[Senate Hearing 115-478]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 115-478
NOMINATION TO THE
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 19, 2017
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
35-161 PDF WASHINGTON : 2019
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).E-mail,
[email protected].
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi BILL NELSON, Florida, Ranking
ROY BLUNT, Missouri MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
TED CRUZ, Texas AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
JERRY MORAN, Kansas BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
DEAN HELLER, Nevada CORY BOOKER, New Jersey
JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma TOM UDALL, New Mexico
MIKE LEE, Utah GARY PETERS, Michigan
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
CORY GARDNER, Colorado MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
TODD YOUNG, Indiana CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
Nick Rossi, Staff Director
Adrian Arnakis, Deputy Staff Director
Jason Van Beek, General Counsel
Kim Lipsky, Democratic Staff Director
Chris Day, Democratic Deputy Staff Director
Renae Black, Senior Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on July 19, 2017.................................... 1
Statement of Senator Thune....................................... 1
Prepared statement........................................... 1
Statement of Senator Nelson...................................... 4
Letter dated July 17, 2017 to Hon. John Thune and Hon. Bill
Nelson from L. Earl Franks, Ed.D., CAE, Executive Director,
National Association of Elementary School Principals....... 86
Letter dated July 17, 2017 to Hon. John Thune and Hon. Bill
Nelson from Daniel A. Domenech, Executive Director, AASA... 87
Letter dated July 18, 2017 to Hon. John Thune and Hon. Bill
Nelson from Tom Armelino, Executive Director, National
Association of School Superintendents...................... 87
Letter to Hon. John Thune and Hon. Bill Nelson from Erika K.
Hoffman, Legislative Advocate, California School Boards
Association; and Adonai Mack, Director of Political Affairs
and Strategy, Association of California School
Administrators............................................. 88
Statement of Senator Moran....................................... 5
Statement of Senator Blumenthal.................................. 6
Statement of Senator Gardner..................................... 6
Statement of Senator Lee......................................... 51
Statement of Senator Markey...................................... 53
Statement of Senator Schatz...................................... 57
Statement of Senator Fischer..................................... 62
Statement of Senator Peters...................................... 64
Statement of Senator Cortez Masto................................ 66
Statement of Senator Booker...................................... 68
Statement of Senator Udall....................................... 70
Statement of Senator Wicker...................................... 72
Statement of Senator Cantwell.................................... 74
Statement of Senator Baldwin..................................... 75
Statement of Senator Hassan...................................... 77
Statement of Senator Klobuchar................................... 80
Statement of Senator Duckworth................................... 82
Press release dated December 18, 2014 from the Federal
Communications Commission.................................. 84
Tweet dated July 3, 2017 from Commissioner Clyburn........... 85
Witnesses
Hon. Pat Roberts, U.S. Senator from Kansas....................... 3
Hon. Ajit Pai, Nominee to be a Member, Federal Communications
Commission (Reappointment)..................................... 7
Prepared statement........................................... 9
Biographical information..................................... 12
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel, Nominee to be a Member, Federal
Communications Commission (Reappointment)...................... 27
Prepared statement........................................... 28
Biographical information..................................... 29
Brendan Carr, Nominee to be a Member, Federal Communications
Commission..................................................... 38
Prepared statement........................................... 39
Biographical information..................................... 41
Appendix
Letter dated July 21, 2017 to Hon. John Thune and Hon. Bill
Nelson from Miguel A. Gamino Jr., Chief Technology Officer,
City of New York............................................... 89
Letter dated August 1, 2017 to Hon. John Thune and Hon. Bill
Nelson from Thomas J. Gentzel, Executive Director and Chief
Executive Officer, National School Boards Association.......... 90
Letter dated September 29, 2017 to Hon. John Thune and Hon. Bill
Nelson from Mario H. Lopez, President, Hispanic Leadership Fund 90
Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Ajit Pai by:
Hon. John Thune.............................................. 91
Hon. Roger F. Wicker......................................... 91
Hon. Roy Blunt............................................... 92
Hon. Ted Cruz................................................ 93
Hon. Jerry Moran............................................. 94
Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................ 95
Hon. Dean Heller............................................. 96
Hon. Mike Lee................................................ 96
Hon. Ron Johnson............................................. 97
Hon. Bill Nelson............................................. 97
Hon. Maria Cantwell.......................................... 98
Hon. Amy Klobuchar........................................... 100
Hon. Richard Blumenthal...................................... 101
Hon. Brian Schatz............................................ 103
Hon. Edward Markey........................................... 104
Hon. Cory Booker............................................. 104
Hon. Tom Udall............................................... 105
Hon. Tammy Duckworth......................................... 106
Hon. Maggie Hassan........................................... 107
Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto.................................. 108
Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Jessica
Rosenworcel by:
Hon. John Thune.............................................. 109
Hon. Roy Blunt............................................... 110
Hon. Ted Cruz................................................ 111
Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................ 115
Hon. Deb Fischer............................................. 116
Hon. Ron Johnson............................................. 116
Hon. Amy Klobuchar........................................... 116
Hon. Cory Booker............................................. 117
Hon. Tom Udall............................................... 118
Hon. Maggie Hassan........................................... 119
Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto.................................. 119
Response to written questions submitted to Brendan Carr by:
Hon. John Thune.............................................. 121
Hon. Ted Cruz................................................ 121
Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................ 123
Hon. Mike Lee................................................ 124
Hon. Bill Nelson............................................. 125
Hon. Maria Cantwell.......................................... 127
Hon. Brian Schatz............................................ 127
Hon. Edward Markey........................................... 128
Hon. Cory Booker............................................. 128
Hon. Tom Udall............................................... 131
Hon. Maggie Hassan........................................... 131
Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto.................................. 132
NOMINATION TO THE
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
----------
WEDNESDAY, JULY 19, 2017
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in room
SD-G50, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. John Thune,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Thune [presiding], Nelson, Lee, Markey,
Moran, Schatz, Blumenthal, Gardner, Fischer, Peters, Cortez
Masto, Booker, Udall, Wicker, Cantwell, Baldwin, Hassan,
Klobuchar, and Duckworth.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA
The Chairman. This hearing will get underway. Welcome.
We've got an opportunity today to hear from some nominees to
the Federal Communications Commission, a critically important
agency with a very wide and critical jurisdiction in our
economy. So we're going to proceed right to that. Because we
have some time constraints that we have to deal with today, I'm
going to forego my opening statement and ask unanimous consent
that it be entered into the record, and we'll proceed directly
to some of the introductions that we are going to hear and then
hopefully to our panel.
I think Senator Nelson wants to make an opener, and we'll
do that right after we recognize Senator Roberts, the
distinguished senior Senator from Kansas, who is here, and he
is going to open things up for us this morning.
[The prepared statement of Senator Thune follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. John Thune, U.S. Senator from South Dakota
Today we welcome three well-qualified nominees to testify before
the Committee as we consider their nominations to serve as
commissioners at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). I'd also
like to welcome the families of the nominees who are here today.
While this is a confirmation hearing, given the issues we'll be
discussing and the extensive experience of the nominees, it will also
serve as this Committee's second FCC oversight hearing this year,
fulfilling a commitment I've made to hold regular, biannual oversight
hearings of the Commission.
It would be hard to imagine a group of nominees more well-versed in
the agency they've been nominated to lead.
Ajit Pai, who has been renominated to a second term by President
Trump, and was designated by the President to be the Chairman of the
FCC this past January, has served as a Commissioner since 2012, when he
was confirmed by voice vote in the Senate. Prior to becoming a
commissioner, Chairman Pai worked on telecommunications policy in both
the public and private sectors, notably serving here in the Senate as a
staffer on the Judiciary Committee, as well as in the general counsel's
office at the FCC.
Jessica Rosenworcel, who has also been renominated by President
Trump for a second term at the FCC, is well known to the Committee and
has nearly two decades of experience in communications policy. She
served as an FCC commissioner from May 2012 until January 2017, and
before that, served as a senior staffer on the Commerce Committee for
both Chairman Rockefeller and Chairman Inouye.
Brendan Carr, who is currently the FCC's General Counsel, has
worked at the Commission for a number of years, first in the office
that he now heads and more recently as lead advisor to then-
Commissioner Pai on wireless and public safety issues. He previously
worked in private practice for Wiley Rein in the firm's appellate,
litigation, and telecom practices.
In my view, the FCC will be in very good hands when all three of
these nominees are confirmed.
Since becoming Chairman, Mr. Pai has made much-needed reforms to
improve transparency at the FCC and to improve the agency's processes.
I am particularly heartened by Chairman Pai's efforts to treat fellow
commissioners fairly by instituting the process of sharing documents
with other commissioners before discussing them publicly, as well as
starting a pilot project to publicly release the text of all agenda
items in advance of Commission meetings. I frequently criticized the
previous Chairman's hyper-partisan leadership approach on these issues
because I believed it would lead to counter-productive outcomes over
the long term. Chairman Pai's new approach should lead to more long-
lasting and positive results at the FCC.
With respect to Internet regulations, I am pleased that Chairman
Pai has sought to hit the reset button on the 2015 Title II Order,
because, as I have previously said, the FCC should do what is necessary
to rebalance the agency's regulatory posture under current law. I
continue to believe, however, that the best way to provide long-term
protections for the Internet is for Congress to pass bipartisan
legislation. Two and a half years ago I put forward legislative
principles and a draft bill to begin the conversation, and I stand
ready and willing today to work toward finding a lasting legislative
solution that will resolve the dispute over net neutrality once and for
all.
Thankfully, the net neutrality debate has not distracted the FCC
from important work in other areas. For instance, the FCC's proposed
rulemaking on robocalls is a positive step in the right direction. The
government must do everything we can to protect consumers from those
who are truly the bad actors, which is one reason why this committee
has advanced Senator Nelson's anti-spoofing legislation. But we also
need to be sure the government's rules are not unfairly punishing
legitimate callers who are not acting maliciously. The FCC's Notice of
Inquiry will give that conversation a much-needed jumpstart.
Given the FCC's importance to the future of our economy and our
society, it is important for the Commission to seek opportunities for
common ground. As I noted last fall, the previous Chairman
unfortunately led the Commission with unprecedented partisan zeal. I
know that agreement is not always possible. Nevertheless, as a
corrective to the Commission's recent history, I urge you all to treat
each other fairly, to respect the law, to be willing to ask Congress
for guidance, and to seek consensus whenever and wherever possible.
Doing so will improve the agency's credibility and will result in
actions that are more likely to endure.
Before I close, I want to extend my thanks to Chairman Pai for
visiting my home state of South Dakota last month, as well as the
emphasis the agency has placed on bridging the digital divide for rural
states like mine where many are still without broadband service. The
actions the agency has taken to advance the long-delayed second phases
of both the Mobility Fund and the Connect America Fund will go a long
way to ensure millions of Americans living in rural states will have
access to an increasingly important service. I deeply appreciate it,
and I also want to take the opportunity to invite Ms. Rosenworcel and
Mr. Carr to visit South Dakota as well.
Thank you all for your willingness to serve the Nation in these
important positions, and thanks again to your families for supporting
your service. As I've indicated, I support all three of these nominees,
and look forward to confirming them quickly. With that, I now turn to
the distinguished ranking member for any remarks he would like to make.
The Chairman. Senator Roberts.
STATEMENT OF HON. PAT ROBERTS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM KANSAS
Senator Roberts. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
too, Ranking Member Nelson, my statemate and fellow Senator,
Senator Moran, and members of the Committee.
It is a great privilege for me to introduce a friend and
fellow Kansan, Ajit Pai, for his reappointment to the Federal
Communications Commission. It isn't often that I find myself on
this side of the dais, but I have to imagine, Ajit, that on
occasions such as this I must be calmer than you are.
[Laughter.]
Senator Roberts. That's sort of an inside story. My staff
wrote that. I have no idea what it means.
[Laughter.]
Senator Roberts. Anyway.
Senator Nelson. You look really nervous.
Senator Roberts. Yes. It's hard to believe more than five
years have already passed since Jerry and I introduced Ajit for
his first confirmation hearing to serve at the FCC. At that
hearing in 2011, I highlighted his impressive professional
background, both in government and the private sector, a
background that made clear he was a talented young man capable
of leadership at the highest levels.
But today, having served as Commissioner and now Chairman
at the FCC, Ajit's record of success speaks for itself. In his
time at the FCC, he has taken on dreaded robocalls, he has
increased transparency and accountability by releasing
Commission documents to the public prior to agency votes, he
has traveled the country highlighting challenges and
opportunities for rural consumers who currently lack sufficient
access to broadband. So more than anything, I want to thank him
for his dedicated work on behalf of consumers across the
country, and especially for Kansans.
Ajit, I want to thank you for joining me in Allen, Kansas,
last fall to highlight the importance of the work rural
providers are doing to connect families and small businesses in
rural communities to the broadband that is so vital to success
in today's economy.
As Chairman of the Agriculture Committee, I regularly hear
from farmers and ranchers who have come to rely on broadband to
run their operations and to connect to customers and markets
all around the world. And I take heart in the fact that those
constituents who feed the Nation and the world have a fearless
advocate at the helm of the FCC who understands the great
challenges that lie ahead in closing the digital divide between
rural and urban communities.
So to my colleagues on this Committee, I urge a swift
confirmation for my friend and proud Kansan, Ajit Pai.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Roberts.
And I always tell Senator Roberts when he talks, if you
could close your eyes and you can kind of hear Paul Harvey.
Doesn't he sound a little bit like Paul Harvey?
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Roberts.
I'm going to turn now to Senator Nelson for his opening
remarks, and then we will go to some other introductions of
some of our panelists today.
Senator Nelson.
STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And there seems to
be some passing interest in this subject matter today. It would
be impossible to get all these people into our little committee
room, so thank you all for being here. And it's because
everybody here understands that the Commission plays such a
vital role in protecting consumers and competition, and it's
incumbent upon us to review the qualifications to carry out the
role of Commissioners to this agency.
For Jessica Rosenworcel, it has been a long and winding
road, when in reality, she should already be well into her
second term on the agency. I want to thank you for your
patience, your perseverance, and your continued willingness to
serve the public. Your expertise, your good judgment, the
dedication to the public interest is noted and it is essential.
Mr. Carr, congratulations on your nomination. There you
are. It seems clear that you are well liked and well regarded
by the communications bar. And I enjoyed my meeting with you
yesterday. We have concerns about two consecutive terms, not
one term, but two consecutive terms, to which the Senate is
being asked to confirm you, and it would provide you with the
longest single initial period of service of any nominee to the
FCC. In addition, it's hard to recall a similar situation where
someone was nominated to serve at the Commission alongside
rather than to follow their current boss.
We must have Commissioners with an independent voice at
this critical independent regulatory agency and ones who will
fight for consumers and the public interest. And that's why I
will urge our colleagues to take a particularly hard look at
the question of two consecutive terms. It seems to me that the
wiser course would be to hold this hearing, consider the
gentleman's qualifications, and if he's confirmed, then see how
he does over the next couple of years before confirming him to
an additional term on top of the original one at this agency.
And finally let me welcome back Chairman Pai. You've been
busy since your last appearance. I want to give you due credit
for many of the actions the FCC took at the open meeting last
week. They included several solid pro-consumer actions aimed at
improving the lives of Americans.
Many view these most recent consumer protection actions,
however, as mere icing on what is an unwise, unpalatable cake,
a cake constructed out of actions that would eliminate
competitive protections that threaten dangerous industry
consolidation that make the Internet less free and less open
and that weaken critical consumer protections for those most
vulnerable.
