that happen.
Mrs. DINGELL. This matters. We have delayed it for too long.
What can the FCC do next to aid automobile stakeholders inter-
ested in deploying C-V2X?
Can the FCC provide any timeline at this time to enable the de-
ployment of C-V2X?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. I think the most important thing at this
point is that we get that updated petition, we provide them with
access on a special temporary authority basis, so they can do the
kind of experimentation necessary, so they can develop their sys-
tems and we can develop rules. That is my goal to have happen as
soon as feasible. So, we will continue to work with them and you
to make sure that that actually takes place.
Mrs. DINGELL. I will commit to working with you and them.
I want to emphasize that this needs to be a priority for the agen-
cy. These stakeholders need clarity, and I urge the FCC to do all
it can to enable the deployment of C-V2X faster. I will continue to
push to ensure that we are addressing this issue with the urgency
that it demands.
Last, what protections are in place to ensure that interference
from unlicensed devices in the lower 45 megahertz will not inter-
fere with ITS’s use of the upper 30 megahertz in the band?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. I should point out that this is the subject of
ongoing litigation in the DC Circuit. There are some auto interests
that have taken the decision from 2020 to court to hash this out
in front of a judge. So that is ongoing right now.
But I have confidence in the engineering work of the FCC that
was done before I took over the agency that suggested that there
is no reason to be concerned for interference. We are going to be
able to accommodate in this band both auto safety interests and
unlicensed interests.
Mrs. DINGELL. Thank you. I just want to say it is vital that we
are developing forward-thinking policy to support the rollout of this
cutting-edge, lifesaving technology such as V22X
[sic]. I want to work very closely with you, because this will save
lives on the roads.
Thank you very much. I yield back.
100
Mr. DOYLE. The gentlelady’s time has expired. We just have two
more witnesses, or two more members, and hopefully we can
maybe get this, so we don’t have to recess for just one more person.
Mr. Joyce, you have 5 minutes, but if you don’t want to use it
all, that would be great.
[Laughter.]
Mr. JOYCE. Thank you to my fellow Pennsylvanian, Chairman
Doyle, and Ranking Member Latta for allowing me to waive onto
this hearing.
And congratulations, Chairwoman Rosenworcel, for your new po-
sition.
My first question is for Commissioner Carr. Many of us have
kind of bad habits of signing up for subscription service, whether
it is Netflix or a free trial online, and then forgetting about it. And
then a few months later, you know what happens? The bill arrives,
and you weren’t using the subscription, and you cancel the bill.
When it comes to Federal subsidy programs, that bill can continue
to increase if eligible households eventually move out of their eligi-
bility, and yet continue to receive support on an ongoing basis.
Does the Affordable Connectivity Program have ongoing
verification processes to continually review and validate eligibility?
Mr. CARR. Yes, thank you, Congressman, for the question.
Generally, with our programs we have usage requirements and
other checks that we make. And I can confirm that we have all of
those right ones in place for ACP, as well.
Mr. JOYCE. Thank you. I think that is very important. Strength-
ening those safeguards to re-verify and re-apply for the ACP pro-
gram on a periodic basis does help to prevent waste, fraud, and
abuse. And I urge the Commission to continue utilizing these types
of accountability measures in the program.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, I have serious concerns about the dif-
ferent Federal agencies making funding decisions based on dif-
ferent sets of data. That, coupled with the differing grant pro-
grams, it is really ripe for wasting Federal funds, rather than fo-
cusing on the truly unserved parts of America. So this is going to
be kind of a quick question, as the chairman requested.
This is yes or no. Do you agree that the FCC’s RDOF program
is on a path toward successfully narrowing the digital divide thus
far?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Yes.
Mr. JOYCE. The second question—again, we are going to make it
quick, yes or no—do you agree that the NTIA should follow a simi-
lar structure, and not impose open access requirements or price
regulations and requirements on recipients of their BEAD grant
program?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. I believe those questions are up to them and
whatever authority you ultimately provided to them in the infra-
structure bill.
Mr. JOYCE. I do not support the NTIA imposing open access or
price regulation as a condition for grant funding. I think that opens
it up to so many areas of disqualification.
Now, changing subjects, it is clear that the American consumers
rely heavily on wireless. And we see it. We see it in the use of mo-
bile phones, Wi-Fi and, increasingly, connected devices like thermo-
101
stats and even door locks. With this demand for wireless services,
how are each of you looking at the need for a spectrum strategy
that includes a balance of license and unlicensed spectrum?
And first I will ask Commissioner Carr.
Mr. CARR. Well, thank you. This is—a year ago I put forward a
spectrum calendar with listed bands. I thought it would get done
that year, this year, and next year. For instance, in that I included
3 to 4, 5 gigahertz, which we have done; 2.5 gigahertz, which hope-
fully we are doing soon; 6 gigahertz—I think we could look to au-
thorize very low power devices, as well as client-to-client device
communications. We can seek comment on increasing power in 3.5
CBRS, and we could take a look at UNII2c and on licensed band
and looking at whether we can make that more usable. And there
are some additional bands for this year and beyond that I have also
listed that I think will help keep us on track.
Mr. JOYCE. Chairwoman Rosenworcel, from your new perch, how
do you address this?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. We are going to have to work with you in
Congress to make sure we identify more spectrum that we can
make available for both licensed and unlicensed purposes.
