Transcripts For CSPAN2 Broadband 20240703

Statement. Thank you for the witnesses for being here today. Americans rely on Internet Connectivity for work, education, healthcare. Despite americans are still without a reliable broadband connection. Closing this divide is a resour have been dedicated , a problem requires an efficient response is overwhelming and said, the government is not the solution to the problem but is the problem. In may of 2022, the Government Accountability office found there were over 130 federal Government Agencies. These programs, the broadband equity access created an Infrastructure Investment and jobs and missed 42. 45 billion. One of the Top Priorities is making sure these programs administered effectively so that money dedicated to closing the Digital Divide achieves its goal. The main concern about whether that will happen. Some of these programs including outside trade of regular order, there is no discussion of 42 billion is the right number or debate on how the program should be administered. Very little of this money ifwir carriers and provide Critical Services. Am also concerned that rising cost of labor and equipment will create changes taking money required for appointment. And i worry that the federal government will waste this opportunity to connect all americans. Oversight of these existing programs is crucial for the loo future to consider what federal funding for broadband should look like when programs like this conclude. For example, the universal service fund was created in 1997 and distributes approximately 8 billion per year. This supports four broadband programs starting in high cost areas, low income households and rural healthcare facilities. Many small world providers are dependent on the deployment and unserved areas. Over the past few years however, congress has been spending billions of dollars with the same efforts through the emergency connectivity fund, the Affordable Connectivity Program and covid telehealth programs. Congress needs to address whether we still need the usf and if so, what it should look like. This includes addressing what programs the usf should fund, how the usf should be funded and what reforms they need to without waste, fraud or abuse. These are important questions for congress to consider. Answering them will require a serious bipartisan discussion. And pleased to announce today that the rankuniversal working group. I look forward to hearing from stakeholders in working of the aisle and in the capital to find a solution hearing is looking toward the future of federal broad bid programs. I look fo the subcommittee, the gentle lady from california for five minutes. Thank you mr. Chair and i would like to welcome the witnesses who are here today. This is an issue that should be familiar to all members of the subcommittee. We had a version of this hearing before and we will need to keep having them and make sure all americans have equal access to this issue is also very personal to me although i have a large urban footprint in my district, i also have small towns t can literally tell me neighborhood by neighborhood but for and the request for service has fallen on deaf ears. Thankfully, congress acted and im more hopeful then i have ever been that we will be getting then the cand adoption efforts. This includes 42 billion for c deployment of new broaaddresses ment economics. Rural areas are more spread out and companies that are private cannot afford to deploy or operate a nethey dont provide the needed support to connect these residents. Is the single most powerful tool that we have to connect the unserved constituents. But it is imperative that we take a they are solvent. That is i am excited to join representative of and the Bipartisan Working Group to modernize the universal service fund. The usf is one of the most effective models of extending expanding connectivity, whether it is rural areas or schools to support telemedicine or low connecting americans. S however, without reform, usfs future is uncertain. Usf is the bedrock of a communication policy in the u. S. And it is imperative that we on solid footing. That is why the working group is so important. It shows that there are bipartisan, bicameral willingness to address these issues had on. I am excited that we will be joining the Ranking Members to advance this effort. And as we all know, usf isnt needswith broadband connection. Whether it is for the first time or if you need a little help making ends meet, this program is working. 21 million could lose connectivity. The funding is set to be completed early next year and they should know that this e he season in december. That is a present none of us constituents deserve to receive. And committed to doing everything i can to find Additional Support to give us time to find a lasting solution to sustain this. It is a Bipartisan Program that helps rural and urban families alike and must be continued. Am also looking forward to a meaningful discussion about Broadband Access and if it is not just access and affordability but also adoption. My Digital Equity Foundation Act for establishing a would channel public and private investments into Broadband Adoption efforts to close the Digital Divide. Not only because it is the right thing to do but because increased adoption means more broadband customers, which improves the Business Case for isp. So it is a vital leg of the conductivity and needs to be part of the discussion today. With that, and want to thank the witnesses for being here and look forward to the discussions and i yelled back. Thank you. The chair now recognizes the gentle lady from washington. Five minutes please. Thank you mr. Chairman. Welcome to the witnesses. Broadband conductivity is becoming essential for americans. People need to anticipate the bills and content of education and open a business or more. Get there are still so in my di eastern washington. Energy and commerce is committed to supporting policies that lead to better and faster Internet Access. Today, there are more than 130 federal broadband programsnding the programs in recent years which include the 65 billion for broadband deployment, affordability and adoption in the iija, as well as existing programs such as the universal service fund or usf. As resources are made available and new funding programs are considered, be assured of taxpayer dollars are not being wasted or duplicated. The usf for instance has helped Internet Service providers connect rural homes and healyea now with some the other programs working to achieve the same or similar goal, it is important that we evaluate the necessities of the usf and consider what it should support to ensure federal resources are achieving the intended purpose. And being duplicated. When we address those questions, we can turn to how we fund usf. Usf is funded by contributions from providers based on resources that are declining causing the contribution factor to increase. In fact, next quarter, the contribution factor will hit a new record. The cost ultimately increases the cost of services. This means that americans will soon see the highest ever usf fee on their phone bills. This is not sustainable. Consider the future of the usf. It is important that we develop a Stable Funding mechanism that meets the needs of conductivity program or acp, it is also important in the context of todays discussion this covid era program was supposed to be a temporary band aid to help families economically impacted by the pandemic that they connected to broadband. In congress, they made it permanent and has given it over 17 billion. That money will soon run out and we must consider the programs future. The program is in addition to the lifelong lifeline program, federal Subsidy Program under usf designed to ensure that low income americans can afford broadband and television service. Congress has a responsibility to make sure that these programs run effectively. And i do have questions about which program is however, to be consolidated or streamlined. And when a federal Subsidy Program for lowincome americans and what it should look like going forward. Analyzing duplicative spending, waste and fraud will make sure resources are using efficiently and serving as many people as possible. Otherwise, witamericans watch from a distance as technologies advance and kids will grow up without access to online Educational Resources and this part of Rural America will be left behind. As the Digital Economy booms and urban centers and across the globe. Todays hearing is an important step as we look to the future of Rural Broadband funding. All of us here share the same goal, ensuring conductivity for every american. This will improve life, strengthen the economy and to o discussion and i think the witnesses for being here. I yelled back. Thank you. The chair recognizes the Ranking Member of the full committee for five minutes. To work of the committee and congress to make highspeed Internet Service available and affordable to all americans. We took a major step in making this a reality as a bipartisan infrastructure lawno one on the side is investing to bring high speed, reliable and affordable internet to every american household. That is critical because 24 million households today lack Internet Service in rural and tribal areas are further behind the divide. Thanks to the bipartisan infrastructure law, National Telecommunications and Information Administration nta will begin to distribute more than 42 billion to all 50 states, d. C. And the u. S. Territories. This money will go first areas completely underserved. Communities the private market. These service will allow the community to grow their economies for the future and compete with areas that have had Broadband Access for years. Not technology in need of replacement in just a few years. Even when the transformational investments bring Internet Service to the most rural and remote areas of the country, of they simply cant afford it. This is particularly true in Rural America where a variety of factors often lead to higher prices and lower speed. Is troubling when we have a strong correlation between Broadband Availability and positive economic outcome. The availability of High Speed Broadband Network opens the door to higher employment and creates better environments for business. Actually signing up for the service and being able to afford each month is linked to higher incomes and lower poverty rates, civic and Community Engagement and enhancingeducational opportunities and better worker productivity. It is a bridge divide that conn communities and individuals with the opportunities for prosperity. The work to close the divide is not necessarily finished just because of these towers and other channels. The bipartisan infrastructure will address broadband affordability by creating the 14. 