Many of us cautioned you earlier in the year that we would
judge your success at the agency on your ability to put the
public interest ahead of certain special interests, and there
are a number of us that are concerned, are you heeding that
advice? And that advice was offered from my heart.
Ultimately, we need Commissioners who have consumers'
backs. We need Commissioners who are not afraid to use the
robust statutory authority Congress has given to the FCC to
protect consumers. And on behalf of those consumers, this
Committee is going to be overseeing and doing our duty, as the
oversight committee, and we will be doing that robustly.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Nelson.
And I'm going to ask if our three nominees would come
forward, and they are very well-qualified nominees, so Chairman
Pai, Mr. Carr, and Ms. Rosenworcel, as we consider the
nominations to serve as Commissioners at the Federal
Communications Commission. And I also want to, before we go any
further, welcome, I know there are a number of the families of
the nominees who are here today, and thank you for being here
and thank you for being a part of public service, which I know
comes in many cases with a great sacrifice on behalf of the
families.
I'm going to flip it now to our other Senator from Kansas,
a member of this Committee, Senator Moran, to introduce
Chairman Pai. And then following that, I'm going to recognize
Senator Blumenthal for 2 minutes to introduce Jessica
Rosenworcel. And then Senator Gardner is going to introduce
Brendan Carr. So we'll go in that order, Senator Moran,
Blumenthal, and Gardner. And then we will get to the remarks
from our nominees.
So, Senator Moran.
STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY MORAN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM KANSAS
Senator Moran. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Thank you to the
Ranking Member. I join my colleague from Kansas in welcoming
Ajit Pai and his family to the Commerce Committee of the U.S.
Senate. I consider Ajit a friend, which is a word that you have
to choose carefully around here so that it retains any meaning.
But I also consider Ajit one of the most intelligent and hard-
working, diligent public servants that I've ever met in my time
in Congress and as a citizen before elective office. And I've
seen him in Kansas and I've seen him in Washington, D.C. We
appreciate the fact that he remains a Kansan even when he's
surrounded by the temptations and influences of the Nation's
capital. So I consider him also a person of integrity, common
sense, and good judgment.
I had conversations with both Jessica Rosenworcel and Mr.
Carr in recent days. In both instances, I asked them to hold
Ajit accountable and to bring the FCC to a point in which it
was a significant amount of camaraderie and cooperation. And
the last time that Chairman Pai was in front of this Committee,
I indicated to the other Commissioners that if he failed to do
that, that I would call his mom and dad at home and ask them to
intervene. And I have no doubt that that will not be necessary.
We want an FCC Commission that works together that, even in
differences of views and policy perspectives, takes the higher
road that says we're going to find, when we can, common ground,
and we're going to work together with respect and dignity for
all Commissioners, something I think that this Committee would
appreciate particularly based upon past circumstances.
So I'm really here to just say, Ajit, thank you for your
public service. I look forward to your confirmation and believe
that you are totally worthy of the opportunity to serve
Americans in the capacity that the President has asked you to
serve. And I will ask my colleagues to join me in that
confirmation.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Moran.
Senator Blumenthal.
STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT
Senator Blumenthal. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman. I
couldn't be more delighted and proud to welcome Jessica
Rosenworcel here today along with her family, Emmett and Mark.
They come from a wonderful family in West Hartford, and she has
really served with extraordinary distinction and dedication,
not only at the FCC, but also with this Committee.
And I would be remiss in letting this moment pass without
paying tribute to two of the giants who have served on this
Committee, Senators Jay Rockefeller and Daniel Inouye, because
she worked with them as their counsel.
She has been a champion of issues so very important to
everyone on this Committee on a bipartisan basis: our schools,
our local emergency responders, everyday consumers. I've been
privileged to welcome her several times to Connecticut, where
she has championed the interests of victims of cramming and
also the homework gap, which the Hartford Courant recognized
just a few days ago in an editorial, a term that she coined.
She has been a tireless advocate of public safety, working
to update the FCC's 911 rules to keep communities safe and
protected. And she has been at the forefront of pushing the FCC
to creatively update our spectrum policy and unlicensed use.
I hope to continue to welcome her back to Connecticut on
issues like the pervasive scourge of robocalls, which she
visited Connecticut to highlight.
And I want to thank her and again to her family, in fact,
to all of the families who are here today, because I know that
your service is really worthy of recognition. You are the ones
who devote the time and effort to your spouses, your parents,
your loved ones.
And I look forward to Commissioner Rosenworcel's very
prompt confirmation. It is, as Ranking Member Nelson said,
overdue. And I look forward to working with all of the nominees
and congratulate you on your nominations.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal.
Senator Gardner.
STATEMENT OF HON. CORY GARDNER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And welcome, Ajit Pai, Jessica Rosenworcel, and Brendan
Carr to the Committee today. I have the great privilege and
honor of introducing Brendan to the Committee today. Before I
begin that, though, I would like to send a strong message to
Ajit, as I do to all Kansans, just remember it's our water.
[Laughter.]
Senator Gardner. And I am not from Virginia, but because
Brendan does not have a Virginian on the Committee, they
selected the next best thing, and that is Colorado, at least
part of it's in the Union today because of a Virginian, thanks
to the Louisiana Purchase. So welcome to the Committee today,
Brendan. It's an honor to have you here.
Brendan has dedicated his professional life to
telecommunications policy. After receiving his undergraduate
degree at Georgetown University, he continued his education in
telecommunications law at Catholic University here in
Washington, worked as a telecom attorney before joining
Chairman Pai's staff as his lead advisor on wireless public
safety and international issues. He now serves as the FCC's
General Counsel acting as the Chief Legal Advisor for the
Commission.
During his time at the FCC, Brendan twice had the
opportunity to visit the great state of Colorado. I was
fortunate enough to have him accompany me around the state on
one of those trips. We had the opportunity to visit startups in
Denver--of course, Colorado, a great startup state. And we met
with local broadcasters and rural broadband providers and
toured a 911 emergency call center. Throughout the tour, I was
impressed with his grasp of telecommunications policy across
the wide range of issues before the FCC, and I believe he would
make an outstanding Commissioner. And he is certainly committed
to the success of our urban corridors of this country, but
equally important, the rural corridors of our Nation as well.
It's my pleasure to introduce Brendan to the Committee. And
I look forward to hearing him discuss what he sees is his
potential role and opportunities ahead of him at the
Commission.
Thank you. And welcome to your family as well.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Gardner.
We've got a vote at 10:30, and I will inform members of the
Committee we're going to roll through that to try and keep the
process moving forward, and I would ask the nominees, if they
could, to confine their oral remarks as close to five minutes
as possible to give an optimum amount of time for members of
the Committee to ask questions.
So I'm going to start on my left and your right with
Chairman Pai, and then we'll recognize Jessica Rosenworcel and
Brendan Carr.
Mr. Chairman.
STATEMENT OF HON. AJIT PAI,
NOMINEE TO BE A MEMBER,
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (REAPPOINTMENT)
Chairman Pai. Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson,
members of the Committee, thank you for holding this hearing
today. It has been an honor to work with you on many issues.
With the Committee's indulgence, I would like to introduce my
family: my wife, Janine; our children, Alexander and Annabelle,
collectively ``the nuggets''; and my brother-in-law, Bob Van
Lancker and his fiancee, Rachel Vistica. I'm grateful to them
for their love and support.
I would especially like to thank my parents, Varadaraj and
Radha Pai, who traveled from Kansas to be here today. Forty-six
years ago, they left India with little more than $10 and a
transistor radio. Today, here they sit before distinguished
members of this august body, their son having been nominated by
the President of the United States to this important post. Only
in America.
I also would like to thank President Trump for nominating
me to serve another term at the FCC, and to Senator Roberts and
Senator Moran, for their longstanding support and their kind
introductions this morning.
Finally, I want to congratulate Jessica Rosenworcel and
Brendan Carr on their nominations. If confirmed, these talented
public servants each will serve with great distinction.
Over the past several years you have come to know me and
where I stand. Over the past several months, you have seen the
FCC's work, from closing the digital divide to combatting
illegal robocalls to making the agency more transparent. And
I'm sure we'll discuss some of that work today.
But I'd like to share some perspectives from outside the
Beltway. One of my favorite poems is Walt Whitman's ``Song of
the Open Road.'' In one passage, Whitman writes of the people
he has met: ``I carry them, men and women, I carry them with me
wherever I go, I swear it is impossible for me to get rid of
them, I am fill'd with them, and I will fill them in return.''
I can understand what Whitman meant, for I have had the
privilege of meeting countless people during my time at the
FCC, both in Washington and around the country. Those stories
stay with me; I carry them wherever I go. They fuel my passion
to help deliver digital opportunity to all Americans.
I carry with me Steve Pourier. During my visit to the
Rosebud Sioux Indian Reservation in Mission, South Dakota, he
told me about a woman who was found dead in her home clutching
her cell phone. She had dialed for help 38 times, but the call
never went through because there was no wireless coverage.
I carry with me Mike Roth, of Allen, Kansas. Mike runs a
feedlot called 2i Feeders that uses broadband-based
technologies to monitor every cow's unique intake in real time.
That way, he can assure particular top-end buyers that his beef
is of the highest quality.
I carry with me Priya Narasimhan, a Carnegie Mellon
professor. Several years ago, she founded YinzCam, a company
that creates apps for sports teams and venues and sets up
beacons that deliver highly localized information to fans. Its
clients now include many sports teams, including her beloved
Penguins. And her personal story is inspiring. Her family came
to America via India and Zambia, and she is a great role model
for Indian Americans and women in STEM fields.
I carry with me Dr. Shazam Hussain, of the Cleveland
Clinic's mobile stroke unit. A stroke patient's brain loses 2
million brain cells every minute. Dr. Hussain explained to me
how connectivity has allowed the unit to cut the average time
for stabilizing a patient by 38 minutes.
I carry with me Mike Bosch, Andy Newton, Travis Carter, and
Marc Hudson. Respectively, they help run competitive fiber
providers, RG Fiber in Kansas, Southern Light along the Gulf
Coast, U.S. Internet in Minnesota, and Rocket Fiber in Detroit.
I had seen for myself how they are building high-speed fiber
networks in small towns and big cities. And I've even strung
some fiber myself in the bayou outside Hammond, Louisiana, and
on a crowded city block in Minneapolis.
I carry with me Wayne Gilmore, who helps run my hometown
radio station, KLKC. Wayne and others are enabling a new
generation of Parsonians to make their own lifelong connections
with the station and the town.
I carry with me Alex Algard and the team at Hiya, a
Seattle-based company which helps consumers avoid unwanted
robocalls.
[Cell phone sounds.]
Chairman Pai. And speaking of----
[Laughter.]
Chairman Pai. I carry with me Florence Friedman of New York
City. Florence wrote to me calling robocalls ``the Wild West,
an area of lawlessness. . . . Hopefully, you will put this high
on your agenda. It really is disruptive to one's life.''
And last, but certainly not least, I carry with me my
coworkers at the FCC. They are the strongest assets this
agency, any agency, could have, and it is an honor to work
alongside them.
Senators, these are just a few of the people and just a few
of the stories that I carry with me every day. As Whitman put
it, I am filled with them. Should I be confirmed, I will do my
best to ensure that the FCC fills them in return by empowering
them to help Americans everywhere improve their lives through
connectivity and technology.
Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, thank you once again
for holding this hearing. I look forward to answering your
questions and to continuing to work with you and hopefully my
colleagues in the time to come.
[The prepared statement and biographical information of
Chairman Pai follow:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Ajit Pai, Chairman,
Federal Communications Commission
Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and Members of the
Committee, thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify today.
For over five years, it has been an honor to work with many of you on a
wide variety of issues. And should I be fortunate enough to be
confirmed, I look forward to continuing to do so in the years to come.
I would like to recognize members of my family in attendance: my
wife, Janine; our children, Alexander and Annabelle; and my brother-in-
law, Robert Van Lancker, and his fiancee, Rachel Vistica. I'm grateful
to all of them for their love and support. I would like to give a
special thank you to my parents, Varadaraj and Radha Pai, who have
travelled from Kansas to be with me today. Forty-six years ago, they
emigrated from India to the United States, bringing with them little
more than ten dollars and a transistor radio. Without their sacrifices,
I would not be where I am today.
I also would like to thank President Trump for nominating me to
serve another term at the Commission.
Finally, I want to congratulate Jessica Rosenworcel and Brendan
Carr for being nominated to be members of the Commission. Each has
served at the agency with great distinction for several years. If
confirmed, they will bring a wealth of communications expertise to our
labors.
Over the past several years, you have come to know me and where I
stand. Over the past several months, you have been able to see some of
the work the FCC has prioritized, from closing the digital divide to
making the agency more open and transparent, from combatting illegal
robocalls to modernizing the Commission's rules. I'm sure we will
discuss those efforts this morning.
But I'd like to share some perspectives from outside the Beltway.
One of my favorite poems is Walt Whitman's ``Song of the Open Road.''
In one passage, Whitman writes this of the people he has met: ``I carry
them, men and women, I carry them with me wherever I go, I swear it is
impossible for me to get rid of them, I am fill'd with them, and I will
fill them in return.''
I can understand what Whitman meant. For I've had the privilege of
meeting countless people during my time at the FCC, both in Washington
and around the country. Their stories stay with me. I carry them with
me wherever I go, likely more often than they know. And they fuel my
passion to help deliver digital opportunity to all Americans and
advance the public interest.
I carry with me Stephen Pourier. During my visit to the Rosebud
Sioux Indian Reservation in Mission, South Dakota, he told me about a
woman on his reservation who was found dead in her home, clutching her
cellphone. She had dialed for help 38 times--but never got a response
because there was no wireless coverage.
I carry with me Lisa Kleinhandler and Cris Young, two hardworking
women who run Hudson Fasteners, a family-owned company that goes back
to 1946 and is now based in Youngstown, Ohio. Up until the 1990s, it
sold things like nuts, bolts, and screws in a bricks-and-mortar store
and kept inventory on notecards. Today, Lisa and Cris have created an
online sales platform that, as they say, ``put[s] the FAST in
fasteners.''
I carry with me Eric Hott of Kirby, West Virginia. Eric runs a
chocolate business that is held back by the lack of broadband, which
makes it harder for Eric to keep in touch with customers who want to be
informed online.
I carry with me Mike Roth of 2i Feeders. Mike runs a feedlot in
Allen, Kansas that uses broadband-based technologies to monitor every
cow's unique intake at all times. That way, he can assure particular,
top-end buyers that his beef is of the highest quality.
I carry with me Chelsea Pickner, a talented fashion entrepreneur in
Sioux Falls, South Dakota. A few years ago, Chelsea had the foresight
to create an online presence for her company. Today, thanks to
broadband, she now sells her stylish wares to customers around the
country and abroad and is creating local jobs.
I carry with me Sanjit Biswas, an engineer who co-founded a Bay
Area startup called Samsara. Samsara deploys sophisticated sensors that
allow companies like Chobani and Cowgirl Creamery to monitor storage
and distribution temperature and humidity in real-time, to save drivers
from having to do paperwork, and to efficiently manage trucking fleets.
