Transcripts For CSPAN3 Broadband Infrastructure 20180202

Proposals and great work from the staff of those of republican and the democrat side and i look forward to seeing progress. The bills to be extended are targeted and promoting innovation, cutting the red tape and advancing Public Safety. To highlight each though i do want to call attention to a couple of resolutions expressing the Guiding Principles on broadband infrastructure that should underpin our efforts first. Any funds for broadband in an infrastructure package should go to underserved areas. Second, as noted, the federal government should not be picking winners and losers in the marketplace. It should be competitively and technologically if we adhere to these principles im confident we can avoid the pitfalls. Most Important Congress should be mindful of the significant amounts of private capital to support broadband deployment. Since the passage of the bipartisan 96 act, the private sector has invested roughly 1. 6 trillion in the networks. To classify the competitive broadband market place under title number two of the Communications Act and an outdated relic of the 1930s monopoly era. To conduct the illconceived policy and return to the accusatory approach. In the best communication they have the highest Economic Growth and most important, most remain a bipartisan effort and im pleased to note our effort has brought support from the crosssection of the industry at this time i would like to enter into the record several letters of support. The commerce, power and communications contractions association. For the witnesse the witness ise that i feel the remainder of my time to the vice chairman of the subcommittee. The chair is doing a terrific job at th of the subcommittee. Since 199 1996 bbravo wirelessd wireline industries invested 1. 6 trillion Capital Investment as we consider how to promote broadband deployment in the network its important that we remember the private investment in the past and pursue federal policies to help and encourage an emphasis on the investment in the future. As the economy becomes more we must ensure the Broadband Access to all areas of the country. Its important that we recognize federal funds for the deployment of the finite on the unserved or underserved areas of the nation. Im pleased we are considering the act which ive introduced with the congressman on a bipartisan basis and i commandd the chariot of the members on both sides of the aisle on the impressive passage of bills we are considering today and i look forward to hearing the testimo testimony. Thank you madam chair for holding this hearing and for the witnesses appearing before us. I want to start off by saying that i share the gold of ensuring all have access to broadband and that we need to come together on a bipartisan basis to address the challenge of millions face today from the lack of Broadband Access and sufficient speed and lack of affordable options. I believe we cannot ignore the lack of competition particularly among the wireline providers and high cost of service that results in far too many in the service. I am concerned about the approach we are considering 25 bills at this hearing. I cant remember a time when the Committee Held a hearing on so many levels with a single witness. We are simply not getting the time and expertise required for the members of the committee to consider each of the bills and their ramifications. It would seem to me far more prudent to uphold a series of hearings so members would have an opportunity to discuss and understand the proposals before us. This gives a short riff for the members on both sides of the aisle and precludes the bills from undergoing the deliberative process. Its my hope that the chairman and the Committee Staff can work with us to avoid this unnecessary problem for the future and its my hope that as we move forward on broadband infrastructure legislation we can do so on a collaborative and bipartisan basis. I am concerned that many of the proposals do not actually address the primary issue of getting broadband to Rural America and that there is no Business Case for that investment. If we were serious about solving this problem they should have access to the comparable surface and wcompatible surfaceand we ne funds necessary. With that i would like to yield a minute to my friend from california and then my good friend mr. Welch. Here is the second decade of the 21st century to Many Americans cannot fully participate in modern life because. Its unavailable and its our responsibility to remedy this. Thats why several things clear the way for the community to take control. The Community Broadband act. They create their own networks and to streamline attachments to the efficiency and competition. The policies are in place. They have more access, Better Service and lower prices. Its up to 50 lower in cost him ththan the taxes and the broadbd community taxable up in the doors and most especially to make a difference in america so i think the gentleman for yielding. We know about 40 has no broadband and there is no Economic Future for any part of the country if it doesnt have highSpeed Internet. Rural america is being left behind and the other issue is that makes no sense for the private markets to be expanding in these areas there is no feedback. The bottom line is we need funding to make certain it is real and we have a group of the committee that wrote we want infrastructure funding that is real so there is broadband in Rural America. Absent funding there is no broadband. It is as simple as that. This is a good hearing on several good pills but there is nothing before us that its going to address the funding that we need for infrastructure for broadband. When we acknowledge that we have to have running for this felt as much as our predecessors and congress provided funding for the buildout of electricity in Rural America no funding, no broadband it is as simple as that. You are recognized for five minutes. Thank you to all the members and witnesses. We have a lot of important ideas and we have 25 bills as youve heard eight of them from democrats and the others from republicans. The committee is used to dealing with big important issues may be hundreds of pages long these are important policy statements in some cases streamline processes so the whole concept is to look at the broad range of ideas and thats why at the subcommittee level we thought it was important to put as many of public to see because its on the agenda and the website also to get our heads around as we look forward in the legislative process i remember when the last administration did the stimulus bill it was a 7 billion they pushed up before they produce the maps to tell us where they were in america and we did that after the fact so we are trying to get the other side of the coin what kind of reporting mechanisms are being conducted today to show us that. You want other organizations to help us figure that out so when the money is invested it isnt the overbuilt its to reach out to the 29 million americans, 39 that dont have access to highSpeed Broadband. 7 billion you have to remember in the market they are spending close to 80 billion a year on broadband deployment between 1996 i think it is and the 2006. They would stretch in the atlantic t to a high of 69,000 square miles. There are multiple ways to close it but one of the best is to make sure to expedite it to those that are underserved in helping move the country in the connectivity that weve never seen before. Its to free up the spectrum ans now being built out we want to move forward in the development. Ive asked for a briefing either classified or not to figure out what those issues are. We want to be smart about having a secure network i dont know that having the government run it is necessarily the best way to go so we are looking at those issues. Its an exciting time for america to figure out the ideas among ourselves and in a bipartisan way to deal with making america in the forefront on development of connectivity and the newest iteration in technology. Mr. Pallone at this time i will yield five minutes. The infrastructure package that would bring democrats and republicans together and for our part the Committee Democrats introduced a comprehensive package across all areas of the committees jurisdiction. Mostly to conflict with the plan that was just leaked out of the white house and since they developed a legislative proposal americans need and deserve the time when the nations infrastructure is either crumbling or in desperate need of modernization its time that we makes it thickens investments in the future. The left america act authorizes 40 billion for the deployment of secure and resilient broadband and also provide over 22 billion for Drinking Water infrastructure over 17 billion for the resistant infrastructure over 3 billion for Health Care Infrastructure and list 3 billion for the redevelopment. And the left america act puts the dollars where the needed creating jobs revitalizing the communities and addressing the threats to human health and the environment and it would address the Drinking Water to fund medical facilities in the country to produce Carbon Emissions and the resilience to the impact of Climate Change and it would do all that without rolling back environmental safeguards as we are now hearing as a major component of the president s plan. When it comes to broadband weve put fortpropagandaweve put forl proposals building on strong foundations of the act and the d the bills ensure that we are investing efficiently basing the decision on the good data and reaching urban, roll and tribal lands. The last couple of weeks weve seen bipartisan agreements that would need dedicated them to have access to broadband nationwide yet despite this, republicans on the committee decided to unveil the bills that dont address the problems they are simply window dressings with Broadband Access and the republican proposals will not improve Broadband Development and may hurt workers and the economy an in parts of the coun. They simply try to jam too much in one hearing and seven witnesses discussing the bills will not help the public understand these proposals let alone the members of the committee. Whats more we do not even have the relative agencies to understand how they fell in her private directions included in the republican bills. Its to paper over the infrastructure into the erosion of privacy rights and elimination of Net Neutrality and when it comes to governing its falling short. I yield the balance of my time. In todays digital age it is simply essential. The bipartisan act introduced by the cult provide targeted assistance to deploy Wireless Service in areas with the worst coverage and in my bill the act would help the divide by reinforcing the importance of the fcc universal Service Fund Programs that serve the communities. They are the most underserved region in the nation in terms of Broadband Access. We have the responsibility to honor our legal and moral obligation and this commonsense bill does just that. I urge the committee to move the bills as quickly as possible. The gentle man yields back into this concludes the opening statements. I would like to remind members pursuant to the rules, you all have your statements that can be made a part of the record and we want to thank our witnesses for being here today and taking their time to testify. The panel for todays hearing will include mr. Jonathan. Its the executive vp president and ceo Shirley Bloomfield mr. Spots lessonsscott slawson. And ellen swanson, the Connecticut Consumer Council we appreciate each of you for being here today and preparing for the committee submitting testimony today. We will work right through the day as recognized. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you. Im president and e. Of the telecom representing everything in between. All are deeply committed to and on the frontlinebeing on the fre massive effort under way for the opportunities and possibilities so we greatly appreciate the leadership and growing momentum we are seeing on both sides of the aisle to aid in this effort and in a few short hours we know the president will deliver the state of the Union Address and in the topics that drove the consensus. One of those issues with a powerful centrifugal force pulling us all together. In a statement and actions sent to the bills now making their way through this Committee Washington has caught up to the times in a moment too soon acknowledging the role of information infrastructure the ones with Broadband Networks to the nation. Its now a privatesector endeavor and the providers have invested as the chairman mentioned 1. 5 trillion over the last two decades building out u. S. Digital infrastructure to put a man on th on the moon andd out the interstate highway system combined so why must we continue to commit public funds to the cost . Because we risk leaving millions of households and citizens behind if we do not. The private investment model works in reasonably populous areas that the Business Case breaks down when the average per mile of laying fiber not to mention the Network Upgrades and maintenance costs associated that are constantly required must be spread across a handful of users. Broadband companies and members want to connect everyone from the most populated urban areas to the most remote communities in the nation. What specifically does that mean . New and direct public funding is needed for connecting the final frontier. It is on a vast spending menu but has its own specific allocation. Allocation. A physician being championed by the bipartisan cochair of the broadband caucus and thank you very much for that. Public dollars should prioritize connecting the underserved areas using proven mechanism chief among them universal service fund. For the accountability by minimizing administrative costs to u. S. Taxpayers. Fourth, connectivity should be factored into physical Infrastructure Projects adding more of the bridges and roads to the conductivity makes them smarter, safer and more Cost Effective and extends their useful life. Last, a stable streamline Regulatory Environment can accelerate and extend the impact of both public and private dollars. Earlier this month the president signed an executive order to expedite the permitting socalled Big Companies can build infrastructure in rural areas faster continuing the efforts reducing deployment cost cost and stretching limited resources further. I really greatly appreciate your testimony today and ongoing leadership. We stand ready to link arms of the policy leaders from anyone else wants to step up. Morning. Thank you for including wireless as part of this conversation. Look at the face challenges we face together and the opportunities we have. We look at driving up Economic Growth and having opportunities for brett about brandon allamericans. We have two core challenges. The first is the Digital Divide. Vermont to eastern americans that do not have access to the wired and Wireless Broadband Solutions that we all rely on everyday. We look forward