2 billion affordable conductivity program. This program is the largest and most Successful Program to address have seen. 21 million households benefit from the program almost equally and both in republican and democratic districts. And the fcc has reported that local households are signing up for the higher rates than urban households. We should all keep this in mind as we inch closer to the looming digital cliff of the affordable conductivity Program Running dry. The program has been so successful signing people up that it will run out of money sooner then we originally thought it would. To start sending 90 day shutoff notices to consumers as early as december, the height of the Holiday Season informing them that they will lose the benefit in the monthly internet bill will go up. For many, this is out of reach and we simply cannot allow this to happen. So i hope democrats and republicans can come together to replenish the fund this year so that the 21 million americans and all congressional dist opportunity and for those on the wrong end of the Digital Divide. We need to make sure the old communities have equal access to robust affordable Internet Service with the skills necessary to take advantage. I hope this is the beginning of a conversation about how the fcc universal service fund can continue to broach bridge the gaps in the country for years to come. I look forward to the opportunity to discussing the nations continued needs and the role that the usf program is playing and ensuring universal conductivity for all americans. I yelled back. Thank you. The gentleman yields back. That will conclude the Opening Statements from the members. We will now turn to the witnesses who are with us today. We have the president and ceo of u. S. Telecom, mr. Justin 40, Vice President for medco. Mr. Scott walton, president and senior fellow at the Technology Policy institute and sara witnesses to know that the timer light will when you have one minute remaining and will turn red when your time has expired. And you are now recognized for five minutes for Opening Statements. Thank you chairman and Ranking Members. Thank you for the invitation to join this really important conversation. And proud to be here on behalf of u. S. Telecom for the broadband association. The Diverse Membership brings us to the publicly traded companies to Regional Companies and coops. Many of which have rural roots that go back literally generations. Our members truly have been leaders in connecting Rural America so we appreciate the opportunity for putting our experience and perspective. This morning. Federal funding for Rural Broadband really is critical, particularly for remote areas or Broadband Service would otherwise not exist. These are sparsely populated parts of the country where the economics are terrain simply do not add up unless the private sector and the government Work Together shoulder to shoulder. A number of programs as used in this partnership. The chief among them is the universal service fund which includes funding to build and maintain login networks and connect Rural Americans with power and promise of broadband. The acp helps ensure that low income families throughout the country are able to benefit from highspeed conductivity and the ones in a Generation Program will b will help connect even more of the community. The question we have before us is how can our commitment to universal conductivity be secured and strengthened the es come for this body and they do not have obvious solutions. But this one does. And it comes first, until a lon solution is established to fund the acp, congress should find funding for the critical program. Today, nearly 21 million low income households in each and every one of the for Broadband Service. And it is now with existing funds likely depleting early next year. Second, there is absolutely no question that the current contribution system needs to be a lot of noise to make those universal conductivity goals. To start, congress should give the fcc the authority to expand usf contribution including Tech Companies that are the primary beneficiaries of the nations universal conductivity and not contribute to the fund. Broadening the base of u. S. Contributors in this way would minimize the burden on any one set of companies and by stabilizing the funds for the long term, the reform would ensure resources continue to be available and keep Rural Communities connected, helping to maintain and upgrade Critical Infrastructure over time for those who may universa i recently heard from one of our small broadband providers of edward u. S. Telecom and rural texas and without would increase roughly 20000 per customer 3000 per customer. Congress should ensure effective limitation of the program to scratch taxpayer dollars and connect to many unserved or underserved homes and businesses as possible. Permitting, minimizing burdensome rules, maximizing provider participation and prioritizing experienced providers, experience matters. Unlike government owned networks, private sector providers have a proven track record of successfully building and operating networks that bridge the Digital Divide. And i stated that this is a moment that matters u. S. Telecom and its members stand ready, willing and able to be constructive partners with the future of Rural Broadband. I am an optimist that we will get the job done and happy of course to take any questions that you have. Thank you very much for your testimony this morning. You are recognized for five minutes for your opening statement. Thank you members of the subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me here today. My name is justin 20. Im the Vice President of at medco. For the datacenter and Advertising Services across five states. Kansas, minnesota, north dakota, south dakota, wisconsin. The majority of the number of 50 communities we serve are very rural. And we have invested more than 765 million in private capital in the last six years to upgrade the Fiber Network. And proud to say that 100 of these homes and businesses have access. But the challenge of connecting of the homes and businesses that dont yet have any Internet Service still exists. In the last two years, the federal government devoted hundreds of millions of dollars to create programs to get broadband infrastructure to the areas that lack. We cannot waste this opportunity by allowing the programs to lose focus or fail. There are seven pillars in the effort that we believe are key to achieving the nations collective goal of getting broadband to all americans. First, target fund areas truly lacking service. Grubbing program should target funding to areas where private investment is not going to occur. A High Percentage of homes in the proposed project area should like service to qualify. Some Programs Fund areas where 50 of the households already have Broadband Service. Again, this takes funding away from areas that are truly underserved. Funding should also not be awarded in government awards or private investment. This was overbilled by reconnect and south dakota even though we were building a network that was funded by the ftc. Because they had not yet finished construction, the area was deemed unserved by usda. Thresholds also matter. Areas should only be eligible if they dont receive the basic level of rugby and service. Otherwise, providers will naturally pursue projects were upgrade services or overbuilt areas that already have Broadband Service. Unserved areas again are at the back of the line. Number two, enabling ist participation. All programs should occur to the broadest position of qualified providers. Some programs have advantage government network, nonprofits or cooperatives the legal structure. This should be reserved for providers with a proven track record to get the job done right. Number three, coordinate approach. With numerous federal agencies in nearly all states dedicating funding to broadband deployment, the government must establish better communication and do not duplicate efforts. Programs, eligibility standards and requirements should be as consistent as possible to the applicant do not have to shop for the least restrictive program. Recently challenged parents under the reconnect program in north dakota. However, the provider took the exact same applications and applied for arpa funding to overbuilt areas that nitco serves great number four, remove regulatory impediments. Administering funding for programs must resist the temptation to layer on policies and regulations. Regulation interconnection and open Access Requirements and burdensome labor rules discourage applicants like nitco from applying. Number five, no barriers to broadband clinic. When we secure an award, we must be specific or we risk forfeiting the funding. First we have to have the requirements to even gain the necessary access to the right ways to begin construction. We may have to rely on others for deployment. His regulations need to be streamlined. Number six. Cubanamericans connected. This acp Program Grants low income households the subsidy and this has been a success. This is new services tailored to acp requirements, identifying qualifying households and help educate families about the opportunities broadband offers. Yet only a year later, the Program Risks losing continued funding. Finally, lets retool before we refuel. When this tremendous influx of funds is in the market place, congress should evaluate its impact as to whether or not a program that is supported can be reduced in particular, given the acp imposes substantial fee burdens directly on consumers, congress on the fcc should evaluate distribution reform. And weather continued distributions are needed or appropriated before considering any contribution reform pick in closing, i commend the subcommittee for its interest in ensuring that this post world looks different from the marketplace we see today. Thank you again for inviting me here. Thank you for your testimony. You are recognized for five minutes. Ranking members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify here today for broadband funding. My name is scott walston. And the president and senior fellow at the Technology Policy institute. I have a phd in economics from stanford and i spent decades researching universal Service Programs that were published widely on the topic. I hope my comments here today will be helpful. The act of 1996 and we have poured 100 billion into rural telecoms including