I carry with me Priya Narasimhan, a professor at Carnegie Mellon
University. Several years ago, inspired by her inability to see the
action at a Pittsburgh Penguins game, she founded YinzCam. The company
creates apps for sports teams and venues and sets up beacons that
deliver highly-localized information to fans. Its clients now include
many NFL, NBA, NCAA, and NHL teams--including her beloved Penguins. (It
was also gratifying to me as an Indian-American to hear her story; her
family came to America via India and Zambia, and she is a great role
model for Indian-Americans and women in STEM fields.)
I carry with me Gabe Hopper, who's working at a startup in Reno,
Nevada called Ustyme. Ustyme enables users to pick an online book,
video-call another user, and read the book interactively together--
something that appeals to me as a father of two young children.
I carry with me Dr. Shazam Hussain of the Cleveland Clinic's mobile
stroke unit. Dr. Hussain explained how a stroke patient's brain loses
two million brain cells every minute and how connectivity has allowed
the Clinic's stroke unit to cut the average time for assessment and
stabilization of a patient by an incredible 38 minutes.
I carry with me Dr. Rick Embrey, Chief Medical Officer at Augusta
Health in Fishersville, Virginia. Dr. Embrey and his team showed me how
emergency room doctors and nurses leverage connectivity and technology
to assess patients before they arrive, and how they've developed a
software tool for real-time patient monitoring that has cut mortality
rates from sepsis by 34 percent.
I carry with me Javier Pena, who was teaching an eighth grade class
at the San Fernando Institute for Applied Media in California. He asked
his students to research the term ``tessellation'' on their iPads
(using the school's Wi-Fi network), to describe what they saw, and then
outline why they thought Islamic art and architecture used tessellation
so extensively.
I carry with me the students and instructors at
Iḷisaġvik College in Barrow, Alaska. In addition to sharing
some muktuk (whale skin and blubber) with me, they shared how important
Internet access and technology was for them to be able to learn and to
preserve their Alaska Native heritage.
I carry with me Mike Bosch, Andy Newton, Travis Carter, and Marc
Hudson. Respectively, they help run competitive fiber providers RG
Fiber in Kansas, Southern Light along the Gulf Coast, U.S. Internet in
Minnesota, and Rocket Fiber in Detroit. I've seen for myself how they
are building high-speed fiber networks in places as small as Baldwin
City, Kansas and as large as the Motor City. And I've even had a chance
to get on a rig and string some fiber in the bayou outside Hammond,
Louisiana and on a densely-populated block in Minneapolis.
I carry with me Gwynne Shotwell, who is literally a rocket
scientist. At SpaceX, she and her team are pioneering commercial space
exploration, including sending communications satellites into space and
creating rockets that can be reused--a technical feat that was once
thought impossible, a massive cost saving, and a portent of broadband
innovation to come.
I carry with me Wayne Gilmore, who helps run KLKC 1540 AM and 93.5
FM. I grew up with this radio station, and can still hear former sports
announcer and DJ Steve Lardy's voice calling the 1987 5A high school
basketball championship game. Wayne and others are enabling a new
generation of Parsonians to make their own lifelong connections with
the station and town.
I carry with me Danny Thomas, the President and General Manager of
KOAM-TV in Joplin, Missouri. I grew up with this TV station, among
others, and came to value the work of dedicated journalists like Dowe
Quick. Danny ensures that the station reflects the best traditions of
broadcast localism, such as round-the-clock coverage and community
service when the deadly EF-5 tornado hit town in 2011. Oh, and Dowe is
still reporting the news!
I carry with me Pervis Parker, the general manager of WLOO, a
television station in Jackson, Mississippi owned by Tougaloo College, a
historically African-American college. Pervis told me that WLOO has
upgraded to HD, produces its own content, carries programming created
by and targeting African-Americans, and trains student-interns to
become the next generation of minority broadcasters.
I carry with me Pat Gottsch. A native of small-town Nebraska, Pat
created Rural Free Delivery Television, or RFD-TV--the country's first
and only 24-hour, rural-focused television network. I've been on RFD-
TV's set in Nashville, Tennessee, where reporter Janet Adkison kindly
allowed me to interrupt the day's commodities reports in order to
discuss my ideas for FCC-led rural development.
I carry with me Alex Algard and the team at Hiya, a Seattle-based
company which helps tens of millions of consumers avoid unwanted
robocalls and tracks the origin of these calls. And speaking of
robocalls, I carry with me Florence Friedman of New York City. She
wrote to me, calling robocalls ``the wild west, an area of lawlessness.
. . . Hopefully, you will put this high on your agenda. It really is
disruptive to one's life. . . . We deserve peace and quiet--and yes,
even security. Please do something!''
I carry with me Gallaudet University's Dr. Christian Vogler,
Director of the Technology Access Program, Research Associate Paula
Tucker, and Senior Research Engineer Norman Williams. They've done
amazing work on real-time text, which helps people with disabilities
communicate in a much more natural way using Internet Protocol-based
technology.
I carry with me Ed Owens and Robby Moore, the mayors of South
Boston, Virginia and Lobelville, Tennessee. Each explained how rural
Internet access was critical to linking small-town residents with
economic and educational opportunities.
I carry with me Captain Robert Johnson, a former officer at Lee
Correctional Institution in Bishopville, South Carolina. I had the
honor of meeting him at a forum hosted by then-Governor Nikki Haley. In
2010, a gunman kicked in the door of his home and shot him six times in
the stomach and chest. Why? Inmates were upset that Captain Johnson
repeatedly foiled their efforts to smuggle in contraband cellphones.
Ironically, they used one to order the hit on him.
I carry with me Hank Hunt. In 2013, Hank's daughter, Kari, and her
three children met her estranged husband in a Marshall, Texas hotel
room. Her husband immediately began stabbing her. Kari's nine-year-old
daughter, who had accompanied her, tried repeatedly to dial 911 from
the room's telephone, but the number didn't go through--because she
first had to dial ``9.'' Hank couldn't save Kari's life, but he made it
a mission to save others by pushing for direct access to 911.
Legislation supported in this Committee bears Kari's name. And the FCC
too has helped by urging hotels to update their systems to allow guests
to immediately reach emergency personnel.
I carry with me Denise Holcomb, the 911 Director of Clay County,
West Virginia. During major flooding just before my visit last summer,
she and her staff handled calls from desperate county residents--even
as floodwaters entered the call center itself. I could still see the
residue of mud and water on the walls. At the end of our visit, she
observed with a matter of fact tone that they simply did what they had
to do to help and gave me a hug.
I carry with me Mark Mew, Chief of the Anchorage Police Department.
He explained how communications helped his officers protect fellow
Alaskans and patrol more efficiently.
And last but certainly not least, I carry with me my co-workers at
the FCC. I love this agency. I've spent most of the last decade there.
That's largely because of its wonderful, hardworking staff. It is such
a privilege to work alongside and get to know them. And I'm so touched
by the messages they send me from time to time. Near my desk, I keep a
note from Debra Jordan, a talented staffer in our Public Safety and
Homeland Security Bureau. She wrote me, unsolicited, ``Chairman Pai,
your comments to the FCC staff shortly after your appointment as the
new Chairman reaffirmed your personal and professional respect for all
peoples . . . regardless of their backgrounds or status. Thank you for
keeping the FCC a respectful environment in which to work.''
These are just a few of the people, and just a few of the stories,
that I carry with me every day. As I work in my office, as Whitman put
it, ``it is impossible for me to get rid of them.'' Indeed, ``I am
fill'd with them.'' And should I be fortunate enough to be confirmed by
the Senate, I will do my best to ensure that the FCC ``fill[s] them in
return'' by empowering them to help Americans everywhere improve their
lives through communications and technology.
Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and Members of the
Committee, thank you once again for holding this hearing. I look
forward to answering your questions and working with you to promote the
public interest.
______
a. biographical information
1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): Ajit
Varadaraj Pai.
2. Position to which nominated: Member, Federal Communications
Commission*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ President Donald J. Trump designated me Chairman of the
Commission on January 23, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Date of Nomination: March 7, 2017.
4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):
Residence: Information not released to the public.
Office: 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20554.
5. Date and Place of Birth: January 10, 1973; Buffalo, New York.
6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your
spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including
stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).
Janine Van Lancker, Assistant Professor of Medicine, George
Washington University Medical Faculty Associates.
7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school
attended.
Harvard University, B.A. (1994)
University of Chicago, J.D. (1997)
8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all
management level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to
the position for which you are nominated.
Federal Communications Commission, Chairman (January 2017 to
present); Commissioner (May 2012-January 2017).
Jenner & Block LLP. Partner (April 2011-May 2012).
Federal Communications Commission, Office of General Counsel.
Special Advisor to the General Counsel (March 2010-April 2011);
Deputy General Counsel (December 2007-February 2010); Associate
General Counsel (July 2007-December 2007).
U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the
Constitution, Civil Rights, and Properly Rights. Chief Counsel
(February 2005-June 2007).
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Legal Policy. Senior
Counsel (May 2004-February 2005).
U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Administrative
Oversight and the Courts. Deputy Chief Counsel (March 2003-May
2004).
Verizon Communications Inc. Associate General Counsel (February
2001-March 2003).
U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division,
Telecommunications Task Force. Trial Attorney, Attorney
General's Honors Program (December 1998-February 2001).
Hon. Martin L.C. Feldman, U.S. District Court, Eastern District
of Louisiana. Law Clerk (September 1997-September 1998).
Kirkland & Ellis. Summer Associate (June 1997-September 1997).
Latham & Watkins. Summer Associate (June 1996-September 1996).
Lathrop & Norquist (now Lathrop & Gage LLP). Summer Associate
(August 1995-September 1995).
Hon. Kathryn H. Vratil, U.S. District Court, District of
Kansas. Summer Law Clerk (June 1995-July 1995).
The management-level jobs I have held include Chairman,
Commissioner, Deputy General Counsel, and Associate General
Counsel at the Federal Communications Commission; Partner at
Jenner & Block LLP; Chief Counsel at the U.S. Senate Judiciary
Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and
Property Rights; and Deputy Chief Counsel at the U.S. Senate
Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight
and the Courts.
The non-managerial jobs I have held which relate to the
position for which I have been nominated include Special
Advisor to the General Counsel at the Federal Communications
Commission; Senior Counsel at the U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Legal Policy; Associate General Counsel at Verizon
Communications Inc.; and Trial Attorney at the U.S. Department
of Justice, Antitrust Division, Telecommunications Task Force.
9. Attach a copy of your resume.
A copy of my resume is attached.
10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time
service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other
than those listed above, within the last ten years. None.
11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee,
partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any
corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise,
educational, or other institution within the last ten years.
Partner, Jenner & Block LLP (April 2011-May 2012).
Co-Trustee, Radha V. Pai Children's Trust (resigned August
2012).
Co-Trustee, Varadaraj S. Pai Children's Trust (resigned August
2012).
12. Please list each membership you have had during the past ten
years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable,
educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or
religious organization, private club, or other membership organization.
Include dates of membership and any positions you have held with any
organization. Please note whether any such club or organization
restricts membership on the basis of sex, race, color, religion,
national origin, age, or handicap.
Kansas Bar. Member during entire reporting period.
District of Columbia Bar. Member during entire reporting
period. Member, Nominations Committee (November 2010-November
2011).
Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies. Member
during entire reporting period; Member, Executive Committee,
Administrative Law Practice Group (January 2011-November 2011).
South Asian Bar Association--District of Columbia. Member
during entire reporting period.
Federal Communications Bar Association. Member (2008-09).
13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office
(elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any
campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are
personally liable for that debt. No.
14. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar
entity of $500 or more for the past ten years. Also list all offices
you have held with, and services rendered to, a state or national
political pm1y or election committee during the same period.
I contributed a total of $750 to the presidential campaign of Mitt
Romney in 2012. I have not contributed $500 or more to any other
individual, campaign organization, political party, political action
committee, or similar entity over the past ten years. 1 have not held
any offices with any state or national political party, political
action committee, or campaign committee during the same period. Between
November 6-8, 2006, I served as a volunteer for the Republican National
Committee in Montana.
15. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary
society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition
for outstanding service or achievements.
2016 Freedom of Speech Award from the Media Institute.
2015 Herbert Brownell Award from the Tech Elders.
2015 Sports Fan Coalition Most Valuable Policymaker (along with
all other Commissioners).
2015 Jerry B. Duvall Public Service Award from the Phoenix
Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public Policy Studies.
2011 Marshall Memorial Fellowship, awarded by the German
Marshall Fund of the United States.
16. Please list each book, article, column, or publication you have
authored, individually or with others. Also list any speeches that you
have given on topics relevant to the position for which you have been
nominated. Do not attach copies of these publications unless otherwise
instructed.
Publications
``Consumer Protection Month at the FCC,'' self-published on
Medium (June 22, 2017), available at https://medium.com/
@AjitPaiFCC/consumer-protection-month-at-the-fcc-1dea0007d9c6.
``How the U.S. can win the digital future,'' Manchester Union
Leader (June 21, 2017), available at http://
www.unionleader.com/Another-View-Ajit-Pai-Tech-Week-How-the-US-
can-win-the-digital-future-06222017.
``Heading Together Toward the Future,'' self-published on
Medium (June 2, 2017), available at https://medium.com/
@AjitPaiFCC/heading-together-toward-the-future-d0800a5e16da.
``Supporting Our Public Safety Heroes,'' self-published on
Medium (June 1, 2017), available at https://medium.com/
@AjitPaiFCC/supporting-our-public-safety-heroes-9f9d0b5946c3.
``But Wait, There's More,'' self-published on Mediwn (April 27,
2017), available at https://medium.com/@AjitPaiFCC/but-wait-
theres-more-d46d5c78719c.
``Why I'm trying to change how the FCC regulates the
Internet,'' Los Angeles Times (April 26, 2017), available at
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-pai-fcc-internet-
regulation-20170426-story.html.
``No, Republicans didn't just strip away your Internet privacy
rights,'' Washington Post (April 4, 2017), available at https:/
/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/no-republicans-didnt-just-
strip-away-yonr-internel-privacy-rights/20l7/04/04/73e6d500-
18ab-11e7-9887-1a5314b56a08_story.html.
``Infrastructure Month at the FCC,'' self-published on Medium
(March 30, 2017), available at https://medium.com/@AjitPaiFCC/
infrastructure-month-at-the-fcc-6d82a10f7033.
``FCC is voting to end robocalls, the `scourge of
civilization,' '' The Hill (March 23, 2017), available at
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/technology/325352-fcc-is-
voting-to-end-robocalls-the-scourge-of-civilization.
``On the Road in the Industrial Midwest,'' self-published on
Medium (March 20, 2017), available at https://medium.com/
@AjitPaiFCC/on-the-road-in-the-industrial-midwest-24e430ceedc3.
``Springing Forward for the Public Interest: The FCC's March
Agenda,'' self-published on Medium (March 2, 2017), available
at https://medium.com/@Ajit
PaiFCC/springing-forward-for-the-public-interest-the-fccs-
march-agenda-337b8e
f582bc.
``Setting the Record Straight on the Digital Divide,'' self-
published on Medium (February 7, 2017), available at https://
medium.com/@AjitPaiFCC/setting-the-record-straight-on-the-
digital-divide-615a9da1f2d1.
``Closing Digital Divides, Boosting Broadcasting, and Reducing
Regulatory Burdens,'' self-published on Medium (February 2,
2017), available at https://medium.com/@AjitPaiFCC/closing-
digital-divides-boosting-broadcasting-and-reducing-regulatory-
burdens-cf911ee5cfl6.