to working with the committee to try with wired wireless broadband deeper. Our second is global competitiveness. Last month International Standards body spent the set the standards in the races now on. See what leadership has meant here and they want to take thus from us. China and others are investing with over a hundred ongoing today. In the u. S. We want to win too. We have our own ongoing trials. And ultimately were ready to invest 275 billion in private capital to build out those networks. We dont need federal funding to solve the 5g problem. We need help to modernize our approach to society. Networks will be different because well them with small cells. Theyre attached to streetlights inside the buildings. The challenge we face is too often advice that takes one or two hours to install takes one or two years to get approved. At every year we treat these like a 270foot tower alongside the highway. In short, we need new rules and thats why we appreciate the focus on this issue focusing on the federal impediments and focus on how to we modernize the federal regulation to expedite things like this another new infrastructure. Her had we marshall federal assets to draw a broadband deeper and utilizing federal lands. The other thing we would hope for is to talk about the leadership with respect to state local sightings as well. Assist leadership at 92 and 96 to give guard whales in guy guidance about how this can and should work to make sure we have deployment of wireless and broadband. Federal guidance also needs to be updated. When we get the rules right 5g will be transformative to your communities. It will unlock self driving cars in the internet of things. It will create jobs in downtown pittsburgh. The server 200 million in the economy. Thats why were excited about winning the 5g race. Need make sure all americans have access to broadband. We think with bold leadership of this congress and committee we can and need to do both thank you. At this time you have five minutes. As you know, for the last year aca and its members have been discussing with members of both sides of the aisle the administration and fcc about how to effectively and efficiently close the Digital Divide. Aca appreciates and supports the commitment to bring rod bentall americans. Over the past decade because of hundreds of billions of dollars of private investment by aca members and others in the secs reforms to the Service Programs were closing in on this goal. Today, more than a hundred million goals have access to more than 100 megabits per second and only 5. 3 million have speeds less than ten megabits. Not only have they invested billions to upgrade and expand their networks but many with their own money have deployed 840,000 homes third otherwise be eligible for support. We should recognize and build upon the successes. We know theres much more to do. For my travel visiting with members across the country i can tell you members are committed to serving the nations most challenging corners. They believe we can close the Digital Divide and they believe we can keep it shut by following four principles. First, encourage private investment. Second, remove barriers to deployment. Third, before spending federal funds take account of successes. Provide broadband subsidies efficiently. Lets encourage private investment. Broadband providers are spending 75 billion annually to upgrade and expand networks. This will continue for the future should be encouraged by avoiding governmental actions that would hinder these. For example, it would not be helpful if funds were used to overbuild the unsubsidized providers are measures adopted that were not technologically neutral favoring one class of providers are an industry over others. Lets remove barriers to deployment. Building Broadband Networks is costly. You get the best pay without spending a buck by lowering those costs. Here are steps to take. Facilitate access to utility poles by removing impediments such as fixing the makeready process. Apply the federal attachment want to cooperatives. Require cost based nondiscriminatory rightofway fees and prohibit charging these fees on a per service basis. Dont neglect successes before determining where to spend federal money and how much is needed. We calculate by removing barriers the cost of Network Department will be reduced to 1. 2 million homes to be served with fiber infrastructure through private investment. We believe the new tax law will enable more than 400,000 unserved homes being served. Finally, the connect America Program will increase the homes live in receiving less than two megabits. To the connect America Programs the fcc has given us a roadmap for awarding Government Support more efficiently by targeting support only to unserved areas and awarding support any new money lets employ these principles and limit the amount of federal support to account for state subsidies list any additional is required. The four principles i set force will maximize consumer welfare, increase Economic Growth, make communities throughout the country thrive, and enable you to bridge the dip in Digital Divide sooner and with more sustainable results. Aca and its members stand ready to assist you in every way. Thank you. Cannot say how excited we are that youre talking about this incredible important topic of broadband and ceo the Broadband Association away represent approximately 850 Small Businesses who are providing broadband across the country. We have led the charge in connecting america with the rest of the world but applying advanced networks that respond to the need and demand for cuttingedge technology. They serve areas where that average density is seven customers per square mile. Thats the average population density of the state of montana. Emphasize work with done survey found 87 of members can purchase broadband at ten megabits or higher 67 can access it beads above 25 meg. Good news but they tell the story of rule consumers that need access when the story is bleak for those were not served its not as if the job is done once its built. There is job to make sure that we have quality service. So how do we overcome this. The first incident you need a Business Case to consider deploying role broadband. If you cannot afford to build or sustain a network the questions dont come into play. The economics of broadband are difficult if not impossible. What rule consumers pay is rarely enough to cover the cost. I wish i had an easier answer but the infrastructure is extensive any of your consumers spread across to cover the cost. Thats why the ongoing support overseen by the sec is critical in making a Business Case. A bipartisan letter led by many in the subcommittee was signed by 101 members of congress in the house encouraging to have Efficient Services available. This is greatly appreciated by our members and reaffirms the fact that the u. S. Highcost program says the foundation of a program we can then focus on the next challenge and thats the barriers to deployment us are the questions become important. With a potential infrastructure package on the horizon is encouraging that the members of this committee are considering measures aimed at some of the unique challenges presented by role broadband. Many initiatives near the work that has been done addressing disaster relief, broadband mapping and supporting innovation on the Technology Neutral basis must be part of the effort to address challeng challenges. Smaller providers have neither the staff nor resources to navigate these complex structures. For these have about 25 employees persist on the time and money spent on navigating relates to money and time not spent on broadband. Its also much needed and greatly appreciated. We need accurate data and transparency to make sure there resources are used and applied as efficiently as possible. We welcome the ability reusing all Communication Technologies available to provide worldclass service to members and customers. Just as we transition any flexibility and access to Additional Support and resources to deploy new technologies and address the new technologies. We have made Great Strides in reducing the Digital Divide but the job is far from done. With millions of Rural Americans served only through the help of the universal Service Program we must work diligently to make sure no child is left behind without access to homework or telehealth capabilities. The farmers left without Precision Tools and no business is left from participating in this economy. Your leadership and commitment to this issue and identifying these issues are so appreciated. I appreciate the ability to be here and i look forward to engaging with you. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is scott and i am the legislative director of the Natural Resources defense council. Concentrate my remarks on the impact of federal Environmental Reviews and infrastructures including broadband. The poor state is not because of Environmental Reviews, our problem is cash. Numerous studies show there is not federal rules causing delays area the number one problem is lack of funding followed by state local loss, citizen opposition to projects and zoning restrictions. Broadband deployment is not delayed by Environmental Impact statements. No broadband project was ever required to do one by the fcc. Our project suffer from a lack of financing that reviews. We cannot streamline our way to universal Broadband Access, new tunnels under the hudson are bridges over the ohio river new sewer systems. Like you to appreciate why its important. And medications it gives constituency only opportunity to voice concerns. Informed Public Engagement performs ideas Information Solutions the government might overlook. The process has saved money, times lives historic and public lands most recommendations to cripple the process try to limit Public Notice in comments and are undemocratic. The first time i learned of a pipeline going to the property should not be when an attorney shows up at a store with an offer to purchase because of threat of eminent domain. Because committees have tried to assert jurisdiction there has been contradictory changes made by congress in 2005, 12, 15. Changes in statutes of limitation limited access to courts and arbitrated deadlines for permit approvals. They can find other agencies in this deadline, the fast stacked, based in large part by the rapid act promoted by was passed in 2015 made dramatic changes. The law created a new interagency apparatus called the federal Steering Council which is largely controlled by omb. They want to set deadlines and have personal resources to support the overall decisionmaking process. President trumps first infrastructure executive order as chief sponsor senator portman wrote contradicted authorities and responsibilities to the consternation of project sponsors already participating in the existing process. Even the Business Roundtable said we should be looking at existing law. Despite that can of these laws the Congress Said many bills go to the house for that would further amend the process without regard to their impact on process changes already made. Rather than simplifying current processes to create new conflicts and delay project reviews. The recent draft infrastructure proposal should not be taken serious, the provisions that would repeal critical cleanair and endangered species protections. It also talk about given agency heads free reign. To fix our infrastructure we dont need to give the interior secretary Carte Blanche to build pipelines serving national park. We do need them to help build a modern infrastructure system thats resilient, Energy Efficient and takes into the account impacts of a changing climate and the needs of the 21st century. We can do this smarter and better by using, not crippling the Environmental Review process. We look for to working with the committee on solutions to our nations infrastructure challenge. Thank you. Thank you for your commitment to bridging the Digital Divide. Im president of Ctc Technology and energy. Im also ceo of the coalition for local internet choice, a coalition of public and private entities that believe solving our challenges requires a full range of options including publicprivate collaborations. As we look forward to super bowl sunday i suggest our drive to bridge the divide is to develop a plane strategy. Do we actually have a Winning Strategy . Much of the current discussion seems premised on the idea that a Winning Strategy will smash the barriers such as environmental processes cost of access to public facilities. In my experience that premise is wrong. The fundamental reason we dont seek this set areas with high am for structure cost per user particularly rural areas failed to attract private capital. To solve this government can take steps to improve this were areas have been insufficient. Rule communities in underserved Rural Communities in lowincome areas where adoption is slow theres no return particular attention and support must be directed to the areas. Without that private dollars would continue to float for the private areas. Support publicprivate partnerships that easy economic challenges of construction rural urban and tribal infrastructure. Build infrastructure that privatesector users can use. Making bonding and other financing strategies usable through expansion of the newmarket program. And power to pursue Broadband Solutions fall types is to leverage taxpayerfunded property and compete Competitive Dynamics that attract investments. Require all that benefit including assets to make enforceable commitments that are historically unserved and maximize the benefits of competition to require their offered on a competitive basis. The current strategy doesnt face the challenge. Many are focused on reducing the privatesector cost of doing business which is why it forces. Test test test test changing the deployment of broadband where there is no true on investment. Its critical to know that no critical engineer, analyst or investor claiming 5g deployment is planned or appropriate for rural areas. Thats because 5g is a Wireless Technology for fast communication should. If the goal is to attract private is exactly the wrong way to do it. Rather, its like moving the ball a few inches and calling it a touchdown. My second question is, do we have the right players on the field. They are creating an incentive broadband for years scatter for duct that local efforts of processes restrict or deter private investment. The assumption that its ignores the immediacy of the Digital Divide for local officials. The assumption that the federal government is more confident to develop strategies ignores the experience of the past decade which demonstrates that local governments get the opportunity and physical assets my testimony includes examples of a wide range of different collaborations in existence or Development Communities ranging from West Virginia to wyoming, to new york city, to the coastal cities. Finally printing local efforts and authority is not a Winning Strategy. It removes one of the most important players. Of money. A good