broadband in 2011 yet independent and government studies find that we have little to show for that investment. Recent legislation has added another 100 billion, about 70 billion of which target rural buildout and as chair rogers noted, the recent notification of over 130 broadband Subsidy Programs the cost 15 agencies. As many have said, this is a onceinalifetime opportunity to bridge the Digital Divide. And although a lot of money is available, it is not infinite. And in any event, should be sent carefully and cost effectively. While state and failure federal agency staff are dedicated and working hard, i believe we are mostly not doing what is necessary. Research and experience suggests we should follow the following four guidelines. First, use competitive mechanisms to distribute money. It spurs competition and stretches dollars. We have served subsidy caused by over 50 . I know these options with reverse are not popular at the moment because of the problems in the world. But this is to weak eligibility rules. This will generate the most costeffective outcomes. Two, demand rigorous, unbiased evaluation. The vital measure is the real world of subsidies. It goes beyond merely verifying if recipients kept their promises. That is compliant. Which is important but not evaluation. Comparisons between a subsidized and unsubsidized area or whether trend lines have changed because of subsidies give us a real understanding of whether the subsidy made a difference. Originally, such studies should be billed to the programs on the beginning. Three, focus on broadband specifications based on what people want and value and not with the Technology Behind it. For example, my research and that of others finds that people value speed increases. For example, jumping from one megabit per second up to 10 per second makes a huge difference and they value that a lot. Moving from 100 megabits per second to one gigabit, they value it but not as much for that increase. Additionally, times of service being available is important. Think about a family in a high cost area that has no service currently. Is a 120 connection tomorrow worthless to that family without service as opposed to a gigabyte connection in three years . I dont know the answer. But we can find out and let realworld guidance show us. Or we dont want the universal service fund to grow. In this area an air of new competition, it should be getting stronger. We must give reasons to ask for more later. For example, regular prices to satisfy vaguely defined terms like middleclass affordability. And arguing that they were required to operate in unprofitable network. Lets please not smart now to reduce the chances for these long time subsidies. We put a lot of taxpayer dollars on the table and i hope these guidelines will help policymakers invest the money carefully and efficiently yielding the maximum benefit possible. Thank you for your time and im happy to answer any questions. Thank you for your testimony. And ms. Nichols, you are recognized for five minutes. Chair and Ranking Member, chair morris, rogers, Ranking Members and members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to speak about the importance of Rural Broadband and Digital Equity funding. My name is sara nichols pick a senior planner who specializes in broadband and digital inclusion. I work this the regional council, a local government develop a district that serves rural, mountainous counties in the Appalachian Region of Western North carolina. One of our regions greatest challenges is the lack of access to broadband. Broadband is essential to our residents. Especially those living in the most rural areas where broadband holds power to less lesson barriers posed by geographical differences. Broadband helps People Living in our communities, work, learn, connect with loved ones and Access Healthcare and Government Services to get 13,000 households in the region still lack reliable broadband. My work is to make sure these committees are seen, heard and represented so the region will have all the opportunity and tools we need to thrive. In order to achieve this, we need a holistic approach to the Digital Divide that includes infrastructure, affordability, devices and skills. Today, i want to address two key points. The importance of the affordable conductivity program and the need for continued funding for fiber, especially in Rural Communities. First, i will address acp. Poverty is everywhere but higher in Rural America. In our region, the reason most people cant adapt service is due to lack of affordability. This impacts more households than the lack of infrastructure alone. Acp has been an important part of the solution to this challenge. For example, there are 39,000 households enrolled in nc11. Even though the program is new, it has connected 21 million households to broadband across the country. It is a program we simply cannot afford to lose. For the more, Internet Service providers in the region can deploy at a lower cost because they can anticipate higher adoption rates and low income areas. Despite its importance, the future of acp is in jeopardy. If congress does not renew it, it is excited to run out of funds and cease to exist. If this happens, it will lead to higher cross cost and the structure and flow down infrastructure and people have to wait longer to have broadband in their homes. And renewing acp, i recommend that congress consider making adjustments. And summaries of the region, 30 subsidy is enough to cover the cost of the service. In other areas, the subsidy is not nearly sufficient. I want to address the importance of continuing to invest in broadband infrastructure. Challenging terrain and low population density in the region makes broadband deployment expensive. As we continue to serve areas that have been overlooked, we can only expect that the costs will continue to increase. The Rural Communities know to ask for fiber because other technologies failed them. Other fiber is the most expensive to deploy. Recent funding opportunities like the American Rescue plan and the bipartisan infrastructure law has given us a chance for those connectivity issues. The opportunity for increased fiber empowers the rural areas to compete on a level Playing Field with the urban counterparts and strengthening other technologies. We are extremely grateful for the immense support from congress toward closing the Digital Divide. But this is not over. We need more funding to build fiber, not just in the last mile but middle Mile Networks that connect the communities. Additionally, we are appreciative for the diversity of broadband programs but need congress is and their help to increase the efficiency of nationwide deployment. I urge you to continue to invest in broadband acp and Digital Equity because the work is not over. It needs to evolve. And making these investments and your making a promise to the future, children and quality of life are worth investing in. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today in raising awareness on this important answering any questions. Thank you for your opening statement. That includes the Opening Statements for the witnesses which will now proceed to questions by the members of the subcommittee. I will recognize myself for five minutes. In 2020, congress created a number of new programs to create and give broadcast broadband needs for schools, hospitals and telehealth. We funded these for years to the universal service fund. Under recent broadband spending, do we still need the universal service fund and if so, which programs should continue . I certainly think we need to go back and evaluate the universal Service Program and evaluate each of the programs to see which ones are truly needed in the service territories. For example, in the dakotas, the High Cost Program, we serve the exact same areas. People that receive high cost under usf and that is to the tune of 1. 3 billion for high cost support. They could take over serving the entire areas and save the federal government 1. 3 billion under that scenario. Also, in regards to the low Income Programs, as we touched on, one program that serves and works well for consumers and works well for providers, and works well for the government is what we need for low income. A Simple Program that works for all to make sure we can keep all the folks connected. Wes welker and dr. Walston, what reforms from the usf should congress consider . What reforms should usf should congress consider . We have a great opportunity to move forward with the significant performance to usf. We need to move usf into the modern activity landscape and i think there are two fundamental things we need to do in order to be able to do so. First is Congress Needs to provide Clear Authority that it needs to be able to expand the contribution based. That is absolutely fundamental. We believe the contribution base should be expanded to not only include broadband providers but essentially must include dominant, internet big Tech Companies that still do not contribute to americas quest for digital conductivity, affordability and equity. These will be essential mechanisms to actually have a sustainable usf program. One that will be able to fulfill its purpose of providing the funds necessary to ensure that our investments and Broadband Access can be sustainable, durable and intact over time. Dr. Walston. Thank you for that question. I think the first thin over time. Dr. Walston. Thank you for that question. I think the first thing we need to do is be aware that we should let it get smaller which is just about impossible currently because the rules themselves prevented. The 2011 reforms for the High Cost Program set a floor on the amount of money the sec had to collect. The amount had been decreasing up to that point. So that needs to change for one thing. So that it can get smaller. As new competition comes online, it should be getting smaller. The areas that cannot support competitive broadband, there are fewer and fewer areas over time. In another way to do that is requiring evaluation. Nothing in the universal service fund is evaluated currently. But not the high cost fund. And if we dont do that, we dont know how effective it is for independent evaluations which certify it isnt very effective and there is room to be more so. And third, which is much more difficult, is to remove cost based support. We know cost models are bad. They radically overestimate the cost of providing service. They are measured with area. People think these are accurate estimates but they are not. And we see that with Competitive Bidding because the subsidies always come down. I know it is a