``Closing the digital divide elevates all entrepreneurs,''
Kansas City Business Journal (October 14, 2016), available
athttp://www.bizjournals.com/kansas
city/news/2016/10/14/guest-column-closing-the-digital-divide-
elevates.html.
``Bringing better, faster Internet access to Iowa,'' Des Moines
Register (October 10, 2016), available at http://
www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/2016/10/10/
bringing-better-faster-internet-access-iowa/91855742/.
With Senator Shelley Moore Capito, ``Bridge is a physical
reminder of the digital divide in West Virginia,'' Beckley
Register-Herald (August 2,2016), available at http://
www.register-herald.com/opinion/columns/bridge-is-a-physical-
remin
der-of-the-digital-divide-in/article_28f1052f-ffee-5fc4-8e1d-
c3473cc50c4e.html.
With Representative Kevin Yoder, ``Passing the Kelsey Smith Act
Will Help Law Enforcement Save Lives,'' The Hill (May 25,
2016), available at http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/
technology/280741-passing-the-kelsey-smith-act-will-help-law-
enforcement-save#.V0WfhN1fug0.
With Governor Nikki Haley, ``Cellphones are Too Dangerous for
Prison,'' USA Today (April 5, 2016), available athttp://
www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/05/nikki-haley-ajit-pai-
fcc-contraband-cellphones-prison-criminals-crime-bebind-bars-
fcc-colunm/82649738/.
``Teaching the Marvels of Music,'' self-published on Medium
(March 25, 2016), available at https://medium.com/@AjitPaiFCC/
teaching-the-marvels-of-music-e5e00a165515.
With Representative Anna Eshoo, ``The Feds Have to Act to Get
America Faster Wi-Fi,'' WIRED (February 7, 2016), available at
http://www.wired.com/2016/02/the-feds-have-to-act-to-get-
america-faster-wi-fi/.
With Senator Cory Gardner, ``Promoting a Digital Future,''
Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (September 11, 2015), available
at http://www.gjsentinel.com/opinion/articles/promoting-a-
digital-future.
``The Obamaphone Program--Fix It, Don't Expand It,'' National
Review (June 17, 2015), available at http://
www.nationalreview.com/article/419868/fcc-should-fix-not-
expand-broken-obamaphone-program-ajit-pai.
The FCC Shouldn't Enable More TCPA Lawsuits,'' The Daily Caller
(June 16, 2015), available at http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/
16/the-fcc-shouldnt-enable-more-tcpa-lawsuits/.
With FEC Commissioner Lee Goodman, ``Internet Freedom Works,''
Politico (February 23, 2015), available athttp://
www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/02/fcc-internet-
regulations-ajit-pai-115399.html.
With FTC Commissioner Josh Wright, ``The Internet Isn't Broken.
Obama Doesn't Need to `Fix' It.'', Chicago Tribune (February
18, 2015), available athttp://www.chicagotribune.com/news/
opinion/commentary/ct-internet-regulations-fcc-ftc-obama-
broadband-perspec-0219-20150218-story.html.
With Senator Kelly Ayotte, ``Ending Welfare for Telecom
Giants,'' The Wall Street Journal (February 4, 2015), available
at http://www.wsj.com/articles/kelly-ayotte-and-ajit-pai-
ending-welfare-for-telecom-giants-1423095287.
``The Government Wants to Study `Social Pollution' on
Twitter,'' Washington Post (October 18, 2014), available at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/truthy-project-is-
unworthy-of-tax-dollars/2014/10/17/a3274faa-531b-11e4-809b-
8cc0a295c773story<.html.
With Representative Billy Long, ``The Case in Defense of
JSAs,'' Broadcasting & Cable (September 22, 2014), available at
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/washington/case-defense-
jsas/134217.
``End the Sports Blackout Rule,'' Cincinnati Enquirer
(September 13, 2014), available at http://www.cincinnati.com/
story/opinion/contributors/2014/09/13/opinion-end-sports-
blackout-rule/15577783/.
With Senator John Thune, ``Taxman, Won't You Please Spare the
Internet?'', The Wall Street Journal (July 17, 2014), available
at http://online.wsj.com/articles/john-thune-and-ajit-pai-
taxman-wont-you please-spare-the-internet-14056
38273.
With Senator Jerry Moran, ``Rural Students Deserve 21'' Century
Education,'' The Wichita Eagle (July 4, 2014), available at
http://www.kansas.com/2014/07/04/3538621/jerry-moran-and-ajit-
pai rural.html.
``Protecting Free Speech from FCC Regulation,'' Red State (May
30, 2014), available at http://www.redstate.com/2014/05/30/
protecting-free-speech-fcc-regulation/.
With Representative Bob Latta, ``Switching Off an Outdated
Cable Rule,'' Washington Times (May 15, 2014), available at
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/15/latta-pai-
switching-off-an-outdated-cable-rule/.
``Giving Up the Internet: Still Risky,'' National Review (April
23, 2014), available at http://www.nationalreview.com/article/
376384/giving-internet-still-ris
ky-ajit-pai.
With Representative Adam Kinzinger, ``Train Kids Better for
Digital-Age Jobs,'' Chicago Sun-Times (March 23, 2014),
available at https://votesmart.org/public-statement/859299/
chicago-sun-times-train-kids-better-for-digital-age-jobs#.WM
G5_W_yuJA.
With Senator Ron Johnson, ``Reform Federal Program to Connect
Classrooms,'' Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (February 21, 2014),
available at http://www.json
line.com/news/opinion/reform-federal-program-to-connect-
classrooms-b9921072
0z1-246624071.html.
``The FCC Wades Into the Newsroom,'' The Wall Street Journal
(February 10, 2014), available at http://online.wsj.com/news/
articles/SB10001424052702304
680904579366903828260732.
With Senator Kelly Ayotte, ``Bringing the Rural Classroom into
the Digital Age,'' New Hampshire Union Leader (February 1,
2014), available at http://www.unionleader.com/article/
20140202/0PINION02/140209958.
``L.A., Let Uber's Cars Share the Road,'' Los Angeles Times
(July 9, 2012), available at http://articles.latimes.com/2013/
jul/09/opinion/la-oe-pai-uber-taxi-app
-20130709.
``Don't Treat Consumers Like Criminals,'' The New York Times
(June 5, 2013), available at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/06/
opinion/switching-wireless-carriers-shouldnt-be-a-
crime.html?_r=0.
``Why We Need to Move Ahead on IP,'' National Journal (April
24, 2013), available at http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/
why-we-need-to-move-ahead-on-ip-20130424.
``Robert McDowell: Champion of Liberty, Innovation, and
Competition,'' Red State (March 25, 2013), available at http://
www.redstate.com/diary/ajitpai/2013/03/25/robert-mcdowell-
champion-of-liberty-innovation-and-competition/.
``Too Much Government, Too Little Spectrum,'' Red Stale
(January 3, 2013), available at http://www.redstate.com/diary/
ajitpai/2013/01/03/too-much-government-too-little-spectrum/.
``Winning the IP Future,'' Red State (October 25, 2012),
available at http://www.redstate.com/diary/ajitpai/2012/10/25/
winning-the-ip-future/.
``Heading Back to Kansas,'' FCC Blog (September 4, 2012),
available at https://www.fcc.gov/news-events/blog/2012/09/04/
heading-back-kansas.
Article, ``Congress and the Constitution: The Legal Tender Act
of 1862,'' 77 Oregon Law Review 535 (1998).
Comment, ``Should a Grand Jury Subpoena Override a District
Court's Protective Order?'', 64 University of Chicago Law
Review 317 (1997).
Speeches
Remarks at ``Broadband for All'' Seminar, Stockholm, Sweden
(June 26, 2017), available at http://transition.fcc.gov/
Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db0
627/DOC-345512A1.pdf.
Remarks at the National Congress of American Indians Mid-Year
Conference, Uncasville, CT (June 14, 2017), available at http:/
/transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db0614/
DOC-345347A1.pdf.
Remarks at the M-Enabling Summit, Arlington, VA (June 13,
2017), available at http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/
Daily_Business/2017/db0613/DOC-345333A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Wyoming Association of Broadcasters Convention,
Casper, WY (June 10, 2017), available at http://
transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily
_Business/2017/db0612/DOC-345292A1.pdf.
Remarks at the United States Department of Justice Blue Alerts
Program, Washington, D.C. (May 19, 2017), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-344966A1.pdf.
Remarks at the American Enterprise Institute, ``The First 100
Days: Bringing the Benefits of the Digital Age to All
Americans,'' Washington, D.C. (May 5, 2017), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-344733
A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Newseum, ``The Future of Internet Freedom,''
Washington, D.C. (April 26, 2017), available at http://
transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_
Business/2017/db0427/DOC-344590A1.pdf.
Remarks at the National Association of Broadcasters Show, Las
Vegas, NV (April 25, 2017), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-344558A1.pdf.
Remarks at the First Meeting of the Federal Communications
Commission's Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee,
Washington, D.C. (April 21, 2017), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-344513A1.
pdf.
Remarks before the World Radiocommunication Conference 2019
Advisory Committee, Washington, D.C. (April 18, 2017),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-
344462A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Hudson Institute, ``The Importance of Economic
Analysis at the FCC,'' Washington, D.C. (April 5, 2017),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-
344248A1.pdf.
Remarks at the FirstNet Signing Ceremony, Washington, D.C.
(March 30, 2017), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-344171A1.
pdf.
Remarks at the U.S.-India Business Council, Washington, D.C.
(March 29, 2017), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-344124A1.
pdf.
Remarks at Carnegie Mellon University's Software Engineering
Institute, ``Bringing the Benefits of the Digital Age to All
Americans,'' Pittsburgh, PA (March 15, 2017), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-343903A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Mobile World Congress, Barcelona, Spain
(February 28, 2017), available at http://transition.fcc.gov/
Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db0228/DOC-343646A1.pdf.
Remarks at the North American Broadcasters Association's Future
of Radio and Audio Symposium, Washington, D.C. (February 16,
2017), available at http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/
Daily_Business/2017/db0216/DOC-343529Al.
pdf.
Remarks to the Staff of the Federal Communications Commission,
Washington, D.C. (January 24, 2017), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attach
match/DOC-343184A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Free State Foundation's 10th Anniversary Gala
Luncheon, Washington, D.C. (December 7, 2016), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs
_public/attachmatch/DOC-342497A1.pdf.
Remarks at CTIA Wireless Foundation Smart Cities Expo,
Washington, D.C. (November 2, 2016), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attach
match/DOC-342032Al.pdf.
Remarks at the Final Meeting of the Robocall Strike Force,
Washington, D.C. (October 26, 2016), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-341999A1.pdf.
Remarks on Receiving the Freedom of Speech Award at the Media
Institute's 2016 Awards Banquet, Washington, D.C. (October 19,
2016), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/
attachmatch/DOC-341825A1.pdf.
Remarks on the Need for a Digital Empowerment Agenda at Think
Big Partners, Kansas City, MO (October 11, 2016), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-341689Al.pdf.
Remarks at the 2016 Kansas Association of Broadcasters
Convention, Wichita, KS (October 10, 2016), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attach
match/DOC-341667A1.pdf.
Remarks at the 2016 Radio Show, Nashville, TN (September 22,
2016), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/
attachmatch/DOC-341393A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Competitive Carriers Association's 2016 Annual
Convention, Seattle, WA (September 21, 2016), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-341365A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Brandery, ``A Digital Empowerment Agenda,''
Cincinnati, OH (September 13, 2016), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attach
match/DOC-341210A1.pdf.
Remarks at the First Meeting of the Robocall Strike Force,
Washington, D.C. (August 19, 2016), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_ public/attachmatch/DOC-340872A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Corrections Technology Association's Annual
Conference [speech delivered via remote video] (May 16, 2016),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-
339388A1.pdf.
Opening Remarks at the NAB Show's Panel on ``Making It Back
Down the Mountain: Repacking Broadcasters Following a
Successful Incentive Auction,'' Las Vegas, NV (April 19, 2016),
available at http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily
_Releases/Daily_Business/2016/db0419/DOC-338939A1.pdf.
Remarks at Contraband Cellphone Field Hearing, Columbia, SC
(April 6, 2016), available at http://transition.fcc.gov/
Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2016/db0
406/DOC-338760A1.pdf.
Keynote Remarks at the Hispanic Radio Conference, Fort
Lauderdale, FL (March 23, 2016), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-338537A1.pdf.
Remarks before the Heritage Foundation, ``The FCC and Internet
Regulation: A First-Year Report Card,'' Washington, D.C.
(February 26, 2016), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-337930A1.pdf.
Remarks on Receiving the Inaugural Herbert Brownell Award at
the Tech Elders' First Annual Herbert Brownell Dinner,
Washington, D.C. (December 4, 2015), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-336719
A1.pdf.
Remarks at the PLI/FCBA 33rd Annual Institute on
Telecommunications Policy & Regulation, Washington, D.C.
(December 3, 2015), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-336693Al.pdf.
Remarks on Receiving the 2015 Jerry B. Duvall Public Service
Award at the Phoenix Center 2015 Annual U.S. Telecoms
Symposium, Washington, D.C. (December 1, 2015), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-336644A1.pdf.
Remarks at NTCA's Telecom Executive Policy Summit, Washington,
D.C. (November 16, 2015), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-336397Al.pdf.
Remarks at the Bill of Rights Institute's Kansas Public Lecture
``A Free Market, If You Can Keep It: The Need For Online
Innovation, Not Regulation.'' Wichita, KS (November 13, 2015),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-
336380A1.pdf.
Remarks to the National Association of Farm Broadcasting
Convention, Kansas City, MO (November 13, 2015), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-336386A1.pdf.
Remarks at 4G Americas' Technology Symposium: ``The Future of
Mobile Broadband in the Americas: LTE to 5G Network
Innovation,'' Washington, D.C. (November 5, 2015), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attach
match/DOC-336219A1.pdf.
Remarks lo the Policy Roundtable of the 2015 Convention of the
Cable and Satellite Broadcasting Association of Asia, Hong
Kong, China (October 26, 2015), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-336043A1
.pdf.
Remarks to the National Religious Broadcasters' President's
Council, Washington, D.C. (October 14, 2015), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-335778A1.pdf.
Remarks at the American Enterprise Institute's Roundtable
Discussion on Decline in Investment Following the FCC's Title
II Order, Washington, D.C. (September 9, 2015), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-335190A1.pdf.
Remarks before the Churchill Club, Palo Alto, CA (August 18,
2015), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/
attachmatch/DOC-334437A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Nebraska Public Service Commission's Public
Workshop on Accessing 911 Service From Multi-Line Telephone
Systems, Lincoln, NE (June 30, 2015), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-334168
A1.pdf.
Remarks at the International Institute of Communications
Telecommunications and Media Forum, Miami, FL (June 24, 2015),
available at https://apps.fcc
.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-333677A1.pdf.
Remarks at the International Institute of Communications Forum,
London, United Kingdom (April 27, 2015), available athttps://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs
_public/attachmatch/DOC-333190A1.pdf.
Remarks at the National Association of Broadcasters Show, Las
Vegas, NV (April l4, 2015), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-332987A1.pdf.
Remarks at the 12th Annual NG9-1-1 Honor Awards Gala to
Celebrate Heroes and Leaders in 9-1-1, Washington, D.C.
(February 25, 2015), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-332231A1.pdf.