morning. I am the Consumer Council from the state of connecticut, go patriots. I am head of a small, independent, nonpartisan state agency that advocates for consumers. In that capacity is served as governor malloys designee to the Intergovernmental Advisory Committee to the fcc in which i serve as chairman. We have 44 consumer advocates across the country in that capacity i serve on the secs joint board of service. My interest and time spent his seat. I thank you for your interest and attention to this issue. As you know there are Many Americans and Small Businesses that dont have access to broadband. Thats about 25 of americans dont have a broadband connection in their home. That rises to 39 but theres approximately 5 million homes that equals 17 that do not have a broadband connection. Connecticut wanted to learn more about the Digital Divide. You may be surprised by this intergoverment alnmenta. O their homework. One of the restaurants changed its policy sequence at their lot that long. We also learned that students venture out at night trying to catch wifi. People are upset that the schools shut down wifi after hours so students can sit nearby. We heard from parents who recognize that broadband was important to their children but found it on available at any price. Long lines of students queued up at the Public Librarys to use their computers. When they close at 6 00 oclock they had nowhere to go. This frustration expressed that a smart phone was theres substitute. Three hard to do your homework on a smart phone or type of paper. What troubled me as a consumer advocate is that if its happening in connecticut is happening everywhere and no child should have to sit and Dunkin Donuts to try to finish a project and the implication for quality education that we deliver to children is profound. We would never say to students whose students can afford textbooks, and sorry cannot learn. Or im sorry you dont have access. But thats what were saying by failing to address the homework happen so many areas. I ask you consider the urban communities and Rural Communities. Its not just the question of adoption or they can afford it. Its also a question of quality. Swanson, would you please recognize her guest again. Miss janice butler. Janice, would you please stand, thank you for your good work. [applause] by way of correcting some statements that were made earlier for the information of those with us today want to reiterate the subcommittee hearing activities relative to infrastructures that have taken place you had november 16 a hearing on the race to 5g, we had the fcc reauthorization legislative hearing on june 21, the hearing and financial mapping broadband coverage we had some on the committee who thought that was redundant because we had a march 21 hearing, realizing nationwide ng 911 and march 21 hearing with the discussion draft some of those bills were now in built form the bill has bipartisan support in february 2 they reauthorization of the in tia. Its timetested stop talking and get bills passed. I thank you for your leadership on this issue and also yielding as i have another commitment. One ask a couple of questions, students, seniors and everybody in between mr. And your testimony is intrigued when he said brought plant deployment is not delayed by Environmental Impact statements. No project was ever required to do one by the federal communications commission. And i really say no project has ever been required to do an eis, are you . Many of had to do assessments of the 50000 federal activities a year, there is only a couple hundred eis is. None that we could find on the fcc has ever required this. I think its required through other agencies. 55 of the districts federal land some familiar with it. Connecticut is about 5544. New jersey it thousand 722. The point is, i run into it all the time were trying to get broadband out there and get power into our communities took three years to get power poles. So there is an issue here. I think theres more there than what you represent your testimony. Mr. Gilling, thank you for your testimony as thank you mr. Gillen for your testimony as well. As you know, we have seen these situations with various federal laws and state laws that have delayed. I know mr. Shimkus will probably speak to this because it was in his district, i guessing, 2016 company was looking to expand by adding add jay sent to its existing facility in a park lot. Study they were required do took five months to complete and costs thousands of dollars. Have you or mr. Polka or anybody else on the panel who does deployment, tell us about the things youve run into, tell us what you like about these bills, youve referenced some in the testimony. But your Member Companies, what are you seeing . Is this a problem or isnt if . On one hand we are here it isnt a problem on the other hand we hear it is a problem. I live it in a district like mine first hand. Mr. Gillen. Thank you. Your example is a good one. Its mg we face throughout the day, carriers are running into challenges that, thatly when we start talk about things like this that to install 23 of these in a park lot cost 173,000 nds environmental historic reviews and takes many months. We dont think that makes any sense. There are times where its appropriate to have those types of things but in terms of streamlining, as mr. Shimkus knows, in pursuing its the type of things that will extradite employment now. Did you say that was in a parking lot . At a parking lot at nrg stadium for the super bowl last year. It cost how much . 173,000 to site 23 of these. Mr. Polka, your people run into citing problems we could address . Absolutely. I have visited with members all across the country. Our members literally build into their budgets time and money because of how long it takes for attachments to poles to produce broadband to be approved and permitted and to move forward. Thousands and thousands of dollars were application fees are made for make ready, then additional engineering studies are made, further requests for engineering studies, duplicating the process. The fact that a Member Company has to build in at least six months of time, at least, before they can move forward on a broadband deployment is actually causing broadband deployment not to be deployed in these most important areas. Ms. Bloomfield. I would love to jump in on that asual. Just to cite a couple of examples i have a company up in south dakota that had a yearlong delay because of needing to get some u. S. For service permitteding threwthrough. Youre in south dakota, your build time is very short, as congressman kraemer knows. Youve got periods of time where you miss that opportunity. Right. In wyoming weve had a state blm office that wound up streeting the broadband build like it was a pipeline so they had to get bonding to do the construction when it was just a conduit. Absolutely there are interests and time and money that needs to be built into the progress. I know my times about expired. Probably only a few and chairs of the committee thats been through a tower citing process, i was in the Radio Business for 20 plus years, and while i never climbed the tower, i was involved in a lot of that. So i share your pain. We and i dont think any of your Companies Want to do environmental damage. I think its a complete false argument that somehow were going to run rough shot over the environment. I reject that, thats not the point. The point is that we can streamline the discussion process, the citing process with the federal government thats an analog process in a digital environment. With that i yield back. Gentleman yields back. Mr. Doyle, five minutes. Thank you, madam chair. I want to tart by recognizing a great pitss burger on the panel and great ceo of the american association, matt polka. Matt, come. I think matt will agree with me morse of us from pittsburgh rarely root for the Philadelphia Eagles but when theyre playing the new England Patriots, were all eagles fans. I hope they win. Dont forget the seeing itles too, back in world war ii. Exactly. Mr. Gillen, i want to make sure i just understood, youre holding that box up and said it you dont need any money from the federal government just make it easier to streamline, you know, deployment of that. Youre not suggesting that youre going to your Member Companies would take care of the deployment in unserved areas in all of Rural America or are you talking are those little white boxes going to solve our problem in Rural America if we just streamline the process . We think there are two separate and important problems. This helps us drive 5g. It certainly will be in dense areas in towns, but it wont solve the problem for unserved areas. I wanted to clarify this is not a solution for Rural Broadband. Secondly, are some of the impedestrian dents of deployment state and local issues or are they all federal issues . Its a mix of both. Okay, thank you. I want to ask ms. Hovis, in areas that are unserved or underserved we sue municipalities either through Public Private partnerships or on their own provide broadband to their communities. In some case when a municipality offers broadband as an alternative to an income bant there, weve seen them lower prices. Its been better for consumers. But were also seeing a number of states are passing laws to prevent municipalities from providing broadband or engage being in a Public Private partnership. What effect do you think these state laws are having on broadband deployment . I think its detrimental to deployment because it takes important players off the field. But it also stops a competitive dynamic from emerging. The cities and towns and communities where we have the most robust broadband and competition are places where some kind of comp petition has come into that market and incumbents have reacted to that competition and invest as a result. I will say also for smaller and Rural Communities that are unserve and underserved, sometimes the only entity thats willing to step up and invest is the community either by itself or through a private public partnership. I hate to think that that we here in washington would try to interfere with loco labrations and processes when we are seeing frankly a thousand collaborative processes bl processes blook around the country. Does anyone here on the panel believe we can successfully deploy underserved areas in Rural America without some sort of federal investment . It can just be done by streamlining regulation and making deployment easy . Which i think is important too and we should be doing that. But is there anyone here that thinks that we dont need to appropriate eight any money to solve this problem . Just yes or no. No, you need direct funding by a universal Service Funding mechanism. Thank you. Agreed. Funding would be helpful on a Technology Neutral basis. The Business Base so you agree that we need funding though . I understand your technology. Yes, absolutely. Support is needed to make the Business Case model in Rural America. Thank you. Yes, definitely needed. Thank you. I agree. Yes, i agree. And lastly, mr. Gillen, we saw this memo that leaked out of the white house, the 5g memo that focussed in detail on our Network Cyber vulnerabilities, particularly when it comes to foreign actors. And the proposal of national lizing our Wireless Telecommunications infrastructure i think many of us here on the committee on both sides of the aisle seems uninformed. Im concerned that the white house and the president have not fully addressed and rejected this very troubling proposal. We heard some of that today. That being said, the security of our nations broadband issue is critical and at the beginning of its tenure, fcc chairman pi rolled back a number of commission items related to cybersecurity, including a notice of inquiry specifically questioning how the fcc would best secure 5g networks. Im concerned that rolling back these majors is part of what has caused so much concern amongst members of the National Security council. Mr. Gillen, do you think its wise for the fcc to roll back cybersecurity initiatives sump as this 5g notice of inquiry . If the Relevant Federal Agency cannot merely ask questions about how best to secure 5g networks, how can we hope to address this problem . Thank you, congressman, thats a great question. Cybersecurity is critical to everything we do if the if you dont have a safe and secure network were not serving the American People and doing our jobs. With respect to the specific questions question you asked, we think that cybersecurity is best handled through the partnership with the Homeland Security. Theyre the experts that we work closely with and i think the white house proposal, i think all fcc commissioners have character trieds very well so i wront say anything further in that right now. But in terms of cybersecurity thats something we work on every day and we do need a partnership with the federal government to make sure that we understand the threats and a lot of what this committee and other committees are focussed on information smarg is something critical to doing that. Gentleman yields back. Ill recognize myself for some questions and i want to start with mr. Spalter, gillen, and polka. You all talked a little bit about tax reform and how that would help with investment. And sometimes i think as we talk about the changes and regulatory relief and tax reform, people focus on Big Companies and not on the Smaller Companies. So if you would take just a moment and talk a little bit about how tax reform regulatory relief affects your companies and the deployment of broadband. Thank you, chairman. The effect on our companies both large and small across the board i had the opportunity recently to visit with some of our Smaller Companies in western nx, western wyoming, alaska, in minnesota, and to a company, each of them have been elated by the idea that theyre going to be able to invest more in deploying more broadband to unserved communities, invest more in research and development to be able to expand next generation networks, and also provide new incentives for their employees, even though they have not that many employees, this was a meaningful step forward for the future of closing the Digital Divide. Great. Mr. Gillen. Agree with mr. Spalter in terms of the Wireless Industry it means weve seen promises of new jobs, weve seen commitments ton build out more networks and add capital expenditures, bring money back home and really it does underscore the Capital Intensive Industries like wireless. This tax reform regulatory relief make a real difference particularly for smaller carriers a lot of relief were talking about, they dont have the staff as my colleagues have said, they dont have the staff to manage these processes so any time theres a streamlining or standardization helps them do their day jobs and serve consumers. Thank you. As i said in my testimony, lets take a count of the successes that exist. Our Member Companies certainly use private funds to deploy broadband, but the benefit of the recently passed tax act cannot be underestimated when you look at the investment that now our members as Smaller Internet Service Providers have to put back into their systems, which they are doing. I have heard from members all over the country who have said to me that the difference in the Corporate Tax rate will make more money available for the company to reinvest broadband serving now hundreds, thousands more homes that would otherwise be uneconomic to serve. So that has helped tremendously all ready to give a boost to smaller businesses, not to mention the deregulation thats already occurred. For Smaller Companies, regulations affect them disproportionately. They have fewer customers per mile over which to past the cost of the regulation. When the federal government takes into account theres a difference between small and rural and big and urban and allows for those Smaller Companies to be able to deploy sensibly and take into account the burden of regulation, it makes a big difference on getting Rural Broadband out there faster. Thank you all. And mr. Bloomfield, i want to come to you now. We spoke briefly about some of the good things in tennessee. I know North Central tennessee spent like a watermillion dollars on historical reviews and 14 million in investment just to build out this. And mr. Welch mentioned 39 of Rural America is without broadband. And i think people lose sight of that, that there is just not that access there. And in tennessee we were talking about the first round of grants, almost 10 million that has gone out and weve got the Scott County Telephone coop got 1. 