really hard lift to ever do that. But it is crucial to the universal service fund. Thank you. My last 20 seconds remaining, a quick yes or no. Is important for all federal agencies to use the fcc broadband map . Thank you. Absolutely. Thank you very much. My time has expired. And i now recognize the gentle lady from california, Ranking Member of the subcommittee, for five minutes. Thank you mr. Chairman. The affordable conductivity program, acp, is successfully helping millet more than 20 million families with internet connection. Ms. Nichols, does the acp have an impact on rural areas and is the expiration of funds impact the likelihood of future rural buildout . Thank you for the question. Yes. Rural households are disproportionately, have been systemically challenged by poverty issues. They are more likely to qualify for acp and participate in it if they have the broadband infrastructure to do so. Thank you. We know that in rural areas, the cost of broadband is high. And we talked about the impact the acp benefit can have . Yes. Can you repeat the question . Can you talk about the impact the acp benefit can have on consumers depending on the market they live in . Yes. Structure in rural areas is very high. We encourage providers to offer affordability plans in those areas. The real challenge is that they need to make their money back and they need to be the business of the provider. By offering the acp program, you lower their cost to infrastructure and allow the buy in. Thank you. The bipartisan infrastructure law established the program which is the single best tool to close the Digital Divide we have had in years. Based on putting this funding to use, and i know members in both red and blue districts are excited about the conductivity. There have already been calls for states to return the funding. Yes or no. Do you think all funding appropriated for the program should be used to increase Broadband Access . Absolutely, yes. Wonderful. Do you have concerns that if states are pressured to give up broadband funding for other causes like paying down the national debt, we could leave households unconnected . We unquestionably will leave households unconnected if we do so. Thank you very much. The Sacramento Region is home to some of the most innovation. We are strengthening the pipeline from the laboratory to laboratory to the field and working on developments that will make a difference for farmers and consumers. The institute for food systems at uc davis is developing inexpensive wireless sensors to help. Miss nichols, given the rich history and agriculture, you believe connectivity and cropland would help the region better compete with larger players over the next few decades, a simple yes or no. Yes. Miss nichols, can you discuss the relationship between connectivity on farms and the ability of rural areas to attack attract younger talent . Yes. Advances in technology will help appeal to a younger audience. With the aging community, this is a critical component. Thank you. Introduce the Digital Equity Foundation Act to make sure Access Affordability and adoption efforts receive the investments they need to succeed. While he made progress, this remains dependent on factors such as age, income and education and need to be addressed. Miss nichols, do you believe this should be a part of the conductivity alongside access and affordability . Yes. Can you talk about the relationship between adoption rates and broadband provider ability to serve the market . Adoption encourages infrastructure. As they work to close the Digital Divide, it is imperative that the federal government as a partner and not an obstacle. And permitting can be extremely burdensome for public land. I introduce the digital application act to introduce needed transparency and accountability to the federal permitting process. The bill establishes a onestop shop online portal to make sure companies have the information they need to bring conductivity to communities. I am almost out of time. Perhaps my colleague can follow up later. Thank you very much. The gentle lady yields back. The gentle lady from washington for five minutes. Thank you. Today we have two Communication Programs targeted at addressing Broadband Adoption for low income households, acp and lifeline. Do we need two programs targeting the low income households . And if we do not, how should we address the duplication . Excellent question. In my perspective, the perspective is that we need to be able to extend the opportunities that the acp is now with 21 million households that have access to the program. The way we can do that i think is very straightforward. As i said in my indiscernible , we can have Congress Give the fcc the authority that it requires to be able to expand the contribution base, integrating the acp within the usf program and their by allowing the potentially out of control contribution factor that will potentially bog down liability and longevity for the universal service on mechanisms. And in so doing, it can expand the contribution base efficiently to allow not only broadband but the development of big Tech Companies to participate so that we would effectively fuse the affordable conductivity program with lifeline and do so in a way that would actually not require appropriated dollars from congress. Thank you. Dr. Wallenstein and mr. 40, do you agree . Yes. I think that when you look at the programs, one program is usually for consumers and customers to understand. Also the programs can be burdensome to providers as we have to work with the Government Agencies and get folks qualified as well and i can take up time and resources from an internal perspective. Not focusing on the folks that truly need it. Any one can do all those things and serve the intended purpose. That is the way to go. It really is a good question. Lifeline and acp are targeted for the same things that makes sense to think of them together. The answer to how they continue it come one of the nice things from acp is that it comes from general revenue which is the way all support should go. And that has the broadest contribution base that you can get. And i know again that that may not be popular. Also, focusing on adoption, which i agree is important, absolutely. Other things matter as well. And we actually dont know a lot about that. All the different factors that keep low income people from adopting. The fcc has done some nice experiments in the past and have discovered that there is a lot we dont know and we should learn. Thank you. I have a lot of concerns about how the programs are being implemented also and i believe it is important that the technology is neutral. And that seems the administration is favoring some technologies over others and like my district in eastern washington, that just doesnt work when you have a lot of mix with terrain and mountainous regions. And is not going to work to ensure universal conductivity in a costeffective way. So why is it important for federal broadband programs to use all Available Technology . It is absolutely essential for the government to be Technology Neutral. We want to use the best technology for our consumers and your constituents to show the folks in rural areas and we have to take into consideration what is best for them. We love the availability of being a company that has multiple forms of conductivity to reach all of them in their intended needs. Many areas, the terrain and the cost thank you. I appreciate that. Im going to move on because im running out of time. Dr. Walston, i wanted to ask, in your perspective, should we first determine what we want the usf to subsidize before determining how to fund the usf . Or should we focus on the distribution reform over the contribution reform . We should be doing everything we can to know that we are finding exactly what it is we want to fund and the way we are doing it makes a difference. And so far, we are pretty much not doing any of that. A lot of money flowing. We need to answer the distribution question first. Thank you all for being here and providing your insight. I will followup with more questions. I yelled back at this point. Thank you. The gentle lady yields back. The chair recognizes the gentleman from californias 29th district for five minutes. Thank you chairman and Ranking Members for holding this very important hearing. And i want to thank the witnesses for imparting their knowledge and expertise and opinions with us, especially in front of the American People. Several of you have made references in your testimony to the importance of continued funding for the affordable conductivity program, otherwise known as acp. A position i fully agree with. Across the trend, americans are paying 14. 2 billion for the buy parts and in the church a lot invested in the acp to access affordable broadband to the tune of 21 million households. In my district, 30 of households participate in the program. That is over 69,000 families that depend on these resources for their affordable broadband. As things stand, the program could run out of money and early 2024 and participants may begin receiving notifications as early as december of this year. If we want to talk about ensuring that no americans are left without Broadband Access, we must talk about the importance of continued funding for the acp. Ms. Nichols, this program that is connecting millions of americans with affordable broadband, can you speak to the challenges that providers call participants and the fcc would encounter when we launch the program if it were to lapse and if the funding of the acp would run out . And would you like to speak to the same question ms. Vulture . Thank you for the question. Besides the fact that you would be cutting them off from Critical Services, there will be massive trust issues from participants. In many cases, the people that struggle with affordability may have problems with other Digital Divides and aspects and they wont understand the complexities of what we are discussing today. Thank you for your question congressman cardenas. In the absence of access to the acp, at a time when we are closing the Digital Divide fully and finally, it would be a devastating blow to the future of universal conductivity. We know that affordability is an aspect of why we have not been able to close the Digital Divide and the acp is an essential program to allow that affordability mechanism to be extended to those families in need. Thank you. Can you describe the reparations being made to notify participants at funding for the acp expecting to run out in early spring . We have not gone to the point where we have started to address that with consumers. But