Keynote Address at the North American Broadcasters
Association's Symposium on the Future of Radio & Audio,
Toronto, Canada (February 19, 2015), available athttps://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-332124A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Marshall, Texas Police Department, ``On
Connecting Americans to Emergency Personnel Whenever They Dial
911,'' Marshall, TC (January 28, 2015), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-33166
3A1.pdf.
Keynote Address at the Friends & Benefactors Awards Banquet of
the Media Institute, Washington, D.C. (November 19, 2014),
available at https://apps.fcc
.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-330571A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Free State Foundation's Policy Seminar,
Washington, D.C. (November 14, 2014), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-330483A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Greater Dallas Asian American Chamber of
Commerce Awards Gala, Dallas, TX (October 22, 2014), available
at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs
_public/attachmatch/DOC-330088A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Texas Forum on Internet Regulation, Texas A&M
University, Bush School of Government & Public Service, College
Station, TX (October 21, 2014), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-33004
8A1.pdf.
Remarks at WISPAPALOOZA, Las Vegas, NV (October 16, 2014),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-
329969A1.pdf.
Remarks. at IX Taller lnternacional de Regulacion: ``Tendencias
Y Retos Del Sector TIC,'' Cartagena De Indias, Colombia
(September 2, 2014), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-329ll2A1.pdf.
Opening Remarks at Ohio Association of Broadcasters' AM Radio
Town Hall, Columbus, OH (August 13, 2014), available at https:/
/apps.fcc.gov/edocs
_public/attachmatch/DOC-328834A1.pdf.
Remarks on Sports Blackout Rule, Buffalo, NY (August 12, 2014),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-
328807A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Citizens Against Government Waste Policy
Breakfast, Washington, D.C. (July 28, 2014), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-328469A1.pdf.
Remarks before the Internet Innovation Alliance, ``The IP
Transition: Great Expectations or Bleak House?'', Washington,
D.C. (July 24, 2014), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-328418A1.pdf.
Remarks on ``Reforming Communications Policy in the Digital
Age: A View from the FCC,'' Washington, D.C. (June 25, 2014),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-
327841A1.pdf.
Remarks before the Federal Communications Bar Association,
Washington, D.C. (June 18, 2014), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-327725A1.pdf.
Remarks at PCIA's 2014 Wireless Infrastructure Show, Orlando,
FL (May 20, 2014), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_publiclattachmatch/DOC-327172
A1.pdf.
Remarks at the FCC's E-Rate Modernization Workshop, Washington,
D.C. (May 6, 2014), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-326945A1.pdf.
Remarks before the Pennsylvania Association of Broadcasters,
Hershey, PA (May 5, 2014), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-326912A1.pdf.
Opening Remarks at the Mobile Future Forum, ``Designing for
Auction Success: Lessons Learned from Around the World,''
Washington, D.C. (April 24, 2014), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-326731A1
.pdf.
Remarks before the University of Pennsylvania Law School South
Asian Law Students Association, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
(April 17, 2014), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-326624A1.pdf.
Remarks before the 2014 Spring Meeting of WTA--Advocates for
Rural Broadband, Las Vegas, NV (April 9, 2014), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-326517A1.pdf.
Remarks at the 9-1-1 Goes to Washington Conference, Arlington,
VA (March 24, 2014), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-326214A1.pdf.
Keynote Address at FICCI Frames 2014, Mumbai, India (March 13,
2014), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/
attachmatch/DOC-326016A1
.pdf.
Remarks at the Emerging Technology Forum of APCO International,
``Public Safety Communications in the Digital Age,'' Orlando,
FL (February 27, 2014), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-325815A1
.pdf.
Remarks Introducing the Panel on MultiLine 911 Issues of the
Congressional NextGen 9-1-1 Caucus, Washington, D.C. (February
7, 2014), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/
attachmatch/DOC-325522A1.pdf.
Remarks at TechFreedom's Forum on the 100th Anniversary of the
Kingsbury Commitment, Washington, D.C. (December 19, 2013),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-
324810A1.pdf.
Remarks before the Communications and Technology Task Force of
the American Legislative Exchange Council, ``Promoting
Investment and Competition in the Several States,'' Washington,
D.C. (December 6, 2013), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-324573A1.pdf.
Remarks to the Board of Directors of the National Religious
Broadcasters, National Harbor, MD (October 21, 2013), available
at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-
323598A1.pdf.
Remarks before the National Association of Broadcasters' Radio
Show Luncheon, Orlando, FL [speech delivered via remote video]
(September 20, 2013), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-323398A1
.pdf.
Keynote Address at the LGBT Technology Partnership's Inaugural
Policy Forum, Washington, D.C. (September 12, 2013), available
at https://apps.fcc
.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-323255A1.pdf.
Remarks at Smith Micro Software/Pittsburgh Technology Council,
``Looking Back and Looking Ahead: The FCC and the Path to the
Digital Economy,'' Pittsburgh, PA (July 25, 2013), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-322384A1.pdf.
Remarks before the Pittsburgh Radio Broadcasters' Roundtable,
Pittsburgh, PA (July 24, 2013), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-322371A1.pdf.
Remarks at American Enterprise Institute, ``On Connecting the
American Classroom: A Student-Centered E-Rate Program,''
Washington, D.C. (July 16, 2013), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-322201A1
.pdf.
Remarks at the Cellphone Unlocking Forum, Hosted by TechFreedom
and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Washington, D.C.
(June 17, 2013), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-321641A1.pdf.
Opening Remarks at CTIA 2013's Panel on the Spectrum Incentive
Auction, ``Step Right Up!'', Las Vegas, NV (May 23, 2013),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-
321172A1.pdf.
Remarks at the NTCA 2013 Legislative and Policy Conference,
Arlington, VA (April 22, 2013), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-32033SA1.pdf.
Opening Remarks at the NAB Show's AM Band Revitalization Panel,
Las Vegas, NV (April 8, 2013), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_publie/attachmatch/DOC-320038A1.pdf.
Opening Remarks at First Technology Transitions Policy Task
Force Workshop, Washington, D.C. (March 18, 2013), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-319565A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Hudson Institute, ``Two Paths to the Internet
Protocol Transition,'' Washington, D.C. (March 7, 2013),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-
319334A1.pdf.
Remarks before the Federal Communications Bar Association,
Washington, D.C. (February 21, 2013), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attach
match/DOC-319045A1.pdf.
Remarks at the Media Institute Luncheon, ``The Video
Marketplace and the Internet Transformation,'' Washington, D.C.
(February 7, 2013), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-318814A1.pdf.
Opening Remarks before the Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal &
Economic Public Policy Studies. 2012 Annual U.S. Telecoms
Symposium, Washington, D.C. (December 6, 2012), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attach
match/DOC-317766A1.pdf.
Opening Remarks before the Internet Transformation Panel of the
Communications Liberty and Innovation Project, Washington, D.C.
(October 16, 2012), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-316824A1
.pdf.
Remarks at CTIA's MobileCon, San Diego, CA (October 10, 2012),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-
316746A1.pdf.
Remarks before the National Association of Broadcasters' Radio
Show, Dallas, TX (September 19, 2012), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-316374A1.pdf.
Opening Remarks at the Telecommunications & E-Commerce
Committee Roundtable of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce,
Washington, D.C. (September 14, 2012), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-316277
A1.pdf.
Remarks at Carnegie Mellon University, ``Unlocking Investment
and Innovation in the Digital Age: The Path to a 21st-Centuty
FCC,'' Pittsburgh, PA (July 18, 2012), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-315268
A1.pdf.
17. Please identify each instance in which you have testified
orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
governmental capacity and specify the date and subject matter of each
testimony.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Financial Services and
General Government of the United States Senate Committee on
Appropriations (June 20, 2017), available at http://
transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db0
620/DOC-345438A1.pdf. Subject matter: the Federal
Communications Commission's FY 2018 Budget.
Testimony before the United States Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation (March 8, 2017),
available at http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/
Daily_Business/2017/db0308/DOC-343814A1.pdf. Subject matter:
oversight of the Federal Communications Commission.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Communications and
Technology of the United States House of Representatives
Committee on Energy and Commerce (July 12, 2016), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-340304A1.pdf.
Subject matter: oversight of the Federal Communications
Commission.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and
the Law of the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
(May 11, 2016), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/
attachmatch/DOC-339331A1.pdf. Subject matter: privacy.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Financial Services and
General Government of the United States Senate Committee on
Appropriations (April 5, 2016), available at http://
transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2016/db0
415/DOC-338886A1.pdf. Subject matter: the Federal
Communications Commission's FY 2017 Budget.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Communications and
Technology of the United States House of Representatives
Committee on Energy and Commerce (March 22, 2016), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-338511A1.pdf.
Subject matter: oversight of the Federal Communications
Commission.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Financial Services and
General Government of the United States House of
Representatives Committee on Appropriations (March 15, 2016),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attach
match/DOC-338312A1.pdf. Subject matter: the Federal
Communications Commission's FY 2017 Budget.
Testimony before the United States Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation (March 2, 2016),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs
_pub1ic/attachmatch/DOC-338045A1.pdf. Subject matter: oversight
of the Federal Communications Commission.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Communications and
Technology of the United States House of Representatives
Committee on Energy and Commerce (November 17, 2015), available
at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attach
match/DOC-336418A1.pdf. Subject matter: oversight of the
Federal Communications Commission.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Communications and
Technology of the United States House of Representatives
Committee on Energy and Commerce (July 28, 2015), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-334607A1.pdf.
Subject matter: oversight of the Federal Communications
Commission.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Financial Services and
General Government of the United States Senate Committee on
Appropriations (May 12, 2015), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-333437A1.
pdf. Subject matter: the Federal Communications Commission's FY
2016 budget.
Testimony before the United States House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary (March 25, 2015), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-332696A1.pdf.
Subject matter: Internet regulation, antitrust, and the
respective roles of the Federal Communications Commission and
Federal Trade Commission.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Financial Services and
General Government of the United States House of
Representatives Committee on Appropriations (March 24, 2015),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attach
match/DOC-332675A1.pdf. Subject matter: the Federal
Communications Commission's FY 2016 budget.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Communications and
Technology of the United States House of Representatives
Committee on Energy and Commerce (March 19, 2015), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-332638A1.pdf.
Subject matter: oversight of the Federal Communications
Commission.
Testimony before the United States Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation (March 18, 2015),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs
_public/attachmatch/DOC-332637A1.pdf. Subject matter: oversight
of the Federal Communications Commission.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Financial Services and
General Government of the United States Senate Committee on
Appropriations (March 27, 2014), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-326288
A1.pdf. Subject matter: the Federal Communications Commission's
FY 2015 budget.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Financial Services and
General Government of the United States House of
Representatives Committee on Appropriations (March 25, 2014),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attach
match/DOC-326249A1.pdf. Subject matter: the Federal
Communications Commission's FY 2015 budget.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Financial Services and
General Government of the United States Senate Committee on
Appropriations (September 11, 2013), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-32323
7A1.pdf. Subject matter: oversight of the Federal
Communications Commission.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Communications and
Technology of the United States House of Representatives
Committee on Energy and Commerce (March 12, 2013), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_pub1ic/attachmatch/DOC-324640A1.pdf.
Subject matter: oversight of the Federal Communications
Commission.
Testimony before the United States Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation (March 12, 2013),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-
319469A1.pdf. Subject matter: oversight of the Federal
Communications Commission.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Communications and
Technology of the United States House of Representatives
Committee on Energy and Commerce (December 12, 2012), available
at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attach
match/DOC-317900A1.pdf. Subject matter: oversight of the
Federal Communications Commission's implementation of the
Spectrum Act of 2012.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Communications and
Technology of the United States House of Representatives
Committee on Energy and Commerce (July 10, 2012), available at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-315058A1.pdf.
Subject matter: oversight of the Federal Communications
Commission.
Testimony before the United States Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation (May 16, 2012), available
at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs
_public/attachmatch/DOC-314115A1.pdf. Subject matter: oversight
of the Federal Communications Commission.
18. Given the current mission, major programs, and major
operational objectives of the department/agency to which you have been
nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you
believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for
which you have been nominated, and why do you wish to serve in that
position?
I have had the privilege of serving as the Chairman and, prior to
that, a Commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission for over
five years. During that time, I have had the oppot1unity to study and
vote on numerous FCC decisions in a wide variety of areas, such as
broadcast, cable, public safety, satellite, wireless, and wireline. In
addition, I have traveled to many pat1s of the United States, from
south Florida to above the Arctic Circle, in order to learn how
Americans benefit from, or could benefit from, communications services.
I believe that experiences such as these serve as my principal
qualifications for continuing to serve at the Commission going forward.
19. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if continued, to
ensure that the department/agency has proper management and accounting
controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large
organization?
The Chairman of the FCC is the agency's chief executive officer. I
believe that the Chairman has a responsibility to ensure the proper
management of the agency. This includes working with the highly capable
FCC staff on management and accounting issues; testifying before
Congress on the FCC's budget request for any given fiscal year; and
otherwise promoting the proper stewardship of the agency, consistent
with all applicable laws and regulations governing the agency's
operations.
Other than my service as Chairman and Commissioner at the agency,
my management experience lies primarily in helping to lead the offices
I served in as Deputy General Counsel in the FCC's Office of General
Counsel between 2007 and 2010 and as Chief Counsel on the Senate
Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights,
and Property Rights between 2005 and 2007. In these roles, I was
responsible for substantive decision-making as well as internal matters
like personnel.
20. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the
department/agency, and why I believe the top three challenges facing
the Federal Communications Commission are as follows:
(1) Promoting broadband deployment. The Internet is increasingly
critical in the daily lives of Americans from all walks of
life. The Commission has an important role to play in ensuring
that consumers who want high-speed access to the Internet can
get it, wherever or whoever they are. I have outlined a
proactive agenda along these lines to enable all Americans to
be participants in, rather than spectators of, the digital
economy.
(2) Defending the public interest Across all sectors under the FCC's
jurisdiction, I believe the agency should focus on promoting
the interests of consumer welfare, competition, and innovation.
There is much the Commission can and should do to promote these
interests, such as making sure that public safety
communications systems are robust, helping advance technology
accessibility to those with disabilities, and maximizing the
incentives for private sector companies to invest and innovate
for the benefit of American consumers.
(3) Increasing openness and transparency. Even though the Commission
plays a significant role in a major sector of the economy,
many--from members of Congress to the American public--can find
it difficult to learn about the agency's operations and
decision-making. The Commission should strive to promote
openness and transparency. This would be in keeping with the
spirit of the digital age and would give Americans greater
confidence in the agency's operations and decisions. This is
why, for instance, I introduced an initiative during my second
week in office as Chairman to disclose the text of ce1iain
items that would be voted at an upcoming meeting. This simple
but significant measure has allowed anyone, anywhere to see
what the Commission is considering doing before the agency
formally votes.
b. potential conflicts of interest
1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation
agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates,
clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement
accounts.
During my employment at Verizon Communications Inc., I contributed
to a 401(k) plan (with a proportionate matching amount contributed by
the company). That plan, over which I still have control, is managed by
Fidelity Investments, and all funds are invested in diversified index
funds. Neither the company nor I continue to make contributions to this
plan.
During my employment at Jenner & Block LLP, I participated in the
Firm's Profit Sharing Plan (401(k)), which was and is managed by
Fidelity Investments. All funds are invested in a diversified index
fund. I do not have any other financial arrangements with the Firm.