9 million, he theyre going to use that in hawkins county. Dtc communications 1. 765 million to use in smith and wilson counties. In sunset digital got 1. 4 million to use in claiborne and Hancock County to demand footprint and to bring more people online. And that type investment we want to see. At the federal level, of course weve got 4. 53 billion that is there in the usf that is going to be over ten years to expand the service. And 2 billion for Rural Broadband deployment that should come from the competitive reverse auction. So i want you to talk just a little bit on specifics of how this serves to get more people online. So chairman i think you raise a really important concept and thats coordination. How can we ensure that whats going on in the federal level coordinates with the what can happen on the state level. I think thats where some of the things that the committee is being loog at like accurate mapping and making sure we know where the undersaerchd unserved areas are so that we can focus those limited resources, whether theyre universal service dollars and we are pleased that the fcc is currently circulating an order that looks to restore some of the funding that had been subject to the budget mechanism. Which will go a long way in terms of giving folks regulatory certainty . How do they know theyve got the resources to actually deploy. And you combine that with state initiatives. What tennessee has done is interesting. Minnesotas done something similar. Wisconsin has done something similar. How do you take all of these ditch pieces so that we can thought offully as a country build out to those consumers that actually have not had the opportunity to have access. Cap 2 is going to be important. We look at those areas when that action comes up as an opportunity for my companies to potentially edge out into communities that are unserved that are neighboring their areas where they may have an opportunity to bring robust broadband like they have to their own income baumbent areaso those who are waiting for service. Thank you. At this time i yield mr. Welch five minutes. Thank you very much. I want to talk about two things, one is bipartisan bill that i have with mr. Mckinley and then second is this question of the Rural Broadband buildout. By the way, thank you all for what i thought was very, very good testimony. Mr. Mckinley and i have a bill that would require the fcc to define on an ongoing basis what is reasonably Comparable Service in reasonably comparable prices in rural and urban america. And weve seen from my per inspect tiff an alarming approach by the current fcc chair thats essentially dumbing down, as i see it, what successes in Rural America. Ms. Bloomfield, could you respond to your view about the value of having the fyc on an ongoing basis give a concrete and scientific answer to the question of reasonably comparable and rural versus urban areas . Would that be helpful . So i think that is, you know, he as i mention in the statistics that we have in terms of the number of my carriers and what the capacity is, i think we do have to figure out how you ensure that particulars consumers demands increase. Bandwidth did he mands that people are looking for grows tremendously. How do we make sure youre not creating two Different Services between rural and urban america . Part of the issue that continues to be the underlying problem, however, is the high cost of deploying that network. So for example when you look at Something Like the ability of a rural provider to do standalone broadband for the consumer who wants the ability to access broadband, they may not nt watt Telephone Service or some of the other things that come with it, right now based on support they have sorry its going to be very important but its going to take resource dollars and support from things like universal service. Thank you. Now, mr. Doyle asked the question that everyone said affirmatively we do need federal funding and i want to go back to that because ive heard a lot about Regulatory Reform and ive heard a lot of good ideas. That makes sense to me. Ive heard a lot, by the way, that the local efforts are very important. So what we should do should enhance them not diminish them. But bottom line theres got to be money just like there was with rural electrification. And mr. Gillen, in your written testimony, as i read it, you didnt believe there was a need for federal funding to deploy 5g. So if that is the case, would your would your folks be able to commit that you will be deploying 5g services at the same speed and pace in Rural America as in urban america . 5g will start in dense areas throughout the country, a rural town in burlington, vermont, university of vermont will see 5g. Its it to start dense. When you talk about reaching the unserved household, youre going to need money. Thats like obvious, right. You go where the market is. And theres no expectation on my part that anyone who has shareholders and has some obligations to the shareholders would do anything ditch. Theres a fundamental policy question that only congress can answer are we going to, you know, show us the money in Rural America . So there is a bill that mr. Pallone has thats based on a study that the fcc did saying that we really need 40 billion. And mr. Walden raised questions about spending that wisely and we want zop that, mato do that, its done right. But of the panelists here, does that fcc figure, 40 billion for this buildout for reasonably Comparable Service in Rural America sound like a good number to you . Ill start with you, jonathan. Congressman welch there are numbers of studies that have indicated that more monies are needed for reaching ubic witty access for americans, a goal that we all share. I will not necessarily agreeing with one or another set of numbers. What we all agree to is that we do need direct funding where there is no Business Case to deploy. Right. High Speed Broadband especially in unserved areas and using universal service fund is the platform for doing so we know is most efficient and administratively logical. And even assuming we do the things that have been recommended with Regulatory Reform in local partnerships, the number that we are going to have to spend is in the billions of dollars. Does anyone disagree with that . No. Ms. Hovis. I do agree. Unfortunately its far more costly to build in rural areas on a per user basis. It gets more and more costly with lower density and not just for capitol koofts but also for operating costs and thats the fundamental challenge that we face. But directing the funding there and making sure that the funding is well suited to the needs there and the needs are the same in Rural America as in urban and suburban america, we all need high speed, we need scaleable networks that are capable of growing over time. We dont need second Rate Services in Rural America. My time is up. I want to thank the panel. Gentleman yields back. Mr. Latta no, mr. Lance, youre recognized, five minutes. Thank you very much, chairman. Mr. Spalter, in your testimony you mentioned that finite federal resources should be targeted to ensure that funding to unserved areas that that funding is prioritized. And i couldnt agree more with that. And ive introduced a resolution stating as much. Could you please expand on the importance of prioritizing federal funds to unserved areas of the country and are we able to learn from past mistakes related to this issue when we are deciding how best to spend federal resources . As stewards thank you very much for the question, advice chairman lance. As stewards of federal dollars, broadband providers and congress, all of the American Republic have to be very, very cautious about how we use those dollars and we have to make sure theyre being used efficiently and to targeted purposes. And we are all focused on doing so in ways that will achieve those goals. With respect to reaching unserved areas where there is no access to broadband, we those highcost areas require a partner in government, directed funds using universal service fund methodologies, is we believe the appropriate way to go. And there is no doubt that in order to fulfill the obligation that we have of closing the Digital Divide, thinking very carefully as we are doing here today and i hope were going to continue to do, how we actually can expand that universal Service Budget universal Service Budget to meet this great goal of closing the Digital Divide is i think a great priority for all of us. Mr. Spalter do you believe that this will require statutory change or can this be done administratively or a combahition nav both . I believe it can be a combination both. It will be left to congress to decide its commitment to, in fact, fulfilling this great goal we have of closing the Digital Divide. To do so we understand its going to cost tens of billions of dollars. Universal Service Funds the universal service Fund Platform and the direct funding model has been proven to be most efficient in doing so and we think administratively and through statute there are going to be mechanisms of achieving of this goal and were looking forward to work with you and doing so. Thank you. Would other members of the panel like to comment . Yes, ms. Bloomfield . I would like to jump in and say when i look at my membership its a combahition nav universal service along with support like the usda has. So you build the case with universal service that allows folks to get the Capital Funding through things like us dwrks a to build these networks. The one thing i would say, its going to be important for us to be thinking about building future Proof Networks to make sure as we look at that the underserve and those finite resources that were using them to build networks that will last into the future. Thank you. Anyone else like to comment . Congressman, i would agree, i would totally agree there certainly is a need as has been demonstrated in very hard to reach, unserved areas where federal funds can be very important to closing that aspect of the Digital Divide. But then as we look at past programs, whether its at the reform of the connect america fund which is focussed on unserved kbrr unserved area, ensuring were using reverse auctions to spend money wisely, these are good ideas to employ. The last thing we dont want is to discourage private investment. And one way would you do that and youve recognized this because of your resolution, is by permitting any situation where an unsubsidized Internet Service provider would have to face subsidized competition. Thats a disincentive to further investment and deployment of broadband. So otherwise think youre right on target as it relates to focusing on areas where broadband is unserved, lets make sure that were not overbuilding the subsidized the unsubsidized providers. So we have to be careful regarding subsidies and those not subsidized . Correct. Anyone else on the panel care to comment . Yes, of course. My perspective would be that competition in this environment as in any environment gets better results. And if there is going to be public funding for broadband deployment, then offering it on a competitive basis so that the best situated, most efficient, perhaps most motivated, strongest set of partners are able to bid for that kind of thing rather than taufrg to a single set of companies where theres no competitive benefit, i think thats a proven strategy. I would agree with that. Yes. Connecticut, near new jersey, although we have to be careful as to whom we root for in new jersey. The remarks concerning the new England Patriots are my own and do not reflect the nonpartisans views of the council. I would just like to add that i think when youre talking about effective deployment of dollars, federal, state at any level, we have to recognize the role, the very legitimate role of state and local governments and maximizing those dollars. I would just encourage you to think about including them in this and not excluding them. And as an example, in the northwest corner of connecticut we have 26 municipalities all nonpartisan have have banded together and are looking at models for how they can get networks deployed their neighbors. Its much more efficient to have 26 towns working together in streamline, permit, finding citing for these companies and working with private sectors as their model. Keep that in mind well be more effective if we allow local leaders to work on this level. Thank you. My thanks to the entire panel. Gentleman yields back. Mr. Pallone, youre recognized. Thank you, madam chair. I think we all agree that better broadband can help provide better opportunities for more people and to make it a reality, democrats on this committee have been working on ways to make sure everyone, whether they live in rural areas or urban areas has access to better and more affordable Broadband Services. Thats why we introduce the lift america act that would provide 40 billion through a mix of reverse auctions and state programs. The bill would prioritize sending non underserved areas and then funding underserved areas, anchor institutions and building our next generation of 911 systems. I wanted to start with mr. Spalter. In your testimony you discuss the need for federal funding to support a more expansive broadband network. You can just elaborate on why this is necessary . Theres ady month strabl need in America Today because of the challenging Business Case of delivering broadband to our unserved areas, our hardest to reach areas for a direct funding model. We understand that with best intentions american broadband providers are doing