certainly, we want to make sure that all of our friends and neighbors have access regardless of their income, to that program and certainly want to work to continue to provide conductivity for them. And frankly, acp is the best program we have for consumers and for the providers. There are folks that would go without that service if acp is not continued. We are dangerously close to keeping the government open. I would prepare if i were you. I dont know if we have high hopes that we will be able to continue the acp with all of the negotiations and bringing together of the minds of members of congress in both houses. So hopefully you can prepare sooner then later. Ms. Nichols, if we allow acp funding to last, what other affordable broadband options will be available for families who currently rely on the program today . There are many options fortunately. Lifeline would be able to help some people with conductivity needs. For many, this will mean that conductivity we would hope that providers would help us step up to the plate and offer affordability options but the optimism is low given the cost of deployment. This would be devastating and i would be looking for support for public wifi. I think it is important. When knew we were debating and coming up with the funding of the acp, we talked about the children who had to sit in parking lots and families who had to sit in parking lots of businesses in order for them to connect and get their homework done, just to get basic access to the things that some of us americans are fortunate to take for granted. Lets not forget that. I really appreciate the opportunity for us to discuss this with the American People and over 21 million American Families have been connected since we brought this into existence. I think it is important for us to understand that in order for us to continue to have trust with the American People, we need to figure out a way to continue the program. Even if we change it. Even if we modify it or even if we learn from our mistakes and the things that may be archer today that were not yesterday. We have to come to grips with the fact that if we dont continue the program, we will lose the confidence of many families across america, people who need us the most. My time has expired and i yelled back. Time has expired and the gentleman from florida from the 12th district for five minutes. Thank you. I appreciated very much mr. Chair. Our committee has worked on closing the divide, the Digital Divide, for decades, as you know. Yet millions of Rural Americans remain on the small side of conductivity. For hernando and citrus counties, the counties i represent in florida, i also represent pasco county, reliable conductivity continues to be a toptier issue. All American Families need access to reliable highspeed internet regardless of their zip code, focusing on closing the divide as quickly as possible. That is my goal and i believe it is the bipartisan goal. So that citizens stay connected and are off the hook. Speed is key. Disputes and delays can stall construction in their tracks and dis incentivize the build out to the communities we are trying to target with all of these federal programs. Delays result in the former chair of billions of dollars of economic gain every year. Gains that would otherwise benefit people across the country and across the commercial, agricultural, health and many other benefits. The importance of broadband is too great and the cost to taxpayers is too big do not consider commonsense reforms. Florida has recognized this and already acted to make some of these reforms for Broadband Access to more residents. I have a couple of questions. Can you provide examples of exi loopholes have delayed or f exi prevented build outs to really unserved areas. Can you estimate the additional time and cost that result from these delays . Just recently, we heard from one of our midsouth members, a local provider that told us, shockingly that because a Rural Electric coop that was a owner made it difficult for them to access those poles and the buildout program for an area where they were unserved and underserved residence was delayed by over a year and if we want to actually have a need for speed as you said, we have to actually make sure that congress does close the municipal and Rural Electrical coop loophole within section 224 and remove this is a barrier to speedy and efficient and importantly comprehensive world broadband deployment. Thank you again. We have seen a few states most recently and in my great state of florida pass legislation to streamline and create a more uniform process for all market participants. Have you found that this has incurred buildout in those areas, and are there any other benefits to this action . Absolutely. The more we have a level Playing Field when it comes to accessing poles and the deployment of poles, we will absolutely be able to expedite the process of Rural Broadband deployment and do it more efficiently and at a lower cost and it is more important to move forward with these types of initiatives. At the end of the day, if we can lower the cost of the buildout, taxpayer money could be spent more effectively today and i think you can all agree on that so we no longer have to sacrifice more taxpayer money to this problem tomorrow. I do appreciate your having this hearing and giving the opportunity. The gentleman yields back in the chair recognizes the gentleman from floridas ninth district for five minutes. Thank you for hosting this hearing today and we have a big job to do and historic investments from the infrastructure for over 65 billion adding 10 billion from the American Rescue plan and we have the capital to fundamentally alter america to make sure we bring internet to every american across the nation and our job is to make sure it is overseen right and in florida we have seen 2. 7 billion coming in to help with this buildout. Also, we look at the work that is being done in my own district in places like keenans bill and bull creek and deerfield among others and these are rural enclaves with just a few hundred people. But they didnt have access to internet and they are working hard to help feed america on our local ranches and doing great work to help with Wildlife Corridors and hunting leases and other key areas of industry in the rural areas. It is about access. But it is also about affordability and that is where the acp is also a key part of this equation and as we look at nearly 70,000 households in floridas ninth Congressional District and rolled through it acp, we appreciate the united way and a lot of our local cable and Internet Companies for really helping seniors and people with disabilities and folks working every day and trying to make ends meet and in addition, i am cointroducing the rural internet at that merges the pilot reconnect program with existing programs to help through the department of agriculture to really bring this to the next level in rural areas and i know we are here today to talk about the future of universal Service Funds among other things. But there is reason to be worried and the fifth circuit recently heard a challenge earlier this week to the constitutionality of usf and what aspects need to be modernized and this is helped countless schools and libraries provide Internet Connections to students and the public to help buildout 5g and other Wireless Technologies in Rural America. What would the impact be if the court finds in favor of the plaintiffs in this case and eliminates usf as we know it . I cant speculate on how the court will move this decision. Lets assume they strike down the program. What would be the result of that happened . It would absolutely be a force majeure and we would never be able to close the Digital Divide in this nation if we dont have a viable, sustainable, resilient universal fund and Congress Needs to be able to ensure that longevity and sustainability. The concern that was brought up about the gap in learning we saw during the pandemic of folks in many districts including some in mind and in parking lots of restaurants trying to catch a little bit of wifi so they can do their homework and more of this would happen if this goes down, correct . You can guarantee that will happen. I did introduce a bill with a congresswoman the rural improvement act of 2023 requiring the usda to use maps to determine eligible funding areas and why is this important for federal agencies to work off the same maps and secure new investments and how could this increase cord nation between agencies that distribute to these grants . We support that act and if everybody uses the same apps, it would be easier and it makes sure it ups the higher cost or ups the threshold of the number of people who could be overbilled, which is essential to get the percentage as high as possible to make sure that usda programs are not building over any other programs that we see a lot today and those few things and other requirements could eliminate that and we appreciate your support of that. And a lot of these areas were talking about those that are feeding america and extraction areas that help with new ev vehicles and other Major Industrial products and how critical is it to our economy to make sure we get internet to these areas. It is essential we get after that and have to use or be Technology Neutral and provide the right type of service to reach the right enduser with that. The chair recognizes the gentleman from michigans Fifth District for five minutes. Thank you and thank you to the panel for being here. I have been known to be a dripping faucet to some of my colleagues and may be a pain in the keister on this issue or necessity of Rural Broadband and i dont want our students going to parking lots of restaurants and libraries to do their work. But i dont see how we can get the combines and tractors today that need all of this technology as well and it just doesnt work well for harvesting or planting. So we need to continue pushing on this and make Rural America a top priority. But we also cant waste our funding and efforts and there has to be coordination. That is why introduced a plan for broadband act that stems from what some of our witnesses mentioned and thats critical and the testimony and i appreciate that. How could a lack of National Strategy with roles and objectives impact providers and their ability to connect to all of america . Yes. Thank you. All of these programs will have overlapping objectives and it will make it harder to achieve any particular goal and we will end up with waste and overbuilding and i dont want to imply it will be easy to have a National Strategy and i was