Neither the firm nor I continue to make contributions to this plan.
2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal,
to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business,
association or other organization during your appointment? If so,
please explain. No.
3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in
the position to which you have been nominated. None.
4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial
transaction which you have bad during the last ten years, whether for
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the
position to which you have been nominated.
During my time at Jenner & Block LLP between April 25, 2011 and May
6, 2012, I did a limited amount of work for a few clients. Out of an
abundance of caution, the complete list of those clients is as follows:
AOL, Inc.; Cablevision Systems Corp.; Cerberus Capital Management,
L.P.; Charter Communications, Inc.; General Dynamics Corp., C4 Systems;
Guggenheim Partners, LLC; The Nielsen Company; and Securus
Technologies, Inc. During that time: (1) I did not appear before the
Federal Communications Commission, Executive Branch agencies, Congress,
or any court in connection with my work for these clients; (2) my name
did not appear on any comments, briefs, or any other written work
submitted on their behalf; and (3) to preclude conflicts, my firm
established a screen as appropriate to prevent my colleagues from
discussing specific matters with me.
5. Describe any activity during the past ten years in which you
have been engaged for the purpose of directly or indirectly influencing
the passage, defeat, or modification of any legislation or affecting
the administration and execution of law or public policy.
During my time at the Federal Communications Commission, I
and/or my staff have been asked on occasion to review
legislative proposals. I also have issued a number of official
statements supportive of the passage of particular bills. See,
for example, Chairman Pai Statement on Bipartisan Support for
the Gigabit Opportunity Act, available at http://
transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_
Business/2017/db0621/DOC-345457Al.pdf; Statement of FCC
Commissioner Ajit Pai on House Passage of the FCC Process
Reform Act of 20l3, available at https://apps.fcc.gov/
edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-326018A1.pdf. Recently, I co-
authored an op-ed with a Congressman urging passage of a public
safety measure. See ``Passing the Kelsey Smith Act Will Help
Law Enforcement Save Lives,'' The Hill (May 25, 2016),
available at http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/technology/
280741-passing-the-kelsey-smith-act-will-help-law-enforcement-
save#.V0WfhNlfug0 (co-authored with Representative Kevin
Yoder''). Finally, I have testified many times before Congress;
often, I have noted favorable consideration of bills and/or
supported enactment of those bills. See, for example, Testimony
before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation at 1-2 (March 2, 2016), available at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-338045A1.pdf (Kari's
Law Act of 2016).
During my initial service at the Federal Communications
Commission, in the Office of General Counsel (between 2007 and
2011), I was asked very occasionally to review proposed
legislation. I was not asked to recommend the passage, defeat,
or modification of such proposals so much as to explain their
likely effects.
My employment at the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee during
2003 and 2004 and again between 2005 and 2007 required frequent
involvement in the legislative process on issues as varied as
compensation for asbestos-related injuries and immigration
reform. I also staffed the Senators for whom I worked at
oversight hearings of Executive Branch agencies, such as the
U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of
Investigation.
6. Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest,
including any that may be disclosed by your responses to the above
items.
Should I be fortunate enough to be confirmed to another term at the
Federal Communications Commission, I would continue to resolve
potential conflicts of interest by (1) identifying the proceeding(s) to
which the potential conflicts pertain and gathering all relevant facts;
(2) discussing the nature of the potential conflicts with and seeking
guidance from the Designated Agency Ethics Official and other attorneys
responsible for ethics issues in the Office of General Counsel; and (3)
taking the appropriate action to ensure compliance with applicable
ethics laws and regulations, as set forth by Congress, the agency, and
the bar, respectively.
c. legal matters
1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics,
professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a
complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special
Counsel, professional association, disciplinary committee, or other
professional group? If yes:
a. Provide the name of agency, association, committee, or group;
b. Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
personnel action was issued or initiated;
c. Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
personnel action;
d. Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action,
complaint, or personnel action.
No.
2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by
any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal,
State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain. No.
3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were
an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency
proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please
explain. No.
4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain. No.
5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual
harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or
any other basis? If so, please explain. No.
6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information,
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in
connection with your nomination.
I am a member of the Kansas and District of Columbia bars, admitted
on October 13, 1998 and December 3, 2001, respectively. In the late
summer of 2003, after I became a staffer for Senator Jeff Sessions on
the Senate Judiciary Committee, I received a notice (possibly a second
notice) from the Kansas Bar informing me that my bar dues had not been
paid. Thereafter, I sent the Kansas Bar a check for the requisite
amount. Unfortunately, the check arrived several days after the
deadline for payment had passed (per a notation made by the Kansas Bar
on the letter that I had sent and that was returned), and on October 6,
2003, my Kansas license was suspended. Similarly, my District of
Columbia license was suspended for nonpayment of dues, effective
September 30, 2003. After this time, I recall having a conversation
with Senate Ethics staff in which I described these circumstances and
was told that Senate staffers doing policy work exclusively were not
required to maintain an active bar license. I also was informed by
Senator Sessions' office that the office did not require that lawyers
on staff maintain an active bar license.
Nonetheless, I sought to reinstate both licenses in late 2003.
According to the Kansas Bar's instructions for reinstatement, one
requirement was that I submit an application tor reinstatement.
Similarly, in order to get my District of Columbia bar license
reinstated, I had to take and certify completion of the Course on the
District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct and District of
Columbia Practice, and I also had to submit a statement that I was not
suspended by any disciplinary authority. See D.C. Bar Bylaws, Art. III,
Sec. 3(a), available at www.dcbar.org/inside_the_bar/structure/bylaws/
articleO3.cfm#sec3. I took the required District of Columbia Bar
course; submitted all necessary forms; paid all applicable fees and
charges; and finished the remaining steps needed in order for the
respective bars to accept my applications for reinstatement. On June
10, 2004, my Kansas license was reinstated to active status, as was my
District of Columbia license on June 18, 2004. I was a member in good
standing of each bar before September 30, 2003, and without exception,
I have been a member in good standing of each bar since June 18, 2004.
However, I greatly regret the oversight that resulted in the
administrative suspensions between those dates and will not allow such
an oversight to happen again.
d. relationship with committee
1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with
deadlines for information set by congressional committees? Yes.
2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can
to protect congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal
for their testimony and disclosures? Yes.
3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested
witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with
firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes.
4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly
constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be
reasonably requested to do so? Yes.
______
Resume of Ajit V. Pai
Experience
Federal Communications Commission. Chairman (2017-present);
Commissioner (2012-17).
Jennet & Block, LLP. Partner (2011-12) in firm's communications
practice.
Federal Communications Commission. Special Advisor (2010-11); Deputy
General Counsel (2007-10); and Associate General Counsel (2007), Office
of General Counsel.
U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution,
Civil Rights, and Property Rights. Chief Counsel (2005-07).
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Legal Policy. Senior Counsel
(2004-05).
U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Administrative
Oversight and the Courts. Deputy Chief Counsel (2003-04).
Verizon Communications Inc. Associate General Counsel (2001-03).
U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, Telecommunications Task
Force, Trial Attorney, Attorney General's Honors Program (1998-2001).
Hon. Martin L.C. Feldman. U.S. District Court, Eastern District of
Louisiana. Law Clerk (1997-98).
Education
University of Chicago Law School. J.D., 1997.
University of Chicago Law Review. Editor (1996-97); Staff
Member (1995-96).
Hinton Moot Court Competition. Semifinalist; winner of
Thomas R. Mulroy Prize (1997).
Harvard University. B.A. with honors in Social Studies, 1994.
Harvard Speech and Parliamentary Debate Society. Member
(1990-94).
Selected Publications
Op-Ed, Des Moines Register, ``Bringing Better, Faster Internet Access
to Iowa'' (Oct. 10, 2016).
Op-Ed (with Senator Shelley Moore Capito), Beckley (WV) Register Herald
``Bridge is a physical reminder of the digital divide in West
Virginia'' (Aug. 2, 2016).
Op-Ed (with Representative Anna Eshoo), WIRED, ``The Feds Have to Act
to Get America Faster Wi-Fi'' (Fed. 7, 2016).
Article, ``Congress and the Constitution: The Legal Tender Act of
1862,'' 77 Oregon Law Review 535 (1998).
Comment, ''Should a Grand Jury Subpoena Override a District Court's
Protective Order?'', 64 University of Chicago Law Review 317 (1997).
Proposal adopted, In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 138 F.38 442, 445 (1st
Cir. 1998); In re Grand Jury, 286 F.3d 153, 162-63 (3rd Cir. 2002).
The Chairman. Thank you, Chairman Pai.
Ms. Rosenworcel, welcome back to the Committee.
STATEMENT OF HON. JESSICA ROSENWORCEL,
NOMINEE TO BE A MEMBER.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (REAPPOINTMENT)
Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Thune,
Ranking Member Nelson, and members of the Committee. Thank you
for the opportunity to appear here before you today. I am
honored to have been renominated by the President to serve as
Commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission.
And I would like to begin by introducing my family. Sitting
behind me is my husband of 17 years, Mark Bailen. And sitting
next to him is our son, Emmett Joseph, who is 7 years old. His
10-year-old sister, Caroline Frances, could not be here today.
She sends her regrets because she's away at summer camp.
[Laughter.]
Ms. Rosenworcel. As you may know, I previously had the
honor of serving as Commissioner, but I stepped down from this
position at the start of this year, and I headed home. Since
that time, I have had the sweet privilege of attending every
school performance and little league game, and I've had the
opportunity to reacquaint myself with the world through my
children's eyes and experiences as digital natives.
And it's trite but true, but a little distance provides
some perspective, and in my time away, one thing has become
abundantly clear: the future belongs to the connected. No
matter who you are or where you live in this country, you need
access to modern communications to have a fair shot at 21st
century success. The choices we make today about communications
technology, infrastructure, and access are an inheritance for
the next generation. How we grapple now with the disrupting and
democratizing effects of digitization will play no small role
in determining American success in the future.
The stakes are high, so, of course, a little humility
helps, and that is why I believe that the work of the agency
must emphasize what is time-tested and enduring. To this end, I
believe the work of the Commission must be guided by four
essential values that have informed communications policies for
decades.
First, public safety. We need policies that ensure that our
networks are available when the unthinkable occurs and we need
them most.
Second, universal access. We need policies that foster the
deployment of modern communications, not just in urban areas,
but also in rural areas.
And, third, competition, because competition, of course, is
the best way to increase innovation and lower prices.
And fourth, and finally, consumer protection.
Communications services are multiplying in our economy and in
their importance in our daily lives. So we should always be on
guard for opportunities to help consumers make good choices.
These values derive from the law and informed my work at the
Commission in the past, and that includes my efforts to
strengthen 911 service, which were based on input from visits
with first responders all across the country. It also includes
my efforts to increase access to broadband in our schools and
increase opportunities for digital age education.
Furthermore, I am proud to have worked on spectrum policies
for both licensed and unlicensed airwaves that have made this
country's wireless markets competitive, innovative, and strong.
However, there is more work to be done to bring
communications policy into the future, and that includes work
following the world's first spectrum incentive auctions,
managing the impact of those auctions on our nation's local
broadcasters, and building on our wireless success with the
next generation of mobile service, known as 5G. That's going to
require new ideas to spur innovation, spark entrepreneurship,
incentivize the deployment of new networks, and help bring the
benefits of modern communications to everyone everywhere across
the country.
If reconfirmed, I look forward to working with the
individuals at this table and all others at the Commission. And
if reconfirmed, I will be guided by the fundamental values in
the law that I discuss with you here today. And if reconfirmed,
I will continue to respect the priorities of this Committee.
In closing, thank you, Chairman Thune, Ranking Member
Nelson, and members of the Committee. I appreciate the
opportunity to appear before you today. And I look forward to
answering any questions you might have.
[The prepared statement and biographical information of Ms.
Rosenworcel follow:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel, Nominee to be a Member,
Federal Communications Commission (Reappointment)
Good morning, Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and Members of
the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
today. I am honored to have been re-nominated by the President to serve
as Commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission.
I would like to begin by introducing my family. Sitting behind me
is my husband of seventeen years, Mark Bailen. Sitting beside him is
our son, Emmett Joseph, who is seven years old. His ten-year-old
sister, Caroline Frances, could not be here today and sends her regrets
because she is away at camp.
As you may know, I previously had the honor of serving as
Commissioner. But I stepped down from this position at the start of the
year--and I headed home. Since that time I have had the sweet privilege
of attending every school performance and every little league game. I
have had the opportunity to reacquaint myself with the world through my
children's eyes and experience as digital natives.
It's trite, but true, that a little distance provides perspective.
In my time away, one thing has become abundantly clear: The future
belongs to the connected. No matter who you are or where you live in
this country, you need access to modern communications for a fair shot
at 21st century success. The choices we make today about communications
technology, infrastructure, and access are an inheritance for the next
generation. How we grapple now with the disrupting and democratizing
effects of digitization will play no small role in determining American
success in the future.
The stakes are high, so a little humility helps. That is why I
believe that the work of the Commission must emphasize what is most
time-tested and enduring. To this end, I believe the work of the
Commission must be guided by four essential values that have informed
communications law in this country for decades.
First, public safety. Our networks must be available when the
unthinkable occurs and we need them most.
Second, universal access. We need policies that foster deployment
in urban areas, rural areas, and everything in between.
Third, competition. Competition is the best way to increase
innovation and lower prices.
Fourth, consumer protection. Communications services are
multiplying in our economy and in their importance in our daily lives.
But the marketplace can be bewildering to navigate. So we should always
be on the lookout for ways to help consumers make good choices.
These values derive from the law and informed my work at the
Commission in the past. This includes my efforts to strengthen 911
service, based on input from visits with first responders across the
country. It also includes my efforts to increase access to broadband in
our schools and enhance opportunities for digital age education.
Furthermore, I am proud to have worked on spectrum policies--for
licensed and unlicensed airwaves--that have made this country's
wireless markets competitive, innovative, and strong.
However, there is more work to be done--to bring communications
policy into the future. That includes work following the world's first
spectrum incentive auctions, managing the impact of this transition on
local broadcasters, and building on our wireless success with the next
generation of mobile service--known as 5G. It requires new ideas to
spur competition, spark entrepreneurship, incentivize the deployment of
new networks, and help bring the benefits of modern communications to
everyone, everywhere across the country.
If re-confirmed, I look forward to working on what lies ahead with
the individuals here with me today and all others at the Commission.
If re-confirmed, I will continue to be guided by the fundamental
values in the law. If re-confirmed, I will continue to respect the
priorities of this Committee. I also pledge to listen to you, those
with business before the Commission--and above all the American people.
In closing, Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and Members of
the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
today. I look forward to answering your questions.
______
a. biographical information
1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): Jessica
Rosenworcel.
2. Position to which nominated: Commissioner, Federal
Communications Commission.
3. Date of Nomination: June 15, 2017.
4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):
Residence: Information not released to the public.
5. Date and Place of Birth: 7/12/71; Boston, Massachusetts.
6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your
spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including
stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).
Spouse: Mark Bailen, Partner at Baker Hostetler.
7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school
attended.
Wesleyan University, BA, 1993
New York University School of Law, JD, 1997
8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all
management-level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to
the position for which you are nominated.
Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission
Senior Communications Counsel, U.S. Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Senior Legal Advisor, Office of Commissioner Michael J. Copps,
Federal Communications Commission
Legal Advisor to the Bureau Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau,
Federal Communications Commission
Attorney, Drinker Biddle & Reath
9. Attach a copy of your resume.
A copy is attached.