everything they can to extend the opportunities of broadband can bring but there still are areas that are going to require a partnership with government. We know that the direct funding model using platforms like universal service fund is the most efficient in the administratively logical way to advance that goal. Direct funding is has been and will be the principle and most sound funding model for actually make the reality of closing Digital Divide actually happen. Thank you. Over the past year, republicans have eliminated our privacy rights online and destroyed Net Neutrality and now they want to eviscerate our environmental and Historic Preservation laws and theyve done all of this in the name of broadband deployment. So i wanted to ask ms. Hovis, have you seen any evidence that elimination of these protections will bring broadband to the millions of americans who are not yet served . No, congressman. I think that this will make for more profitable companies, whether better profitability leads to more deployment, particularly in areas that are not going to result in protests themselves is just not clear to me that theres a link between those things. I am concerned frequently that certain kinds of regulatory relief, deregulation or other kinds of things are extended to the Companies Based on the preps that it will lead to new deployment in rural areas. But there is no commitment or enforceable mechanism for making sure that that actually happens. And given greater profitability, Companies May or may not further invest. I thank you. I understand that the elimination of our environmental laws will not make a meaningful difference in connect gts millions of americans that dont have access to broadband, but i do think we need to better understand what the effect of some of these proposals would actually be. So i wanted to ask mr. Sles singer, if i could, in your opinion what would be the effect of carving up longstanding environmental protections as some of the bills before us would do . Thank you, mr. Pallone. I think that the the impacts can be very big. I mean, broadband cells that were talking about are not large environmental problems to this country. There are ways that the Forest Service and blm could do a programmatic impact statement that would make it very easy to get any required federal approval. Its not a major issue. We have programmatic impact statements for solar, we could do it easily for broadband. And i dont think that is a big problem. However, i think what were missing the issue here. Many of these cases in state and local zoning and other things that are the problem. But i think the issue that i was talking about was mainly in the lift bill where were talking about things well beyond broadband that could have large Environmental Impacts. And in that case we need to keep the environmental laws strong and enforce sod that peoples communities are not adversely affected by large federal projects. Kpleerly the fcc, as i said, is never required an eis. Theres not a big burden in this. But it is an excuse not to do unprofitable broadband in rural areas. All right. Thank you very much. I yield back, madam chair. Gentleman yields back. Mr. Shimkus, youre remembering mized for five minutes. Thank you, madam chairman. Thank you for being here an issue that we continue to talk about. Im pretty proud of my coops, my small Telephone Companies in these areas that are trying to do just that. So there is a need for government involve meant to provide some certainty financially because the return on investment is just not there. I always talk about the need on the universal service fund to get that right and start parleying that towards a broadband deployment. But, i think its, you know, when we hear the testimony, im sorry im bouncing back like a lot of members between two hearings, when we just beat up large corporations and their profitability, were really want continue to sent advise these small coops and small family privately owned companies to do what theyre trying to do right now. And then bring and then bring competition. This came from a local newspaper just january 28th, not that i so he lis icited it, id like to a consent to submit this for the record. Without objection. But it just talks about a community in my district, highland, illinois, that because they were they felt they were held hostage to the local provider, they built their own fiber system. Now, the editorials pretty good because it says there was just a report out that Harvard University study and they were fifth out of 27 Public Utilities that said youre doing a good job. But at the end of it it also says but there are hidden costs when you have a governmentrun system, right, the government is assuming some of those costs just on payroll and insurance and all those other things. So i just thought it was timely and i wanted to submit that for the record because this does really segue into this debate. I do believe regulatory burdens slow the process up. And especially for these Smaller Companies. Whether privately or public. So thats why we did the speed act which is an attempt to alleviate some of these additional reviews, especially in the environmental and historic reviews. Now, the key to this small provision of this package is that its in right away and its already being used. Its not like new, youre not like the greenfield area, its not like youre building over new territory, untouched, pristine land, its using current right of ways and current systems and with a focus on size. So mr. Gillen, can you elaborate on the challenges of environmental and historic reviews that present for deployment and how this bill might address those . Absolutely. Thank you, mr. Shimkus. Thank you for leadership on this issue, i agree with everything you said. When youre talking about citing and rights of way or citing devices like this like your bills of addresses, right now that adds thousands of costs and months and months of review that we dont get back thats delaying deployment. Let me follow up. As you follow actions going around through the states, is this similar to what some of the states are doing in this venue, in this way . Absolutely. I think sort of the notion that we need both state and local government tighten how they do this and we need the federal government. Its going to take both for us to do this. Mr. Spalter, how important is it for communications, this whole debate, a policy to apply equally regardless of technology . Technology neutrality is extremely important as we think about the opportunities of actually closing the Digital Divide. We support any innovation that actually will be able to deliver broadband through whatever technology that most suits the community and the institutions that support that community. What we also realize, though, is in the current moment that were living in that to the most effective mechanism is to pull broadband fibber to as many in many communities as possible, and do so needs Creative Partnership that has to exist between private investment which is on the table with a Strong Partner in government through direct funding. And let me follow, ms. Bloomfield, are small providers disproportionately impacted by regulations . Part of that is just that they have fewer staff and they have fewer resources, so obviously time you spend doing dealing with regulations youre not dealing with building broadband. But i also do want to commend you for your leadership because i think the other initiative in your legislation is you recognize that its also about upgrading the network. So its not just building it but what you are trying to address is the fact that these networks are living, breathing networks and they need to constantly be upgraded. So that certainly eases the process. Thank you. Madam chair my times expired. Gentleman yields back. Mr. Mcnerney youre recognized for five minutes. I thank the chair for holding this hearing and the witnesses. Im going to start with ms. Katz. Im concerned that the fccs recent action of eliminating Net Neutrality and lifeline will actually open the Digital Divide. Is the fccs current lifeline proposal to cut 70 of the Lifeline Program counterproductive to closing the Digital Divide and making broadband widely available to lowincome americans . Well, i think the short answer to that is yes. The racial ftional for severely curtailing the lifeline is that it would enhance broadband deployment. By think thats comparing apples and oranges. This is a situation we are trying to put communication capabilities in the hands of our lowest income people. And to take those away from them, yes, absolutely, will aggravate the Digital Divide and have impacts on many different populations. Theres just a lot of talk of how lifeline phones are being used by the homeless to connect with family and find resources. And so it not only broadens the Digital Divide but sort of has a Ripple Effect on the way we can see our most vulnerable citizens impacted. Thank you. Ms. Hovis, i appreciate your direct testimony. I heard in some places the best way to deploy high Speed Internet access that americans deserve is to go to private Public Partnerships and you stressed that in your testimony. You can provide us with some illustrations for me regarding the effectiveness of private Public Partnerships . Absolutely. Thank you congressman. I am seeing around the country hundreds, possibly thousands of local initiatives with the willing and enthusiastic participation of the private sector in communities like sublet county, wyoming, where the local community is planning to deploy infrastructure that will be made available to their private partners and to business areas, Business Districts where theres no adequate broadband at all, just speeds of a mega by the or two at best in order to allow businesses to thrive in that part of the community. There are efforts like that under way in parts of kentucky, in parts of West Virginia, all over the country. And then even more ambitious and far sided efforts, the city of San Francisco is considering a Public Private partnership that is focused on ensuring that the 150,000 people in San Francisco who dont currently have broadband mostly because they cant afford it, have access to adequate speeds, not one mega bit speeds, but the same kinds of speeds that you and i consider to be appropriate for our families. Theres enormous creativity on the public and private side and the private sector is willingly participating and engaged. Thank you. I cosponsored a bill with congressman lieu honor that would help Public Private partnerships get fund. Would that be helpful in the building out process . Yes, because it makes it feasible for a local community to have lowcost financing to build infrastructure, and then potentially to make that infrastructure available for private sector use. Weve all agreed on this panel that the cost of infrastructure deployment in certain markets is prohibitive. If theres a way that public state, local, and federal efforts can be targeted toward infrastructure, then allowing for private Sector Service provision in some cases public Service Provision its going to differ fre community to community. But that is a mechanism for ensuring that we get infrastructure to place wrdolla where it does not exist in an adequate way. Im going to move to cybersecurity. Weve had Security Experts testify in front of this committee that most of the iot devices are insecure. By 2020 as projected there will be bfl devices in use. Should we be concerned about the risk that insecure iot devices are posing to our Broadband Networks . Thank you for the question, congressman. Its a concern that all broadband providers share that we have to be much more focused and increasingly focus on the resiliency, security of not only our wired networks but of our wireless networks. The internet of things is an opportunity of great promise for the economic productivity of our country. The focus that we have been giving as a Broadband Community to this initiative is also being done in partnership with the broader set of colleagues in the net ecosystem. Our cloud companies, our Internet Information Technology companies, Internet Companies increasingly are joining to share the responsibilities with us to extend greater and more secure greater security for our Broadband Networks, including for the internet of things. And were doing so in partnership with the department of Homeland Security and other agencies of government that we have to work closely with to solve this problem. I have a lot more questions but ive run out of time so ill yield back. Gentleman yields back. Mr. Latta, five minutes. Well thank you very much, madam chair, for holding todays hearing. This is very, very important. As cochair of the Rural Broadband caucus and cochair of the Rural Telecommunications working group, access to high Speed Broadband in rural areas is a top priority of mine. I believe congress should facilitate the development of robust broad baband networks by creating competition and encourages innovation. Thats why i introduced this to the house that broadband deployment should be technologically neutral. Ive introduced the precision agriculture connectivity act with congressman loebsack to help close the Digital Divide faced by the agricultural communities in Rural America. And ms. Bloomfield, if i could pose my first question to you. Every culture generates significant value to the National Economy and are a Central Source of revenue and jobs in our Rural Communities. Today, modern High Precision farming requires access to high Speed Broadband to support advanced operations and technologies that significantly increase crop yields, reduce costs, and improve the environment. My bill to prevision agricultural connectivity act requires the fcc to obtain steps to obtain reliable measurements of broadband coverage in order to gain a better understanding of the true lack of access in america. Its my understanding that finding adequate, accurate broadband mapping and coverage managements is nearly impossible. And so, ms. Bloomfield, in what ways would it be beneficial for the fcc to obtain such data for the purpose of deploying high Speed Broadband on agricultural crop lands and other rural areas . So congressman latta, i appreciate the question, greatly appreciate the leadership that youve shown on a lot of these issues. Smart ag is truly the next fron ture when we think about Economic Development and vitality for Rural America and a lot of the initiatives that youre look alt is how do you gather more of that data so we can look at the census track level and figure out where is the infrastructure and where is the void. Because we certainly know that, you know, you need to be able to see it whether its street level or whether its literally on the cropland. You know, in terms of where that infrastructure resides. So i think when we look at the fcc and some of the work that theyve been doing and gathering 477 data and trying to take that data and figure out in a granular, transparent and accurate way and measuring ames to ames. The thing i always worry