the economics director on the fccs National Broadband plan of 2010. So coming up with a National Strategy is difficult. But having these programs is clearly not the best way to go at least without having a strategy. Let me jump over to mr. Forde and ask you to elaborate on any coordination problems you have had as your Company Works with these programs. It is challenging. In some cases you are playing defenses and defending programs in these areas and you put a lot of time and effort into the challenge process or show folks you have broadband and the speed and customer testimonials and you may be successful with one federal agency and then the provider will go to another agency and try to get funding to overbilled that same area and that is frustrating. So if agencies cant coordinate, we need to start stamping some of these areas served and to share that paperwork with us and notify us that this is a challenge that has been successful and notify the provider and federal agencies and this area is off the map in this area has been taken care of so we really need to get after that because otherwise these areas that truly dont have Service Still remain that way and we have to have that strategy where people who have no broadband get served first and its not okay for folks to get a second or third or fourth bite of the apple to overbilled with all of the concerns for those folks that truly dont have broadband today. Acp has connected many people who couldnt previously afford it, but that doesnt mean we shouldnt explore reforms and the program currently provides a 30 subsidy to make broadband affordable for low income americans and midco participates in acp and how does this 30 subsidy influence how you design these plans. Do you feel you have appropriate flexibility . The acp is giving consumers a choice and that 30 and helps them provide the level of service they need so that does work well for providers and as i said before the tools that they offer are better than the other programs and a little bit easier to work with so again the right tool and price point that works for the three key constituencies in your constituents in our consumers and obviously they are easy to operate and they are easy to work through with our customers and also, of course, the taxpayer as well so if you can work for those three things that is what we need, a low Income Program to make sure those low income folks can gain the benefit of that connectivity to find a job or school or do the things they need to do and we feel that is essential. Okay. I have two more questions. And we will submit that to get answers but i dont want to be a pain in the keister. I will yield back. He yields back in the chair recognizes the gentleman from New Hampshire for five minutes. Mr. Walberg, you are never a pain in the keister. I want to focus my remarks today on the key message of this hearing, connecting every american to provide Broadband Access nationwide and close the Digital Divide and we need to address the unique barriers to access for the communities that are still unserved or underserved such as my district in a Rural Communities and you specialize, ms. Nichols, in rural mountainous regions similar to my district in New Hampshire and i know you understand the challenges these communities face and the importance of providing them with Broadband Services and in your testimony you stated we must take a holistic approach to closing the Digital Divide by addressing both lack of access and affordability and can you speak to how the Affordable Connectivity Program helps to address these dual barriers of affordability and available broadband infrastructure . Yes. We work a lot in the space of trying to get connectivity in places that needed the most including some mixes of technology and affordability so we find the high poverty rates in rural areas lend themselves to needing to take a 12 approach of access and affordability but even those things alone dont close the Digital Divide. The acp is currently help to bridge the affordability gap and connect 21 million americans to the internet including over 18,000 in my district in New Hampshire and congress have to invest in the acp and i join my colleagues in sending a letter to the president of congressional leadership urging them to come to an agreement to continue funding this program and prevent it from lapsing next year and i want to thank my colleagues in the rural caucus and the cochairs representatives craig and whitman for leading this and showing the necessary bipartisanship to get this done. And, mr. Chair, i want to submit this letter to the record. And thank you so much. Congress made major federal investments for broadband infrastructure like the middle mile program and bead and New Hampshire was recently awarded 12 million grant to install fiber as the back bone of this regions Broadband Network and investments like these will transform access to broadband for this rural region of my district and again, can you speak to how this investment and a fiber back bone will support the buildout of additional technologies needed to reach Rural Communities . Middle Mile Networks are excruciatingly not work dash work necessary and additionally they are effective to support other technologies such as wireless and are needed to help Emergency Management support services. Thank you. For many those living in rural or underserved regions, the lack of Broadband Access means that many of these streaming services are still out of reach and i am committed to providing Broadband Service to every household in america and i do look forward to working with my colleagues to make sure we dont take steps backwards in our efforts to close the Digital Divide. With that, the yield back with over a minute to go. Thank you. The gentlelady yields back in the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia, the vice chair of the subcommittee for five minutes. Inc. You and thank you for being here and this is extremely important. I do represent south georgia. We do have a saying in georgia that there are two georges, atlanta and everywhere else and i represent everywhere else. And that is rural. We are trying to close the Digital Divide and that is what we want to do, making sure everybody has access. But we also want to make sure that these programs are working efficiently and effectively. I have to be quite honest. I like to simplify. Over 130 programs now . I mean, it seems like we have way too many. That is what really concerns me and i dont know why we need 130 of them. I think we are all after the same goal of closing the Digital Divide, but 130 . Goodness gracious. Let me ask you, there have been all of these enrolled and how many of these enrollees are new subscribers . Do you have any idea . How many are just these subsidies are going to consumers already connected . We dont know the answer to that question. That is the kind of question i need answers to. I agree. There is an a mistake of confusing inputs and outputs. Yes. How would you evaluate whether the acp is a success or not . I think you are on the right track. We want to first know what the goal of the acp is and if it is to close the Digital Divide, then the question is how many additional people are subscribing because of it . And how many people stayed on because of the acp and the latter is harder to know. So if that is the question, the former is not hard to do. No. It shouldnt be. Right. Right. What kind of reforms would you make to the acp to make it more effective you had if you have a chance . Let me start off by saying this. It is from general revenues which is appropriate and its a Voucher Program which lets the consumer choose where they want the money to go and those are good things. But other things could change so it is a 30 subsidy i dont know whether that is too much or too little but we know it can only go to one company that any price between zero and 30 is zero dollars to the consumer. So it does have a not great effect on price competition on the low end and one possibility may be allowed the voucher to be split for example between two companies which could stir competition on the lowend of the market. I think things like that could be helpful. Do you have any suggestions . I think given the fact that the rollout for acp is still in its infancy, we need some time to do the kind of evaluation that he is suggesting that will be critical and if we will suggest any reforms we have the right kind of data to be able to do so. I would say, however, what is critical is that we extend the program so we can ensure that your constituents and others are represented by many of you and cant can have access and the choices over time. In your testimony you mentioned permitting information and i know you find this hard to believe but i have a bill for that and it would streamline these procedures and again i am wanting to simplify and streamline and how does this play a role in the future of broadband and how does it promote competitiveness . Thank you. That is key and we are working on a project in the beautiful black hills of south dakota and not different from the areas you serve and there was a road through the area but we were able to access that right away and we tried looking at drilling through the rock and it is 200,000 per mile to do that and found there were old poles that we could have access to but the company had challenges with hanging onto that to replace all of that because they were 40 or 50 years old at our expense and the reality is we were running and all of these different challenges to serve one of our last truly unserved places in america which puts a burden on the provider to solve all of those issues in a short period of time with government funding and it makes it difficult and if you had some of those challenges eliminated you could have service to those. Thank you. I am out of time but 130 is too many. Thank you. I do yield back. The chair recognizes the gentlelady from illinois for five minutes. Thank you for holding this mornings hearings and thank you to our witnesses for participating. Over the years i, like many of my colleagues served on this committee and have been concerned can about the Digital Divide in this country and my district in illinois has become increasingly rural and now i do represent more than 2000 farms and much of this farmland in my district and the rest of Rural America has outdated services at high prices if they have it at all so as i have said before my constituents back home in illinois, there is no dispute that this access to reliable and highspeed Internet Services is one of the most beneficial things that can happen