10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time
service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other
than those listed above, within the last ten years. None.
11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee,
partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any
corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise,
educational, or other institution within the last ten years. None.
12. Please list each membership you have had during the past ten
years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable,
educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or
religious organization, private club, or other membership organization.
Include dates of membership and any positions you have held with any
organization. Please note whether any such club or organization
restricts membership on the basis of sex, race, color, religion,
national origin, age, or handicap.
Federal Communications Bar Association
Chair, Cable Practice Committee (2007-2008)
Chair, Legislative Practice Committee (2009)
13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office
(elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any
campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are
personally liable for that debt.
Not applicable.
14. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar
entity of $500 or more for the past ten years. Also list all offices
you have held with, and services rendered to, a state or national
political party or election committee during the same period.
$1,000--Obama for America, 2008
$2,700--Hillary Victory Fund, 2016
15. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary
society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition
for outstanding service or achievements.
White Prize for Excellence in Economics, Wesleyan University
(1993)
Special Act Award for Contributions to Common Carrier Bureau,
Federal Communications Commission (1999)
Women Who Represent Award, Alliance for Women in Media (2013)
Leadership in Advancing Communications Policy Award,
Association of Public Safety Communications Officials
International (2013)
Impact Award for Public Service, National Hispanic Media
Coalition (2013)
Federal Policymaker Award, State Education Technology Directors
Association (2013)
Award for Excellence in Public Service, Consortium for School
Networking (2014)
Special Recognition Award, CEF Gala (2015)
Award for Outstanding Achievement, Family Online Safety
Institute (2014)
Broadband Hero of the Year, National Association of
Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (2016)
Community Builder Award, National Coalition for Technology in
Education (2017)
Advocacy Award, CUE (2017)
16. Please list each book, article, column, or publication you have
authored, individually or with others. Also list any speeches that you
have given on topics relevant to the position for which you have been
nominated. Do not attach copies of these publications unless otherwise
instructed.
Articles
As a Commissioner I authored and/or co-authored the following:
``Transforming Education Digitally,'' co-authored with Rep.
Anna Eshoo, Politico (June 3, 2013);
``High-Speed Internet Access a Classroom Necessity,'' co-
authored with San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, San Antonio
Express (June 25, 2013);
``A Federal Wireless Policy Built on Carrots, Not Sticks,'' The
Hill (June 27, 2013);
``Giving Our Kids a Chance to Compete in the Global Economy
Means High-Speed Broadband Capacity,'' co-authored with
Mooresville, North Carolina School Superintendent Dr. Mark
Edwards, Huffington Post (July 24, 2013);
``Bring Wireless 911 Up to Date,'' The Hill (January 14, 2014);
``Growing Unlicensed Spectrum, Growing the Economy,'' Re/code
(February 21, 2014);
``Let's Upgrade Our Schools for the Digital Age,'' co-authored
with Rep. Doris Matsui and Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson,
Sacramento Bee (April 25, 2014);
``Here's How to Expand Wireless Spectrum, '' co-authored with
Marty Cooper, San Jose Mercury News (September 26, 2014);
``Sandbox Thinking,'' Democracy Journal (Fall 2014);
``The Spectrum Pipeline,'' Silicon Valley Leadership Group
Gamechangers 2015 (Fall 2014);
``The Race to 5G is On,'' Re/code (October 27, 2014);
``A New Year, a Bolder and Better E-Rate,'' Huffington Post
(December 3, 2014);
``How to Close the Homework Gap,'' Miami Herald (December 5,
2014);
``Let's Give Our Students a Chance to Compete in the Digital
Age,'' co-authored with Sen. Angus King, Roll Call (December
10, 2014);
``Limited Internet Access a Challenge for Detroit Kids, Detroit
Free Press (March 16, 2015);
``Falling through the Homework Gap,'' Providence Journal (April
25, 2015);
``Filling in the Homework Gap,'' Virginia Daily Press (May 30,
2015); ``Bridging the Homework Gap,'' Huffington Post (June 15,
2015);
``Boost the Homework Connection,'' Albany Times Union (March
29, 2016);
``Connecting Students at School and at Home,'' Principal
Leadership (April 2016);
``The Cleveland Homework Gap When There's No Internet at
Home,'' Cleveland Plain Dealer (April 22, 2016);
``We Need More Wi-Fi,'' Morning Consult (June 20, 2016);
``Millions of Children Can't Do Their Homework Because They
Don't Have Access to Broadband Internet,'' Aspen Ideas Festival
Blog (June 29, 2016);
``Action Needed to Advance the Next Generation 911,'' co-
authored with Betty Wafer, Manager, Dallas Police Department,
The Hill (June 30, 2016);
``Moving Next Generation 911 Forward,'' co-authored with Lance
Terry, Communications Manager of Norman, Oklahoma, The
Oklahoman (September 24, 2016); and
``Homework Gap Hurts Poor, Rural Students,'' co-authored with
Sen. Tom Udall, Las Cruces Sun News (October 22, 2016).
As Legal Counsel to the Wireline Competition Bureau I co-authored
the following:
``Assessing the Effectiveness of Section 271 Five Years After
the Telecommunications Act of 1996,'' co-authored with Daniel
Shiman, Chapter 7, Communications Policy and Information
Technology: Promises, Problems, Prospects, MIT Press (2002).
Speeches
As a Commissioner, I spoke at a variety of events, including, but
not limited to the following:
August 21, 2012--Speech at Association for Public Safety
Communications Officials International 78th Annual Conference,
held in Minneapolis, MN;
November 13, 2012--Speech on The Next Ten Years of Spectrum
Policy, Silicon Flatirons Conference sponsored by the
University of Colorado, held in Washington, D.C.;
November 15, 2012--Speech at The Media Institute Awards, held
in Washington, D.C.;
December 13, 2012--Speech at Practising Law Institute, 30th
Annual Telecommunications Policy and Regulation Institute, held
in Washington, D.C.;
February 4, 2013--Speech at Rural Telecom Industry Meeting &
Expo, held in Orlando, FL;
April 11, 2013--Speech at Washington Education Technology
Policy Summit, held in Washington, D.C.;
May 14, 2013--Speech at Association for Public Safety
Communications Officials International Policy Awards Dinner,
held in Washington, D.C.;
May 22, 2013--Speech at CTIA--The Mobile Marketplace, held in
Las Vegas, NV;
July 1, 2013--Speech at American Telemedicine Association
Policy Summit, held in Washington, D.C.;
September 19, 2013--Speech at It Can Wait Campaign's Drive 4
Pledges Day to Prevent Texting While Driving, held in
Washington, D.C.;
October 25, 2013--Speech at Women in Science Awards Ceremony,
held in New York, NY;
October 29, 2013--Speech at Future of Music Summit, held in
Washington, D.C.;
November 4, 2013--Speech at West Virginia Broadband Summit,
held in Morgantown, WV;
November 4, 2013--Speech at State Education Technology
Directors Association Federal Policymaker Award Ceremony, held
in Washington, D.C.;
November 14, 2013--Speech at Women Who Represent Awards, held
in Washington, D.C.;
November 21, 2013--Speech at White House Champions of Change
Event, held in Washington, D.C.;
December 4, 2013--Speech at Association of Public Safety
Communications Officials International Emerging Tech Conference
held in Boston, MA;
December 12, 2013--Speech at Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers Globecom Conference, held in Atlanta, GA;
January 24, 2014--Speech on Families Educational Media Use in
America at The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop, held
in New York, NY;
March 17, 2014--Speech at Satellite Industry Association
Leadership Dinner, held in Washington, D.C.;
March 7, 2014--Speech on Wi-Fi in the 5 GHz Fast Lane at the
National Press Club in Washington, D.C.;
March 7, 2014--Speech at South by Southwest Education
Conference, held in Austin, TX;
March 20, 2014--Speech at Consortium for School Networking
Award for Excellence in Public Service, held in Washington,
D.C.;
May 6, 2014--Speech on Moving Wi-Fi Forward at The Newseum,
held in Washington, D.C.;
May 7, 2014--Speech at Chief Officers of State Library Agencies
Meeting, held in Washington, D.C.;
June 19, 2014--Speech at Workshop on Prevention of Mobile
Device Theft, held in Washington, D.C.;
August 6, 2014--Speech at Association of Public Safety
Communications Officials International Conference, held in New
Orleans, LA;
September 11, 2014--Speech on The Future of Unlicensed Spectrum
at the Computer History Museum, held in Mountain View, CA;
September 16, 2014--Speech on Latino 2.0: Latinos in Tech
Innovation & Social Media, held in New York, NY;
September 22, 2014--Speech at GSMA Mobile 360, held in Atlanta,
GA;
September 30, 2014--Speech on Sandbox Thinking at the Democracy
Symposium, held in Washington, D.C.;
October 2, 2014--Speech at the Marconi Society Symposium, the
National Academy of Sciences, held in Washington, D.C.;
October 14, 2014--Speech at 4G Americas Technology Briefing,
held in Washington, D.C.;
October 29, 2014--Speech at W3C 20th Anniversary Symposium: The
Future of the Web, held in Santa Clara, CA;
November 13, 2014--Speech at Family Online Safety Institute
Award for Outstanding Achievement, held in Washington, D.C.;
January 27, 2015--Speech at State of the Net Conference, held
in Washington, D.C.;
February 4, 2015--Speech at Texas Computer Education
Association, held in Austin, TX;
March 16, 2015--Speech on Supersizing Wi-Fi at South by
Southwest Interactive, held in Austin, TX;
April 29, 2014--Speech on Taking the Pulse of the High School
Student Experience in America at Hispanic Heritage Foundation,
held in Washington, D.C.;
June 29, 2015--Speech on Women in Consumer Electronics, held in
New York, NY;
September 3, 2015--Speech on Montana Veterans, Tele-Acute &
Rural Health Financing, held in Kalispell, MT;
October 7, 2015--Speech at Committee for Education Funding
Gala, held in Washington, D.C.;
January 12, 2016--Speech on The Road to Gigabit Wi-Fi at New
America, held in Washington, D.C.;
February 2, 2016--Speech on Spectrum Policy at Forum Global
Americas Spectrum Management Conference, held in Washington,
D.C.;
February 9, 2016--Speech on Five Ideas for the Road to 5G at
Leadership Forum on 5G: The Next Generation of Wireless, held
in Washington, D.C.;
February 22, 2016--Speech on Spectrum Policy at Mobile World
Congress, held in Barcelona, Spain;
March 17, 2016--Speech on Closing the Homework Gap at CUE16,
held in Palm Springs, CA;
May 16, 2016--Speech on 911 at APCO Broadband Summit, held in
Washington, D.C.;
June 8, 2016--Speech on the Wireless Network of the Future,
held in Dallas, TX;
September 8, 2016--Speech on the Broadband Imperative and the
Homework Gap at State Education Technology Directors
Association, held in Washington, D.C.; and
October 26, 2016--Speech on Robocall Strike Force, held in
Washington, D.C.
As Senior Communications Counsel at the U.S. Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science and Transportation, I spoke at a variety of events,
including, but not limited to the following:
June 8, 2007--Panel on communications issues at Pike and
Fisher's Broadband Policy Summit, held in Arlington, VA;
September 17, 2007--Panel on congressional issues at Future of
Music Policy Summit, held in Washington, D.C.;
January 28, 2008--Panel on congressional issues at Alaska
Telephone Association Winter Convention, held in Lihue, HI;
March 5, 2008--Panel on emergency communications at policy
conference sponsored by the E-911 Institute, held in Arlington,
VA;
March 13, 2008--Panel on communications issues at policy
conference sponsored by Association for Maximum Service
Television, held in Washington, D.C.;
January 5, 2009--Panel on Implementing the Broadband Stimulus:
Maximizing Benefits and Monitoring Performance sponsored by
Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and Georgetown
University McDonough Business School, held in Washington, D.C.;
April 2, 2009--Panel on congressional issues at The Cable Show,
held in Washington, D.C.;
March 31, 2009--Panel on legislative issues at the National
Association of Broadcasters State Leadership Conference, held
in Washington, D.C.;
May 14, 2009--Panel on Changing Media: Thinking Across the
Issues, Part 2, James L. Knight Foundation, held in Washington,
D.C.; and
March 2, 2010--Panel on the FCC's Authority, sponsored by the
Berkman Center for Internet & Society and the Wharton School,
held in Washington, D.C.
17. Please identify each instance in which you have testified
orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
governmental capacity and specify the date and subject matter of each
testimony.
November 30, 2011--Nomination Hearing, U.S. Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation (with Ajit Pai);
May 16, 2012--Federal Communications Commission Oversight
Hearing, U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation;
July 10, 2012--Federal Communications Commission Oversight
Hearing, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and
Commerce;
December 12, 2012--Hearing on keeping the New Broadband
Spectrum Law on Track, U.S. House of Representatives Committee
on Energy and Commerce;
March 12, 2013--Federal Communications Commission Oversight
Hearing, U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation;
August 19, 2013--Field Hearing on the State of Rural
Communications, U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation;
December 12, 2013--Federal Communications Commission Oversight
Hearing, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and
Commerce;
March 18, 2015--Federal Communications Commission Oversight
Hearing, U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation;
March 19, 2015--Federal Communications Commission Oversight
Hearing, U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce
Committee;
July 29, 2015--Hearing on Wireless Broadband and the Future of
Spectrum Policy, U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation;
October 28, 2015--Nomination Hearing, U.S. Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation;
November 17, 2015--Federal Communications Commission Oversight
Hearing, U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce
Committee;
March 2, 2016--Federal Communications Commission Oversight
Hearing, U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation;
March 22, 2016--Federal Communications Commission Oversight
Hearing, U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce
Committee;
July 12, 2016--Federal Communications Commission Oversight
Hearing, U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce
Committee; and
September 15, 2016--Federal Communications Commission Oversight
Hearing, U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
18. Given the current mission, major programs, and major
operational objectives of the department/agency to which you have been
nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you
believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for
which you have been nominated, and why do you wish to serve in that
position?
I have two decades of experience in communications policy. I have
worked on communications and technology matters from a wide variety of
positions--both in the private and public sector. This includes
positions in a law firm, as a Commissioner at the Federal
Communications Commission, and as Senior Communications Counsel at the
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
I believe that I have used this background to make a positive
contribution to communications policy--and hope to be able to continue
to do so by protecting consumers, promoting access to new services, and
fostering investment and innovation.
19. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to
ensure that the department/agency has proper management and accounting
controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large
organization?
All government officials operate in positions of trust and have a
duty to ensure that the organization where they work has proper
management and accounting controls.
I have experience managing an office at the agency; managing
policies involving communications at the Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science and Transportation; and managing client matters at a private
law firm.
20. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the
department/agency, and why?
Protecting consumers. As technologies evolve, one thing is
paramount--consumers should be the ultimate beneficiaries of policy
choices by the Federal Communications Commission.
Securing access. As technologies evolve, it is imperative that all
people in this country, no matter who they are or where they live, have
access to the communications services that are necessary for 21st
century opportunity, safety, and economic security.
Growing economy. Digital services are now a vital feature of our
economy, providing certainty to companies is an essential part of
promoting investment, fostering innovation, and creating jobs.
b. potential conflicts of interest
1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation
agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates,
clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement
accounts.