about when you get different entities trying to measure, theyre measuring different ways of measuring where that dem employment is. I think your focus on how do we take, how do we coordinate and aggregate this will go a long way in terms of seeing where we need to focus some of our future energy and resources. Let me ask you just a followup. Youre talk about apples and apples not apples to oranges here, what should they be looking at to make sure they are looking at the right data and everyones on the same page here, theyre not look at two Different Things and coming up with two different answers . I think we saw a little bit where there was a broadband map ha was built but it was very inconsistent and it wasnt checked. So people were kind of putting in their own data, there was really no resource to basically say is this the real data in is there really coverage there. And as somebody that represents small carriers, i understand theres that competitive concern about what data youre release, but i also worry that if youve got an entity like nfaa looking at datand at fcc and theyre using two different measurements and two different land tracks, different speeds, i think the ability to actually kind of hows if in one place where youve got the ability to be consistent, youve got the ability to be transparent i think folks need to actually see as it gets developed, and you need to be able to have the ability to check it, i think those are things that are going to be very important check posts as we go forward on that. But its going to be the foundation for where we go in terms of future investment. Thank you. Mr. Polka, theres legislation as part of our hearing today which i support that incentivizes 5g wireless deployment. Ive also introduced resolution setting policy of Net Neutrality so the government isnt picking winners and losers out there. Is the cable industry doing anything comparable to the 5g roll out with similar fooeds spee speeds and coverage. Comparable and surpassing. When you look at the amount of Broadband Service thats being delivered by our members in Rural America. I had an opportunity yesterday to hear from members all over the country telling us what theyre doing. I heard from one Small Company in eastern kentucky, theyre delivering gigabit speed in eastern kentucky. I heard from a Company Called hickory telephone which is building fiber to the home in underserved areas, one of our members in western pennsylvania. We have members all over the country that are providing gigabit service, 100 meg bit, 200 mega bit, 300 mega bit service. So were ibuilding that service as our customers and our Community Want us to do. And what we ask and what which is why we appreciate your resolution, that as we go forward as a country and look at regulations that apply to helping broadband be deployed more effectively, that we do so on a competitive Technology Neutral basis. I can tell you we have a lot of area out there that i have visited personally with our members. It is amazing how much rural area there is out there. Not one company is going to solve these problems. Which is why our policy needs to encourage competitive Technology Neutral proponents. So, yes, were providing the service, were building the backbone that actually can help to deliver 5g service down the road as it comes farther out into our areas. So were up to the challenge. Well thank you very much. Madam chair, my times expired and i yield back. Gentleman yields back. Mr. Loebsack, youre remembering thighsed. Thank you, madam chair. This is really great. Normally i would be asking questions earlier but i was a little bit late, i had some things in my office i had to do, some meetings. But i got to hear from some so many of my colleagues and all of you folks and, you know, the first thing i want to saysy guess when we talk about the funding, making sure that we do have broadband in these rural areas, i represent about a fourth of iowa, not quite as much, the state of iowa isnt quite as big as chairman waldens district, he likes to remind me, but we have a lot of rural areas and as you might imagine. But its clear to me that weve got to have some public funding, weve got to have a lot of private investment, theres no doubt. Weve got to make sure we deal with regulations. Chairman walden and i have worked together on that to make sure that small Internet Service providers in particular, not unfairly subject to too many regular layings so they can actually put their resources into building out and making sure that Rural America is served instead of simply filling out paperwork regulations that are unnecessary, that kind of thing. So i think we actually have more bipartisan support and i think the chair woman would agree that we actually have some bipartisan support on a number of these issues here. Oh, yes, im accustomed to hearing from broadband loebsack. Thats right, exactly. And thank you very much, madam chair, i do appreciate that. And working with representative latta we talked this morning earlier today i didnt realize he was going to quite steal so much of my thunder are are but really happy to work with him on the agriculture precision th agriculture connectivity act, very important obviously in my district in iowa. But of course related to what he was talking about with mapping, i actually did introduce and with mr. Costello last year, the Rural Wireless access act. We got it out of the subcommittee but the fcc paid close attention to that. That comes down essentially to i like to call it garbage in, garbage out. If we dont have accurate maps, then were not going to be able to make accurate decisions and good decisions Going Forward. So a lot of this, people from iowa like to say we have a lot of common sense, but a lot of whats going on here is just common sense. If we dont have accurate data, whether its in agriculture or being a subset of something larger, were not going to be able to make Public Policy decisions or Investment Decisions on private sector. I heard the chairman had been to northwest iowa and drove from sioux city to rural iowa. So i just want to ask, i guess that ms. Bloomfield, youve already pretty much responded to what this is all about so im going to skip you for a moment if thats okay and id like to go to ms. Gillon, talk about that issue if you would, mapping issue and making sure that we have good data. As you said, congressman, thanks to your leadership i think weve all listened and heard and i think working with both National Regional carriers, worked with the fcc, that well hopefully have a better map to inform the Mobility Fund Going Forward and what that 450 million will do is hopefully serve those areas and those communities that dont have service today. The Condition Precedent to do that is the data that youre looking for and that will start soon. Mr. Spaulding. I would agree with mr. Gillon and i want to thank you for your leadership in understanding that important management principle. What you cant measure, you cant manage. This is particularly true with respect to delivering broadband. Form 477 has taken Great Strides to provide more precise geo coding. The next frontier is to do that for locations that dont have broadband yet and we believe we have to be creative and slightly out of the box in thinking how to do so. One idea as the Census Bureau is looking, they might bring that specificity to pinpoint areas where broadband is not yet. I would suggest mostly jokingly that the fcc talk to all of us with rural districts because we can actually identify the gaps if we get around our districts like i do all the time. Ms. Bloomfield, would you like to elaborate . The only thing i would add as we talk about your initiative on some of the wireless front is just a reminder that wireless needs wires so those networks cant even be built if you dont have the back haul out there. As we have more and more need for capacity and more and more ability for you, if youre like me and ive gotten lost in northwest iowa, the ability to pull over and pull up a map and see where you are, to do that data, you actually need that infrastructure. They go hand in hand. Theyre Complimentary Services and i think theyre going to be important for Rural Americans. Thank you. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Soolson, five minutes. I thank the chair. Welcome to our seven witnesses. A special welcome to mr. Gillon and please give our warm regards to your boss, meredith atwellbaker. That family is a legend in houston, texas, iconic, so please give our regards. Id like to brag about texas and give a perspective on chairman waldens comments about square miles. He talked about connecticut and oregon. For the record, texas is 268,597 square miles. My district, texas 22, is a small portion of that, 1,032 square miles, very small. Basically its halfway between rural and suburban. Because its so close to houston, all the challenges with the telecom industry, the 5g, arent really applicable. But we did suffer a disaster, Hurricane Harvey hit us in august. After that puerto rico was hit with maria and the Virgin Islands as well as florida was hit by hurricane irma. Weve seen rushes of mud because of the lost of the cover. As these disasters hit, its critically important that we get the Communications Infrastructure up and running as quickly as possible to give these communities the help they need to recover as quickly as possible. Thats why hr4845 is called the connecting communities post disasters act and this bill makes a simple step by allowing local communities to bypass long and unnecessary environmental and historic views and to replace damaged or lost towers and communication infrastructure. Not to have new ones but replace ones hit by the disaster. My first question is for you, mr. Gillon. Houston made a strong effort after hurricane ike to bury their communications cables, and that was very successful. In fact, fcc commissioner pie came down a couple days after the storm hit and was wowed about her very cables but he also noted we have a lot of cell towers exposed to the storm, especially where she came ashore there by corpus christi. How important is it to get communications up and ready following disaster . How important is that to fight the disaster . Its critical and i think its critical particularly for temporary facilities to be marshalled immediately. What we learned from these most recent storms, smartphones are what americans need to reach Public Safety, reach their families, let people know theyre safe and cell coverage is critical. The bill is very important because when the storm is over, our jobs are just getting started, how do we restore services and make them better. We have the opportunity in in your district to give you the most advanced networks. Thanks to your bill we can start doing that more quickly. For three straight nights they got all these warnings on the cell phone about tornado watches, flood warnings. That was valuable information coming not from the phone lines or the tb but coming from the cell phones that my kids have, i have, my wife has, so its very important. Do you agree that it makes sense to suspend parts of reconstructing these towers, suspend them a certain amount of time to get rolling quickly as opposed to dragging this out month after month, year after year . Absolutely and i think its a very targeted relief youre proposing. Mr. Spalter, ms. Bloomfield, any comments on this issue about disaster . I would add that we had about four carriers in the path of harvey and i checked in with each one of them. Thanks to the ability to build these futureProof Networks and the barry plant and the ability to put their switches underground, every one of my companies that were in the path actually were able to be up and running instantaneously, actually never lost service, so very important. Mr. Spalter . Congressman, your initiative to move forward with hl4845 is meaningful not only to citizens in your community which were served by companies in u. S. Telecom like consolidated that were running towards danger to support the broadband needs but also your issue is going to be meaningful for communities around the country including places where i used to live near earthquake faults in california. It is an absolute necessity that we as a nation provide any mechanism to provide efficiency so that broadband facilities can be put back into place to serve communities that have been affected by disaster. Your initiative is one such step and were grateful for it. One question before i yield back. There was discussion of some sort of concern about the Football Game coming up, the super bowl between the patriots and the eagles. A yes or no question for the panelists, are yall okay, do you have a problem with the Houston Astros being the champs for 91 days now . As long as you legislate about it. The gentlemans time as expired on that issue. Thank you, madam chairwoman. Im not going to get into that because i dont have a dog in that fight. Good luck to all. Thank you, mr. Olson, for bringing up some of the issues that are related to disasters and i know there was a response here, but i think that its important to note that in the fires in northern california, in napa and sonoma counties, the cell phones didnt work. Life is not tidy. Fires just dont occur between the time people get up, maybe 7 00 in the morning, and retire at maybe 10 00 at night. Were it not for the Public Safety people actually going door to door and banging on doors in the middle of the night to arouse people to get them out of their homes and they fled in their night gowns and their underwear. That was it because the fires were even at the back of their houses and their roofs had started burning. And the other alert was dogs, their own dogs barking so much that it awakened them. So we cant live in a bubble that we have something, this one which i think is wonderful. Its an american invention, its a computer in our pocket, but we havent allow ourselves to dream on and say we have something and its going to alert everyone. We have to think outside the edges of the envelope. I want to thank the gentleman for raising that. I want to go to what ms. Hovis and ms. Katz i have to go downstairs for another hearing and wanted to come back and ask a few questions here. What do you think are the biggest impediments to deployment that you see in communities . Certainly in Rural Communities there are many specifics that belong to Rural Communities, but you spoke very clearly about the hartford area. I was born and raised in connecticut so its nice to have someone from connecticut here just outside of the hartford area actually. I think what the committee needs is something pinpointing by you of specifics that will actually remove impediments to deployment. Now, that may be a soft ball question because i have legislation on it and neither bill costs a dime. Anyway, to both of you, whomever wants to go first. Actually, i couldnt agree more about the importance of some of those particular issues, and weve talked a lot about rural challenges. I would say that there are some very acute urban challenges