in my constituents and will make sure that all americans participate in the modern society and i commend the commitment of the Bidens Administration to closing the Digital Divide by signing into law the historic bipartisan infrastructure law which made a 65 billion broadband investment to bring highspeed Reliable Services to every u. S. Household and the program is established by the law will pave the way for people of all socioeconomic backgrounds to have and effectively use Internet Services and one such program that i would like to highlight is the 42 billion broadband equity access and Deployment Program to expand highspeed Internet Access by funding the deployment of broadband infrastructure and this will have a substantial impact on all communities but particularly rural and unserved and underserved communities in my district starts in chicago and then goes three hours south and some amount of time less and in my home state of illinois 10 of households have no Internet Access or device that connects to the internet and as it continues to rollout this program to address this very issue, can you discuss the importance of states and local governments working with the private sector to find the most Affordable Solutions to connect rural, underserved, and unserved communities . Of the programs are complicated and there is a lot of work to be done. I do agree there needs to be a streamlined approach. But coordination between the federal, state, local governments and providers and residents of these communities is an effective strategy because collectively we can make the right map and buildout. Lets move to the acp program and there are hundreds of thousands of those in illinois and american households Access Internet without for going necessities like food and groceries, medicine, utilities and housing. Given there are reports that acp could run out of funding as soon as mid2024, and i have heard as early as march, how important is it for congress to act to ensure the acp remains funded and after you give your answer if any other panelists would like to comment. It is a critical part of how Rural America and america is getting access to those Critical Services and losing it at this point would be devastating causing massive mistrust between the relationship we build with our communities. Thank you. Any other witness would like to comment . No . Okay. In your testimony you noticed it was important for congress to make strides toward getting universal connections and do you think americans are sufficiently aware and educated on ai as an important component of digital connectivity and literacy . It absolutely is important, not only of the future Digital Literacy but the fundamentals about how the networks will be working and ai will be a driver significantly, and they have been integrated already internet works and for how we will actually be communicating across the future networks of our nation. Ai needs to be thought of comprehensively through as tuitt how can be an accelerator of connections and we need to take an approach towards it that i think is one of optimism to see what benefits it can bring rather than more of a regulatory instinct at first. When we do so, i think we will find potential benefits for the integration of ai into the future of america and connection. We need a lot more education and i have learned a lot since ive been in congress and there is more to learn but i think the public tends to be a little bit more afraid of it. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you. The time is expired in the chair now recognizes the gentleman of utah for five minutes. Thank you and i need half a second here. This is an important topic to me and i had the opportunity to serve as mayor of a city. The city tried to bring broadband into the city and through a number of efforts that were sometimes not very successful we were able to bring gigs speed in 15 or 20 years ago into the city and offer Free Internet to all of our residents and i am sure there is no other city that is actually done that. As i look at this program that we have to make sure everybody has access to internet, i can acknowledge all of the good in it and also i worry about the stability on the foundation that is underneath it. And maybe quickly could ask dr. Wallsten to talk about the foundation and how stable that is. I guess there are two parts and one is the current bead and other programs and i do worry about the long term and what will happen in the longterm because of that and we want to make sure these are subsidies to build out and not reasons to make the fund grow even more because it is easy to see Networks Coming back in a few years and saying we need more money for this and it seems to be hard to say no to more money. So that is a problem. Somebody suggested that scc videos streaming platforms or other edge providers to help support broadband buildout or setting aside their authority and is it necessary or even a good idea . The current contribution mechanism is not going to work and the tax rate goes up. And the best option is for it to come from general revenues which is the way to spread across the largest tax base. Otherwise, i think we are getting into an antitrust style discussion of what this market looks like. That becomes really complicated. Mr. Spalter, how do you view the funding of this, the edge providers . Is a good idea . And if you set aside the authority of the fcc . I think the opportunity to expand the contribution base in a way that actually will reflect the modern connectivity landscape requires us to expand that is to include the big tech Internet Companies. We do know that the dominant internet big Tech Companies now have market capitalization in the axis of 9 trillion. If we want to have a universal service fund that is a fundamentally reformed and capable of doing its work, ensuring we can provide operational expenses to expand and upgrade and repair networks, it is time for those dominant companies to fairly and reasonably be part of the solution set. You are not at the table. There have been proposals to assess contributions paid for by broadband providers based on revenue generated from Broadband Services are based on the number of subscribers or connections provided, but what challenges do you see there and i will give you a chance to respond to that, dr. Wallsten. But what challenges are there . The inclusion of Broadband Services into the contribution base is important. But i dont think it is sufficient. We have seen modeling that suggests that effectually Broadband Services are included in the formula that establishes the contribution factor, we will be able to push that down but only temporarily and we need to actually go beyond that. I do appreciate your answer but i want to give mr. Wilson a chance to respond. The foundation of that mechanism doesnt make sense and we tax a service to provide a service. If we head down that road, the economics answer is the tax will have the smallest effect on consumer behavior. And it will have the smallest real effect on the economy. I wish we had more time to explore this and i would love to give you a minute so i will have to yield back. The gentlemans time has expired and votes have been called and i want to get a Ranking Member of the full committees questions and we will recess and go vote and come back so the gentleman from new jersey, the Ranking Member is recognized for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. We already talked about the harm of letting the acp run out of funding especially right now as the bipartisan infrastructure law is set to bring affordable internet unserved areas across the country. Let me ask, how are Internet Service providers factoring acp into their deployment planning decisions, and how does the uncertainty of the programs future affect that . The acp is an essential part of that plan and particularly in the context of bead where there are states requiring that access to that funding has to have a prerequisite of participation in the program. So those are tied together and an absence of clarity about the future of the acp, it will be enormously difficult for broadband providers small and large to plan successfully to make sure that their Investments Building networks will be able to be planned in a way that will reach the underserved and low income families that are in those areas. We love to bring her services to more people who want them and more communities and of course anywhere where it makes sense so when we look at these areas to deploy and oftentimes under our franchising authority we go into the Community Ready to serve the whole community and that means low income folks there and we certainly dont want anybody to go without services so it is something we take into account and we are working and for us it is better when we go into a new community. I have to say i am struck i the numbers we have heard today regarding the amount of money the country has spent over the last decade supporting internet infrastructure in rural areas but it seems to be that for too long we have supported good enough infrastructure that is kept these communities constantly behind the curve. I think that is an unfortunate use of Government Funds so let me ask, and i think this is what you referred to in your testimony is some thing is better than nothing projects. Can you tell us how Government Investment and future proof of internet infrastructure combined with a sustainable acp will help your area and local economies and role of economies and communities . I believe it is about not duplicating projects over and over and fiber is the most scalable and reliable future strategy we have so cost efficiency is lost when we have to keep coming to these hearings and reappropriating funding year after year to do technologies that only our band aid approaches to the solution. What would you like to see different . And what do you propose we do differently with existing programs or in the future . s the 25 three standard is already behind and the need for technology increases will keep going so put in a strategy that allows for that baseline to come in the play and the Fiber Network solves that solution. So rather than keep putting in 25 320 put in the Gigabit Solution now so we can spend it when the cost is the cheapest. My last questions about the universal service fund and there is an active conversation about the entities that should pay into the fund but i think its important to start with a vision of how it will continue to support universal connectivity into the United States in the future. So i will ask, what kinds of programs do you think are important for the universal service fund to support in the future, it is a question that goes to the heart of what we talk about when we talk about reform and i think the critical programs will be those that will sustain and focus on operational expenses that allow us to continue to optimize those investments that we are making in the networks via the cat investments so we can maintain those in areas where its not economic to do so so i think the high cost is critical and affordability will be huge part of the future of usf and current we lifeline, if it can be integrated with acp in the future framework will be the best shot and actually ensuring that those of families and households that simply cant afford broadband are able to do so. I do agree with the affordability programs and i would add to the list other Digital Equity tools such as devices and skills training and also Emergency Management services such as towers. Thank you. The time has expired and we are in the first votes of the first series today so what i would like to do is we will recess and good morning again. The vote, we think the two boats are over right now. But at this time i would like to recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania for five minutes for questions. Enqueue chairman and Ranking Members for conducting todays hearing on broadband in the future federal broadband programs. The government made an historic investment our nations broadband infrastructure with the recent b program. Rural pennsylvania specifically is a beneficiary with 1. 