The truth is that many of the Federal actors that have alloca-
tions today are not eager to give it up. And we are going to need
to work with Congress to make sure that their allocations are effi-
cient, and when they have airwaves that they can make available
for commercial auction or new unlicensed use, they do so.
Mr. JOYCE. And we look forward to working with you in those re-
gards.
Commissioner Simington, would you please address this?
Mr. SIMINGTON. Absolutely. Everything that has been said so far
is correct. We need to continue bringing licensed spectrum to mar-
ket.
Part of the obstacle in the background of everyone’s thinking
about the question of bringing licensed spectrum to market is the
conflict that inevitably arises. And so we need tools to diffuse those
conflicts in advance, which is where I think we are trying to go
with the receiver NOI.
As far as unlicensed uses, I would also note that some unlicensed
uses have proven to be so encumbered that only a small portion of
the actual unlicensed spectrum that is allocated is actually sup-
ported by vendors. And I would be happy to support that with ex-
amples in——
Mr. DOYLE. The gentleman’s time has expired. Thank you.
Is Mrs. Trahan still looking to ask questions?
Mrs. TRAHAN. I would love to, if there is time, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DOYLE. OK. You have got 5 minutes, and we have got 1
minute and 12 seconds until the vote is over. So go for it.
Mrs. TRAHAN. Well, thank you, thank you, Chairman Doyle,
Ranking Member Latta, for allowing me to waive on today to dis-
cuss a crucial agency.
The bipartisan infrastructure bill included 65 billion to ensure
that every American has access to high-speed internet, and Massa-
chusetts is slated to receive no less than 100 million to help pro-
vide broadband coverage to 137,000 people who currently lack it.
102
The legislation also created the new Affordable Connectivity Pro-
gram, the long-term iteration of the Emergency Broadband Benefit.
And according to recent data, over 161,000 Massachusetts resi-
dents have enrolled in the program already.
Congress created the Emergency Connectivity Fund in the Amer-
ican Rescue Plan that funds devices and internet service to stu-
dents and teachers and library patrons, and schools and libraries
in my district in Massachusetts have received about seven-and-a-
half million dollars from this fund.
So I just want to thank you all for your leadership on this impor-
tant program. Each of these investments is critical to ensuring that
no family ever has to sit in a fast food parking lot to get online
again.
But the infrastructure law also included a broadband nutrition
label provision spearheaded by my colleague, Congresswoman
Craig, and dedicated public interest groups. And this provision is
vital in helping my constituents understand their broadband serv-
ice speeds, costs, and network management in simple, clear terms.
It is a great idea, but the label won’t work if people can’t see it.
ISPs are very good at hiding fees in the fine print, and so we need
to make sure they don’t hide this new label.
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, it is, first of all, great to see you
again. I know the Commission is still working to finalize those
rules, but I think it is critical that these labels be displayed in a
number of places most often seen by consumers, including their
monthly bills. Can you just talk briefly about why this kind of
transparency is so important for consumers, and also for competi-
tion?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. Yes, I agree. Look, you go into the grocery
store, you pull boxes of cereal off the shelf, you can compare cal-
ories and carbohydrates really easily, because they have the same
nutrition label. That is what we are going for here. All of us know
that so many of the details get buried in the fine print. We want
to make it easy for people to compare service and make good
choices for their families. The goal is to make these labels manda-
tory, so that consumers can come to expect them any time they
choose to sign up for or purchase broadband service.
Mrs. TRAHAN. I couldn’t agree more. I have been advocating for
similar measures from tech platforms for terms of service labeling.
It is clear to me that enforcement is very important with this kind
of transparency.
For example, this committee has worked to ensure the FDA nu-
trition label, as you mentioned, is accurate for over 30 years. And
with the new broadband label, consumers are going to need an easy
way to report problems, and the FCC should be prepared to inves-
tigate.
Do you have thoughts on how the FCC can enforce the label re-
quirement?
Ms. ROSENWORCEL. I think it will provide us with an additional
tool. If a consumer signs up for service and the label says that they
get a minimum speed, and they don’t get that minimum speed, and
we start hearing from lots of consumers about that, we are going
to have an opportunity to enforce and take action against them,
103
and hold them to their word. So it provides an additional route for
enforcement activity going forward.
Mrs. TRAHAN. Great.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate you allowing—squeezing me in at the
tail end, and I yield back.
Mr. DOYLE. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair requests
unanimous consent to enter the following records and other infor-
mation into the record: a letter from Leadership Conference on
Civil and Human Rights; a document from former FCC Chair Mi-
chael O’Reilly; an op ed from Congressman Crowley; an op ed from
Neil Freed; a letter from 11 organizations on the 5.9 gigahertz
band; a letter from U.S. Chamber of Commerce; a letter to former
FCC Chairman Genachowski; and a letter to Hon. Gina Raimondo.
Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. DOYLE. I want to thank our witnesses for their participation
today.
I remind members that, pursuant to committee rules, they have
ten business days to submit additional questions for the record to
be answered by the witnesses who have appeared. I ask the wit-
nesses to respond promptly to any such questions you may receive.
At this time, the committee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 1:49 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
Æ
File and source
- File
- CHRG-117hhrg60331.pdf
- Size
- 33,815,982 bytes
- SHA-256
- 0025c0f8e024dfbb5ef57597b738e2f12edd2551cfad15739f72a9101c21d1df
- Our copy
- CHRG-117hhrg60331.pdf
- Original
- www.govinfo.gov