that unfortunately get a lot less discussion and i think sometimes are not even recognized. For example, Small Business areas in urban and suburban areas are remarkably less served in many cases than residential customers, and that is because the traditional footprint of the cable industry, to its credit, was to go to all of the residences in the community. That is great in most metropolitan areas because there will be a phone company provider you see all the advertisements on tv for the commercial side, come do business with us and, you know, were the ones that can serve your Small Business the best. If the infrastructure is not there, its going to be incredibly costly to get the infrastructure there. A Large Business will be able to afford to pay whatever it takes but a Small Business that can spend 79 or 99, 129 s 129 sds month, theres not infrastructure to them. Thats not a slam to the private sector. Thats how the private investment works and its doing exactly what it should but i think theres an undiscussed conversation that should be had about the fact that Small Business areas struggle at remarkable levels, as do very low income neighborhoods in many cases because theres simply not Business Case for upgrade of the networks. Thank you. I want to go to your teammate there because i have 30 seconds. If i can add to that, the reason we focused on hartford is we were contacted by hartford officials who had done a survey of their Small Businesses and found that they were unable for the reasons ms. Hovis was discussing to connect to the internet because they were being quoted 30,000 for street crossings. Yon i dont fault the industry but i do note that thats a reality and thats where we need to make progress. I think thats very helpful. Madam chairwoman, i want to ask anonymous consent that i be able to place the harvard study that i referenced in my opening comments today that deals with communities being able to set up their own municipal broadband. So ordered without objection. Thank you. Thank you to all of the witnesses. A good hearing. Important one. Gentle lady yields back and now the gentleman leading our broadband expansion effort, mr. Johnson, youre recognized. Thank you, madam chair. I appreciate it. This is such an important hearing. Living in rural appalachia, i hear all the time about the urban rural divide. Its very, very real. Places that businesses will not come into because they cant get access to their suppliers, to their customers, provide training for their employees. Youve got children that have to go to another county or to another local township or to a Public Library to get access so they can do their school projects. Weve got a lot of intellectual capital and a lot of economic potential in Rural America thats being just ignored because of this rural urban divide. Thats one of the reasons why. An important step to solving the broadband issue and expanding employment is first accurately identifying where those unserved areas are. We need an accurate map to do that. As some of you on the panel and i have discussed, just because one facility or one location in a census block says that there is coverage, thats not true, i can tell you from somebody that lives there. Thats simply not true. We need this legislation that directs the assistant secretary of commerce for communications and information to create that National Broadband map and reassert ntias authority to do so. Many rural areas in appalachia and ohio find themselves on the wrong side of that urban rural divide. We all know that high Speed Internet is no longer a luxury but a necessity. Today for education, for business, especially in this technologydriven global marketplace. Im going to continue to drive this issue very, very hard and working with my colleagues to break down the barriers to broadband deployment, particularly in rural areas. Mr. Gillon, from ctias perspective, in your written testimony you mentioned that any new funding should ensure that reaching areas unserved by wireless is reflected in the programs objectives. In making funding decisions, better data is key. Rural broadband is no exception. First of all, do you agree with my assertion that the maps are inaccurate, that we really dont have a good definition of where the unserved and underserved areas here . Certainly we can and we need to do better. Do you have any suggestions on how we can ensure better data of unserved areas . Absolutely. I think there are commercial tools available that we can start informing our process as well, but i think it really comes down to we have to have a set ideas of what were measuring for, what do we decide broadband is, what is satisfying coverage is. Satisfying coverage is coverage. Thats what it is, its access. But i appreciate your answer. Ms. Bloomfield, could you please explain the benefits of having an accurate broadband map . Absolutely. I know weve discussed this and again thank you for your leadership. The ability to actually get granular, get clear, get transparent and making sure that you are coordinating. So when you talk about whatever federal entity is controlling the mapping, making sure that actually we are coordinating between all of those who are gathering data so again you are comparing, you dont have those inconsistencies which i think have led to some of the confusion in the past. I think the whole focus on the ability to Access Spectrum will also be very important in the future. In your written testimony, ms. Block fielomfield, you ment providing accurate data at a granular level and a consistent basis to help drive better informed decisionmaking. When updating the broadband map, should ntia use form 477 data, and is that data detailed enough, and if not, how would you recommend obtaining more granular data . I think you make an excellent point and i think 477 is the best data so far that really is collected from all broadband providers which is going to be important so you make sure that everybody that is in the pool is submitting data. The problem is its still selfreporting so youre still going to have to make sure that theres some way to check to make sure that theres verification and what people report is actually true, other than driving through your district and actually doing it anecdotally. I think having it spread across different entities is going to lead to confusion and not get the results that youre looking for. Thank you very much. I have a lot more questions, but madam chair, my time is expired and i yield back. Ms. Clark, youre recognized for five minutes. Thank you very much, madam chair and i thank our expert panelists for their testimony here this morning. This congress, ive had the honor of producing and establishing the congressional smart cities caucus along with my colleague, congressman darrell isa. As cochair of this bipartisan smart cities caucus, i know deploying brond baord band is critical. Thats why i cosponsored the connecti connecting broadband deserts of 2018. Under the legislation the fcc will be tasked with reviewing the state of deploying urban broadband deserts and will be required to take action to help speed deployment if it is not occurring at a reasonable pace. So, ms. Katz, what types of issues we heard a little bit about this when the question was asked, i believe it was by ms. Eschew. What issues do we currently allow when we assume that every part of a city is connected and what can we do to help address these issues . Thank you for the question. Its an excellent one. I talked a little about the homework gap. Weve seen continuing impacts on Small Businesses. Theres also in my testimony a report we did on that issue. We see that you continue the cycle of lack of opportunity for these areas when they dont have access to broadband. This panel, its delightful that its almost undisputed that its a utility at this point, that Everybody Needs access to it. So i think some of the most effective things we can do is to allow state and local governments to be a part of the dialogue. It does concern me as chair of the inner governmental Advisory Committee when theres repeated references to removing barriers at state and local levels. In fact, state and local governments are trying very hard to move the needle on these things. For example, in connecticut we are working weve been working for years on a single pole administrator, onestop shopping for connecting to utility poles. Were also working for smart cities, dig once policies, coordinating on digging up the streets. These are important but complex issues but these are some of the initiatives that state and local gochblt governments are working on. Ms. Hovis, did you have anything to add . From the smart city stand the smart communities because were going to have smart counties and smart rural areas as well, the infrastructure is so critically important. As long as a divide persists in who has access to the best infrastructure, then as services in a Smart Community environment move on to the infrastructure more and more, there will be less access by some members of the community. Our risk here is that the Digital Divide, rural, urban and that impacts low income folks and that impacts from Small Businesses will be more pronounced. We cant double down on the existing divide. Part of this conversation is one of cyber security. If were talking about smart cities and gaps in coverage, would any of you speak to what having sort of those vulnerabilities could mean from a national perspective. I have the opportunity right now to serve on the fcc working group talking about what is the importance of protecting those networks. One of the things that we think is really important is to ensure i have 850 carriers across 46 states. People tend to think of the large carriers but we need to make sure that the small carriers have the ability to protect their networks because sometimes its the assumption that where the networks are vulnerable is where the problems will actually happen. Were spending a lot of time in resources educating our Small Network operators on how to protect their assets, consumer assets. Thats going to be important as we move on to the internet of things. I applaud your efforts to make our cities smarter and broaden infrastructure for our cities and all of our communities safer and more secure. We at u. S. Telecom are taking that very seriously and recently launched a small and Medium Business initiative to make sure that our Smallest Companies who share a vulnerability can do incident response, information sharing much more effectively. Our enemies are getting smarter by the day. We have to think of this als s challenge by the entire internet ecosystem and join a common cause in doing so. Very well. I yield back. Mr. Guthrie, youre recognized. Thank you very much. Sorry, ive been bouncing between a couple of hearings today so i apologize. I did hear mr. Johnsons questioning and understand there were some other questions about mapping. I know thats what were talking about. The fact that we have to get more granular data and does the 477 give enough information. This is really to the providers. Given the need for Service Providers to protect proprietary asset information and our need as policymakers to get more granular Broadband Availability information, is there even a pathway forward to get to a street level understanding of Broadband Service availability that meets both needs . Technologically there is a pathway forward. Technology is provided by the fcc and also those advanced by the private sector. This is an opportunity Going Forward to think about how we can streamline and make a uniform approach to a mapping exercise so that we are not nearly identifying addresses but geo coding relevant locations where we need to deliver broadband which is why i said earlier first that its fantastic through hr4510 you and mr. Johnson are working on Creative Solutions but knowing that the fcc is going to be driving this process forward to the extent the ntia is going to be involved. It needs to meaningfully coordinate with the fcc to avoid duplication and therefore confusion, and also we collectively have to think about other assets that can be put onto the Table Including as i mentioned whether the Census Bureau can use its resources to map and locate longitude aly an latitudely residences where there is not Broadband Access. Id echo mr. Spalters comments. Its important that we marshal all resources and its going to take a partnership of all these companies and the government to figure out how best to do this. A lot of it is right on track. If i would just add, weve talked a lot about streamlining. The one thing i would encourage is that we dont look at creating multiple burdens and youre not having Small Companies like the ones i represent having to do reporting to three or four agencies. Other mechan. Other mechanisms that would relieve that burden . Its helpful to designate who takes the lead. How you actually designate where that point is and agree to one form of process, one form of data to be collected and then certainly a challenge process so folks can ensure that the data is accurate. Completely agree. Mapping is essential. We have to know where we need to build. There does need to be a partnership. Theres no question about it. Whatever technological means that we can determine to help better determine where broadband is necessary but ultimately this is going to come down to information from the provider. In the hardest to reach areas youre going to have Small Companies that have very, very small staffs, very few people. The people that they employ are the ones that are literally climbing the poles and serving the customers at the counters. They dont have deep legal staffs, nor regulatory staffs. For them to take the time to fill out the information thats required is a burden. That has to be factored in. Certainly that selfreporting is important and essential as a piece of how we determine where broadband is and isnt as part of the mapping process. This has to be a much broader, deeper discussion on what is the baseline of information that we want to obtain, how can we obtain it and who will be the providers to help provide that information. Some of the previous mapping efforts administered from 2009 to 14, what are the deficiencies and maybe lessoned learned that can be applied . I only have 45 seconds but what are the deficiencies and what should we do different . I would say paperwork. Its as simple sometimes as paperwork. When you have forms to fill out again by Small Companies who do not have the background, the regulatory, legal background, even then determining more particularly census block, census tracks, obtaining the data, the cost of the data teen populate the maps, its extremely difficult for Small Companies to accomplish. Its vital, but here again, it has to be part of a Public Private purpose to deliver that information. Thank you very much. My time is expired and i yield back. Mr. Collins, youre recognized for five minutes. Thank you, madam chair. Thank you also for holding this hearing and having such a Diverse Group of witnesses. Broadba Broadband Access is important to our Rural Communities. Unfortunately, some states like new york are now working to complicate this issue but well set that aside for a second. Im at least glad to see some bipartisan bills here as the subject of this committee hearing. As we focus on infrastructure, the inclusion of broadband is something that i bring up again and again. Its not just roads and bridges and airports. 