16 billion gault went to the state, to my district to help those previously unserved by broadband. Conductivity has become a necessity for my constituents, since their livelihoods and as our economy becomes dependent on strong, fast, internet connection. Telehealth, work, agriculture, and more. However, our work is just starting. We must ensure that the government is being that responsible steward of the hard earned taxpayer dollars, and is only promoting broadband programs that will help the american public. Mister 40 . The fcc is entering the third iteration of the broadband. These maps not only show where the services being provided, but also the level of service and Technology Utilized in a certain location. As we reevaluate, what funding is still needed to connect every american and what rules should the fcc maps to ensure limited overlap and waste between federal agencies. Yes, thank you for the question. We absolutely have everybody using the fccs map to make sure there is no overbuilding thats going on. If we have all of these programs work correctly, the resources are there to close the Digital Divide. If we go after the Technology Neutral manner and use all of our future proof technologies, all technologies are future proof, we would not deploy a connection that would not if we can do that and attack all of our unserved addresses, there is enough money to serve those areas and we can all use the same map and continue to make sure the areas on the map and theres no overbuilding this can be a goal that can be accomplished with the current funding that is out there. Mr. 40 , many Beer Companies participate in the affordable connectivity or acp. In fact, as of august first of this year, pennsylvania alone has over 660,000 enrollees however despite this large number of household, that of artery enrolled in the program, it is unclear whether acp enrollees had previously described broadband before this benefit. Does your company keep track of how many acp subscribers existed before the implementation of this program . Yes. So would go has about 11,000 with cocustomers in about 2000 of them are new. You feel that should be the industry standards that we recognize how much this additional funding is going to encourage and allow additional individuals to participate . We certainly dont want anybody to go without a connection and want to make sure that we can provide our services for free so certainly to those low income individuals we want to make sure they are still access connectivity so they can do the things that they need to do with it to find a job and educate their kids. I agree with that. To find a job, to find a job, to have the telehealth access they need and engagement from rural broad band as well. We all need this. Every constituent and our commitment to make sure that the funds are adequately there. But also make sure that they are not overlap and overspending to occur. I think each of the members for being present today, i think all of the witnesses for being here today to further this enrollment and further the Rural Broadband throughout pennsylvania and throughout and sylvania. You, mr. Chairman, i yield. Think you the chairman yields back the chart this time recognizes gentleman from ohios 12th district for five minutes for questioning. Take you, mr. Chairman, thank you all for being here today and everybody. My first question is, for mr. Forte, in your testimony you mentioned that Internet Service providers should be allowed to participate in federal broadband programs. Fiber remains one of the most reliable ways to connect americans to the highest available speed given geographic differences in the time it takes to buildout it may not be a viable for everywhere. In my district a local fix wireless company, ohio tt has worked with the individuals of somerset to connect residents the internet. This was the first time my constituents in somerset were able to connect to the internet in their homes. It took just 29 days from getting approval from the village to getting the first resident connected. Ohio tt now serves large portions of kinshasa county where internet has been very slow. We always get our constituents connected as quickly as possible. As speed bailouts can be taking years, we can get rural customers connected in munford im a fan of fiber but i have also seen firsthand how its hard to reach these communities in my district. They benefit from a x wireless and to the federal government. Mr. Forte understand that medco operate some of the fixed wireless networks. Can you explain the benefits of these networks and understood what circumstances you might choose to build a fixed wireless network, whether than a Fiber Network . I couldnt agree more. Again we want to use the best tools in the toolbox with what you said, during covid our folks hooked up thousands of customers for their Educational Needs in a few days. We only have six months or so where we can build and most of our service area because of the weather. Thats a great reason to use a fixed wireless, we have agriculture communities and very sparsely populated homes who may be eight or 10 miles away where we can, we and eight along nine mile driveway. I dont think its a situation where the government should be looking at fiber similarly there might be folks that have very expensive Vacation Home up the hill, talk about 200,000 a mile and another instances where fixed my wire is really the best choice. You hear a lot about instances of fiber, we totally use fiber throughout our network. But it isnt always the best tool in the toolbox because of all those challenges. You know, our fixed Wireless Technology it is future proof. All technology we deploy we would not Deploy Technology that isnt teacher proof. I myself am a wireless customer ive had it for 12 years ive had 27 odd connected devices on my small family farm. Three ipt tvs come i never had an issue at all with my connection. In fact if you ask my wife that you want to fiber the farm she would say no, we are not tearing up the yard. We want to keep her happy. My next question is for all witnesses. At i would like to move on to the rural Digital Opportunity fund, this is intended to be a twophase auction, a total of nine point 2 billion for broadband being out to across Rural America. For states receiving the funny, some are wondering if we should even move forward with phase 2. This is a question for any of the witnesses and can you tell me what you inc. Of it what you did right and what he did wrong and how we can improve future fcc funding programs including phase 2 if it happens. Gentlemen, my mother has taught me ladies first, please. Ms. Nichols . Thank you for the questions. In our area ties up a lot of the territory served into very long time frame. So my key complaint although we are seeing build off started to strategize is the funding could be implemented faster. So securing the areas in locking them up this emblematic. Thank you, doctor . The key problems with art off , with the eligibility rules, peep companies that werent allowed to do with a promised and the second was when the fcc changed its rules, about space execs, there was an argument of whether they should or should not of been created a real credibility problem. But, i think it is important to make sure that artoff and we dont overlap. Im going to skip you, mr. Sparta. I will reserve. Okay. Take you mr. Chairman, i yield back. Thank you gentlemen, your time has expired and am going to see another member coming to the door and another 30 seconds. Again to our witnesses i really appreciate your testimony today because this is a topic that we are very interested in, i know one of the numbers mr. Rancor if you would like 30 seconds, two if you like. Several years ago the number was about 1. 7 trillion invested by private industry out there to expand broadband. Today it is up to 2. 1 trillion. So the numbers going up. Anyone willing to make a comic . Thank you, mr. Chairman. As you all know, broadband is important and we have the funding and indeed were never going to get that at again. We really need to be smart about how we put this out and be intentional about it. I think we can look back and say there have been mistakes made but lets not make any mistakes this time. We understand what is critical here in the public is watching. And all these unserved areas, its incredible, i have a big urban presence, in the big cities of sacramento and two other larger cities, but i got a huge territory of smaller cities, actually towns and farms. And they are hungry. This is what they really want, and we have to be successful in those rural areas, so thank you. Take you purchasing that we have no other members present at this time, i asked to put in the record the documents included on this list without objection so ordered. I remind members that they have 10 Business Days to submit questions for the record and ask any witnesses whose respond to the questions probably. Membership should submit answers with the close of business by october fifth. And thank you to our witnesses for being here today. And we are adjourned. Thank you