65 of my district, 8 counties, very rural. A lot of Dairy Farmers are certainly underserved. My bill, hr4798 considers inventory of assets for communication facilities act of 2018. Lets know what weve got and make it easier for some of the smaller carriers. Somebody said dont the big guys already know what weve got. Maybe they do, maybe they dont. It never hurts to make it easier but certainly some of the smaller suppliers may be those that end up coming into some of my Rural Communities, that they can see some value. Maybe specifically, mr. Splelter, ill ask you, as common sense as some of this is, im presuming you would support such an inventory of assets. Could you speak to how that might help. Its not only common sense but music to our ears when the federal government wants to actually try to identify and map its assets. Great. We encourage that to happen. Id also say that we know that when and as that mapping takes place and that inventories are done, we will be able to deliver broadband more efficiency with a speed to market that will be much more effective. When our federal infrastructure and assets are connected to broadband, they become more Cost Effective, safer and have longer life spans. This is an Important Initiative that youre undertaking and we applaud your effort and were going to support. Thank you. Mr. Gillon . I think this is something both big and Small Companies dont know where those assets are so its a critical resource to be able to know when youre trying to deploy as quickly as you want to deploy where we can and cant go. Its a critical transparency vehicle for us to be able to Start Building faster. Ms. Bloomfield. I was going to commend you for keeping it Technology Neutral which is going to be important as we assess the assets. I would just say access to technology is important, and particularly for a Smaller Company where you have fewer customers per mile but the cost of technology that you need to deploy the same amount of broadband is the same whether youre in rural new york or in the middle of manhattan. Having access to Additional Resources for Small Businesses is extremely important. In fact, im not aware of any other idea like that before thats existed where such information would be made available to Smaller Companies. We certainly appreciate the idea and really look forward to working with you on it. Mr. Gillon, you brought your 5g device in. Were going to have a lot more of those devices than the big towers. Absolutely. When you talk about the federal assets, the post office, the Federal Building in town, its critical for us to go in town and i know exactly where we can start. If we want to win the race against china and others, we need all the information we can get. Do any other witnesses care to make a comment . Its incredibly important to know where the assets are, whats available to consumers and that it be independently verifiable. I think its important for the public to know that they can rely on the data and its transparently available. Thank you, madam chair. I yield back. The gentleman yields back. Now to the patient mr. Kramer. I have patience. Im not sick. But thank you. By the way, thank you for the hearing and thanks to all of you for your testimony and for being here. It really didnt require any patience at all. This is quite interesting to me and fascinating. I appreciate everybody being here. I have to admit that sometimes when i hear about these sparsely populated states like vermont and the Digital Divide, i start to feel a little guilty. When i look at north dakota its hard to claim a divide. There are some places but we have over 90 of our population that has 100 mbps or more and 92 that are over 25 93 over 25. Ms. Bloomfield, you know well and this is one of the concerns that i want to get to here, that many of your members in north dakota were broadband before broadband was cool. They were efficiently using federal support funds to build out broadband long before it was mandated by either tradition or policy. One of the things i worry a little bit about as we talk about and i support lets get to unserved before underserved. We want to have that bridge. It would be crazy to have an intere interstate that they decided to gravel in montana or something. But as each generation comes and the demands get greater in places like north dakota where its not just education or health care huge, really huge. Other business really important. But even safety, environmental safety, system ths that work onr Oil Pipe Lines and gas pipe lines and our big transmission lines as we generate electricity, all of that will require upfwragrades. As we talk about the efficient deployment of federal funds i want to make sure that we have protections for upgrading as well. Does that make sense . Maybe start with you, ms. Bloomfield, to comment. You are absolutely spot on. Again, thank you for your leadership on all of these issues. I think people are always surprised that north dakota has probably one of the most fiber rich states in the country because when you look at that land mass its pretty amazing. In part when youre really that rural, you actually see what broadband can do to kind of narrow that gap that geography creates. The ability to do telemedicine, the ability to bring the Community Together to do Economic Development and then when you had the oil industry coming in, the ability to make sure that that economic enterprise was able to be supported. So the fact that youre focus people get so focused on building and they forget about the fact that youve got to maintain that network. Otherwise down the road you dont have anything but a capacity thats limited by what it was when it was actually built. So the ability to live and breathe. The other thing i would tout, particularly in a state like north dakota is the ability of companies to collaborate with each other, the ability to realize that all boats rise if theyre able to build that infrastructure out further. All of the carriers in the state actually benefit from it and the state itself benefits from it. I want to add statistics for others to comment. Only three states have less population density than north dakota but 20 states and territories that have less connectivity than north dakota. I also wonder, some of these other states have a lot of federal lands and weve been talking about that. We do not. We have some but its not a barrier for us. I think state policy does matter. While i agree that communities ought to have some competitiveness and control over their own regulation, there should be a minimum standard to make sure that the country is connected as well. Mr. Spalter . I couldnt agree with you more that the cost of maintaining and upgrading networks for underserved areas is escalating. Its a multiplier of what the build costs are. We know as were seeing this extraordinary spike in the data thats being put through these networks from an increasingly small number of internationet companies that this is becoming more profound. I completely agree with your insight but also your initiative via 4832 to not only think through opportunities to serve communities that have been impacted by disaster but also to better serve communities that already have broadband. I think weve certainly learned some things in the last year that can be helpful in that so why not apply it across the board and avoid special circumstances. Anybody else . Sg when you talk about upgrades its really important to talk about how these upgrades are accomplished. One of the things that i mentioned in my comments were about this sexy issue of pole attachments. Its incredibly important when you have either whether its an attachment to a pole or a condu conduit, it seems like our policy is any time something new happens to the pole or the conduit, that is a new starting point for a long application process for fees and other things of that nature rather than saying how can we simplify this process, simplifying this to make sure that we get attachments on the poles, through the conduits to get broadband out there faster. Another reason not to nationali ieize anything. With that i yield back. This hearing is so popular today, we have uced mr. Taco onto the committee for his g question. The gentleman is given five minutes. Thank you for hosting this hearing today. A hear from constituents all the time on the need for broadband expansi expansion. I was excited to see that the broadband bill included in todays discussion which i sponsored is part of the process. I fear that we dont have the time to have an indepth discussion on many of these important issues. Im proud to have worked on this legislation with congressman Leonard Lance and thank the members who co sponsored the legislation including 8 members of the energy and Commerce Committee who have worked together and agreed this is an issue worth supporting. I also want to thank Jonathan Spalter with u. S. Telecom for your call to action to move forward on vital bills like access broadband that offer responsible solutions. Ive engaged with industry and Many Organizations and believe this is a bill we can all work on together and support. Chair blackburn and Ranking Member doyle, i ask as we move forward we take a closer look at pieces of legislation like access broadband that have strong bipartisan support. Lets have a discussion on what we can improve and move the bills forward. The advancing critical connectivity expand small resource opportunities access a database on need and demand would establish a coordinating office for federal broadband resources. It would use existing resources to streamline management of federal broadband resources across multiple agencies and simplify the process for Small Businesses and local Economic Developers to access them. Broadband Internet Access is often the difference between success and failure for students doing homework, job seekers, doctors, or entrepreneurs starting a Small Business. However, to date, the federal government has done a poor job of tracking broadband deployment. Currently theres no comprehensive system that practitracks where federal dollars are going. Investments are made with little accountability and oversight on behalf of the taxpayer. Ms. Hovis, can agencies do a better job of coordinating federal resources, and what are some of the current problems we see with a lack of coordination . Congressman, i think coordination would be exceptionally helpful. Its obviously not a simple matter in any Large Organization whether public or private, but it would be helpful not only because we would be collecting better data of all types and knowing exactly how public funds are being spent and the impact they are having on the broadband environment. Federal government is a big buyer of services so its dollars are being spent to deploy infrastructure in certain places and make it more economical and other places would be helpful from this standpoint but also helpful with things like knowing where public assets are, knowing how they can be used. An example of this would be that there is at the state and local level i think some confusion among private companies but also departments of transportation about whether assets built with federal funds for transportation purposes can be used, excess capacity can be used for broadband purposes, whether public or private. Clearing up some of the confusion, having coordination among Different Levels of government and among different Government Entities would be enormously helpful and time saving. Obviously that coordination could unlock more Broadband Development . Yes, i think it could. That information is always going to be better and lack of information like the map that is insufficient granular or lack of information about what different agencies are doing and spending makes it just that much harder to plan in an efficient and pragmatic way. A question for both you and mr. Spalter. Can we better coordinate to simplify the process for companies for Small Businesses and local Economic Developers to access federal resources . I think we can and i must say, congressman, that the access broadband act is an innovative step towards unlo unlocking that opportunity. Not only do you recognize that we have to do better in managing and streamlining resources but the more that our Smaller Enterprises can have a greater understanding of where those how those resources are being directed, how theyre being managed, there will be opportunities to create even more efficiencies for broadband deployment and for their participation in that process. Were very grateful for your insight but also your foresight in making sure that we can do better in unlocking the opportunities of managing our federal resources a more efficient way. I totally agree. I would add that its critically important obviously that those assets and resources were built for particular purposes having to do with the agencies that built them and their critical mission. Its critical that no asset is ever compromised by a secondary use, as important as the secondary uses are, transportation, Public Safety, all of these kinds of infrastructure assets have that first primary use but subject to protection of that use and security and so on. Theres enormous potential value of this kind of coordinated, planned approach. I would assess that the federal government knowing where it spends and understanding the impact of the spending are going to provide a lot of direction as we go forward. Were you going to add . Im just agreeing with you, sir. Thank you. Thank you to your witnesses and thank you for allowing me to participate. The gentleman yields back. Seeing that there are no further members asking questions yes, mr. Doyle . Youre recognized. Id like to get unanimous consent to enter a few things into the record. A press release on todays hearing, a natural story on the Security Councils plan for 5g networks and a letter from remc. Without objection. Thank you. Pursuant to committee rules, all members have ten days to submit questions, and we would ask that you respond in ten days to those questions. Without any further business coming to the subcommittee today, the committee is adjourned. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] chair of the White House Council of economic advisers will be speaking at Georgetown University today about the Corporate Tax rate which was lowered from 35 to 21 as part of the gop tax bill signed in december by president trump. You can see that event live on our companion network, cspan, beginning at 12 45 p. M. Eastern. This weekend on American History tv, on cspan 3 saturday at 8 00 p. M. On lectures and history, university of North Carolina at chapel hill professor Molly Worthen on