None. My financial interests are disclosed on my SF-278.
2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal,
to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business,
association or other organization during your appointment? If so,
please explain. None.
3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in
the position to which you have been nominated.
None. My husband is a partner at Baker Hostetler. His practice
involves commercial litigation and does not include advocacy before the
Federal Communications Commission.
4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial
transaction which you have had during the last ten years, whether for
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the
position to which you have been nominated. None.
5. Describe any activity during the past ten years in which you
have been engaged for the purpose of directly or indirectly influencing
the passage, defeat, or modification of any legislation or affecting
the administration and execution of law or public policy.
I previously served as a Commissioner at the Federal Communications
Commission. In this position, from time to time, I am asked my thoughts
on legislative matters pending before the Congress.
I also previously served as Senior Communications Counsel at the
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. In this
capacity I regularly advised Senate offices on communications policy
and legislation.
6. Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest,
including any that may be disclosed by your responses to the above
items.
Not applicable.
c. legal matters
1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics,
professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a
complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special
Counsel, professional association, disciplinary committee, or other
professional group? If yes:
a. Provide the name of agency, association, committee, or group;
b. Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
personnel action was issued or initiated;
c. Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
personnel action;
d. Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action,
complaint, or personnel action.
No.
2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by
any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal,
State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain. No.
3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were
an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency
proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please
explain. No.
4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain. No.
5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual
harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or
any other basis? If so, please explain. No.
6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information,
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in
connection with your nomination. None.
d. relationship with committee
1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with
deadlines for information set by congressional committees? Yes.
2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can
to protect congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal
for their testimony and disclosures? Yes.
3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested
witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with
firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes.
4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly
constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be
reasonably requested to do so? Yes.
______
Resume of Jessica Rosenworcel
Legal and Policy Experience
Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 2012-2017
Commissioner
Developed and implemented communications policy involving radio,
television, wire, satellite and cable services as a member of the
United States' primary authority for communications law, regulation and
technological innovation.
United States Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Washington, DC
Senior Communications Counsel 2009-2012
Developed and implemented communications policy agenda for the
Democratic members of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, under the leadership of Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-West
Virginia). Organize hearings regarding the National Broadband Plan,
universal service and rural communications, Children's Television Act,
future of journalism, wireless service, communications accessibility
for the disabled, retransmission consent for video programming,
satellite television, public safety spectrum and oversight of the
Federal Communications Commission and National Telecommunications and
Information Administration. Develop and work to secure passage of
legislation, including the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program
in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, DTV Delay Act, Satellite
Television Extension and Localism Act, 21st Century Communications and
Video Accessibility Act and Public Safety Spectrum and Wireless
Innovation Act.
Senior Communications Counsel 2007-2008
Developed and implemented communications policy agenda for the
Democratic members of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, under the leadership of Senator Daniel K. Inouye (D-
Hawaii). Organized hearings regarding the digital television
transition, broadband deployment and adoption, universal service, media
ownership, media violence and indecency, network neutrality, online
privacy and oversight of the Federal Communications Commission and
National Telecommunications and Information Administration. Developed
and worked to secure passage of legislation, including the Broadband
Data Improvement Act, DTV Transition Assistance Act, Child Safe Viewing
Act, and New and Emerging Technologies 911 Improvement Act.
Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC
Senior Legal Advisor to Commissioner Michael J. Copps 2006-2007
Advised Senior Democratic Commissioner on television, radio and cable
policy issues arising under the Communications Act and Cable Television
and Consumer Protection Act. Developed office positions and strategy
for advancing telecommunications, Internet, wireless and media policy
priorities. Managed office staff. Provided legal analysis and voting
recommendations for Commission decisions. Drafted speeches, editorials
and press statements. Coordinated policy decisions with Congressional
offices, state and local officials and industry representatives.
Legal Advisor to Commissioner Michael J. Copps 2003-2006
Advised Senior Democratic Commissioner on competition policy and
universal service issues arising under the Telecommunications Act.
Developed policy positions on broadband deployment, Internet access,
rural communications, public safety networks, E-Rate and VoIP. Provided
legal analysis and voting recommendations for Commission decisions.
Drafted Senate testimony, speeches and press statements. Coordinated
policy decisions with Congressional offices and state regulatory
authorities.
Legal Counsel to Bureau Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau 2002-2003
Advised Bureau Chief on universal service and broadband policy.
Coordinated wireline policy with Wireless Telecommunications Bureau,
Cable Services Bureau and International Bureau. Taught World Bank
telecommunications workshops for the Economic Ministry of Latvia.
Attorney Advisor, Policy Division, Common Carrier Bureau 1999-2002
Managed teams drafting decisions concerning broadband deployment and
competitive entry into local and long distance markets. Recipient of
Special Act Award for policy contributions to the Common Carrier Bureau
in 2000.
Drinker Biddle & Reath, Washington, DC
Communications Associate 1997-1999
Drafted merger documents for privatization of state-owned telephone
company. Prepared Bureau of Export Administration license application
for cable modem encryption technology.
Reboul, MacMurray, Hewitt, Maynard & Kristol, New York, NY
Summer Associate 1996
Drafted securities purchase agreements for venture capital and buyout
firm transactions.
United States Attorney's Office, Brooklyn, NY
Summer Fellow, Criminal Division 1995
Researched and drafted motions on issues of evidence, criminal law and
criminal procedure.
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, New York, NY
Legal Assistant 1993-1994
Managed litigation documents.
Education
New York University School of Law, New York, NY JD, 1997
Honors: Annual Survey of American Law, Editor
Wesleyan University, Middletown, CT BA, Economics and English, 1993
Honors: White Prize for Excellence in Economics
Publications
``Homework Gap Hurts Poor, Rural Students,'' co-authored with
Senator Tom Udall, Las Cruces Sun-News, October 22, 2016.
``Moving Next Generation 911 Forward,'' co-authored with Lance
Terry, The Oklahoman, September 24, 2016.
``Action Needed to Advance Next Generation 911,'' co-authored
with Betty Wafer, The Hill, June 30, 2016.
``We Need More Wi-Fi,'' Morning Consult, June 20, 2016.
``The Cleveland Homework Gap When There's No Internet at
Home,'' Cleveland Plain Dealer, April 22, 2016.
``Boost the Homework Connection,'' Albany Times Union, March
29, 2016.
``Limited Internet Access a Challenge for Detroit Kids,''
Detroit Free Press, March 16, 2015. ``How to Close the Homework
Gap,'' Miami Herald, December 5, 2014.
``A New Year, a Bolder and Better E-Rate,'' Huffington Post,
December 3, 2014.
``The Race to 5G is On,'' Re/code, October 27, 2014.
``The Spectrum Pipeline,'' Silicon Valley Leadership Group
Gamechangers 2015, Fall 2014.
``Sandbox Thinking,'' Democracy Journal, Fall 2014.
``Here's How to Expand Wireless Spectrum,'' co-authored with
Marty Cooper, San Jose Mercury News, September 26, 2014.
``Let's Upgrade Our Schools for the Digital Age,'' co-authored
with Rep. Doris Matsui and Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson,
Sacramento Bee, April 25, 2014.
``Growing Unlicensed Spectrum, Growing the Economy,'' Re/code,
February 21, 2014.
``Bring Wireless 911 Up to Date,'' The Hill, January 14, 2014.
``A Federal Wireless Policy Built on Carrots, Not Sticks,'' The
Hill, July 27, 2013.
``Transforming Education Digitally,'' co-authored with Rep.
Anna Eshoo, Politico, June 3, 2013.
``Assessing the Effectiveness of Section 271 Five Years After
the Telecommunications Act of 1996,'' Jessica Rosenworcel &
Daniel R. Shiman, Chapter 7, Communications Policy and
Information Technology: Promises, Problems, Prospects, MIT
Press, 2002.
The Chairman. Thank you, Ms. Rosenworcel.
Mr. Carr, welcome to the Committee.
STATEMENT OF BRENDAN CARR, NOMINEE TO BE A MEMBER, FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Mr. Carr. Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson,
distinguished members of the Committee, it's a privilege to
appear before you today. I am humbled by President Trump's
decision to nominate me to serve as a Commissioner at the FCC,
and I'm honored to have this Committee consider that
nomination.
I want to start by thanking you and your staffs for the
courtesies you've shown me over the past few weeks. The chance
to meet with you has given me the opportunity to learn more
about the telecom and communications issues that are important
to you and to your states.
These meetings have only underscored the important role the
FCC plays in the lives of all Americans, whether it's promoting
broadband deployment, protecting consumers, or advancing public
safety.
And with the Committee's indulgence, I would like to take a
moment to introduce my family. My wonderful wife, Machalagh,
our two terrific boys, Quinn, who is three, and Emmet, who is
six months. We're just blessed to be their parents. I also want
to introduce my parents, Tom Carr and Barbara Carr. I know that
for my dad this is a bit of a homecoming. His first job during
college in D.C. was to work as a Mail Sorter in the Post Office
here in Dirksen, so he's really glad to get the chance to come
back.
I also want to congratulate Chairman Pai and Commissioner
Rosenworcel on their renominations. I've worked with both of
them, as well as Commissioners Clyburn and O'Rielly, at the FCC
for a number of years now. I can say that they are all
exceptionally thoughtful and dedicated public servants.
I currently have the privilege of serving as the general
counsel of the FCC. It's not the first job I've had at the
agency, however. I joined the Commission over five years ago
now as a staffer during the Obama administration. I worked in
the Office of General Counsel providing advice to the Wireless
Bureau, Public Safety Bureau, and International Bureau. I then
had the chance to work on some of the same issues for then
Commissioner Pai.
My passion for technology, however, started well before I
joined the agency. In fact, I went to law school over 15 years
ago now specifically for the purpose of studying
telecommunications law and policy. After graduating, I worked
at a law firm where I gained broad experience in this area, and
I later accepted a clerkship with a judge on the Fourth
Circuit, which helped spark my interest in public service.
Looking back, I've learned a lot in the past dozen years
working in communications. I've come to know and admire the
FCC's terrific staff. They are passionate about delivering for
the public interest. I've come to understand the importance of
bipartisan consensus and working toward common ground, and if
confirmed, I will certainly work in that spirit as a
Commissioner.
I want to talk briefly about the focus I bring to the
Commission, if confirmed.
First, we have a tremendous opportunity in the telecom
space to create jobs, to spur investment and to grow the
economy for the benefit of all Americans, and I believe the
FCC's policies should do just that.
Broadband is certainly going to play a key role, whether
it's the app economy that runs over high-speed connections, the
workers that manufacture network infrastructure and deploy it,
or the businesses that use those connections to reach customers
around the world. Broadband can harness the talents of all
Americans, it can create good-paying jobs, and it can help
drive our nation's economic growth.
Second, we must maintain the United States' leadership in
wireless. As 5G and other advanced and competitive networks
come online, spectrum and infrastructure are going to be two
key pieces of that, whether that's in connecting every American
or the expanding Internet of Things.
And, finally, the FCC must always promote public safety.
This includes speeding the transition to Next-Generation 911
and ensuring that our first responders have the communications
technologies they need to do their jobs.
So in closing, I want to thank the Committee again for
taking the time to consider my nomination. I look forward to
answering your questions.
[The prepared statement and biographical information of Mr.
Carr follow:]
Prepared Statement of Brendan Carr, Nominee to be a Member,
Federal Communications Commission
Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and distinguished Members of
the Committee, it is a privilege to appear before you today. I am
humbled by President Trump's decision to nominate me to serve as a
Commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission, and I am honored
to have this Committee consider that nomination.
I want to start by thanking you and your staffs for the courtesies
you have shown me over the past few weeks and for giving me the
opportunity to learn more about the technology and communications
issues that are important to you and your states. These meetings have
only underscored the important role the FCC plays in the lives of all
Americans--whether it is promoting broadband deployment, protecting
consumers, or advancing public safety. If I am fortunate enough to be
confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to work with all of you on
ways the FCC can continue to advance the public interest.
With the Committee's indulgence, I would like to take a moment to
introduce my family--my wonderful wife Machalagh and our two terrific
boys: Quinn, who is three years old, and Emmet, who is six months. We
are just blessed to be their parents. I also want to introduce my
parents, Thomas Carr and Barbara Carr, as well as my sister Courtney
Carr, and thank them for the support they have always shown me.
I also want to extend my congratulations to Chairman Pai and
Commissioner Rosenworcel on their renominations. I have had the chance
to work with both of them, as well as Commissioner Clyburn and
Commissioner O'Rielly, for a number of years at the FCC, and I know
they are all exceptionally thoughtful and dedicated public servants.
I currently have the privilege of serving as the FCC's General
Counsel. It is an honor and a tremendously rewarding experience to lead
the talented lawyers and other professionals that work in the Office of
General Counsel.
But this is not the first job I have had at the FCC. I joined the
Commission as a staffer over five years ago. I worked initially as an
attorney in the Administrative Law Division of the Office of General
Counsel. My job was to provide advice to the policymakers in the
agency's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Public Safety and Homeland
Security Bureau, and International Bureau. Later, I had the chance to
work on those same issues as an advisor to then Commissioner Pai.
My passion for technology and communications started well before I
joined the agency, however. In fact, I went to law school over fifteen
years ago for the purpose of studying telecommunications law and
policy. I obtained a certificate in communications law studies in
addition to my J.D.
During law school, I took the opportunity to intern twice at the
FCC and once with the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on
Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and
the Internet. Those experiences only confirmed that I made the right
decision to study communications law, and they solidified my interest
in spending my career working as a lawyer on communications issues.
After graduating, I accepted a job at a law firm where I could gain
broad experience working on various telecommunications issues. Later, I
accepted a clerkship with a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Fourth Circuit, which helped spark my interest in public service and
instilled in me the importance of considering all sides of any debate.
I have learned a lot over the past dozen years working on
communications law and policy. I have come to know and admire the FCC's
terrific staff. They are passionate about delivering for the public
interest, and they truly are the agency's best asset.
My time at the Commission has also instilled in me an appreciation
for the importance of bipartisan consensus and working towards common
ground. I believe that focusing on our shared goals produces the best
and lasting results for the public. I hope that my work at the FCC and
my interactions with all stakeholders over the years have reflected my
commitment to that approach. I can assure you that, if confirmed, I
would work in that spirit as a Commissioner.
I can also assure this Committee that, if confirmed, I would
approach the job with an appreciation for the challenges we face and a
determination to help solve them. In terms of my regulatory philosophy,
I believe that the public interest is best served by vigorous
competition in the marketplace. But when there are marketplace failures
that harm consumers, the agency must take action consistent with the
scope of our authority and the direction provided by Congress.
We must always be willing to take a fresh look at any barriers to
entry or competition that we can remove, and we must ensure that our
regulatory framework supports innovation and entrepreneurship, reflects
the realities of today's dynamic marketplace, and always promotes the
public interest.
With that in mind, I want to talk briefly about the focus I would
bring to the Commission, if confirmed.
We have a tremendous opportunity in the technology and
communications space to create jobs, spur investment, and grow the
economy for the benefit all Americans. If confirmed, I would work to
ensure that the FCC's policies do just that.
Broadband is certainly going to play a key role. Whether it is the
app economy that runs over high-speed networks, the workers who deploy
and make network infrastructure, or the businesses that use these
connections to reach customers around the world, broadband can harness
the talents of all Americans, create good-paying jobs, and help drive
our nation's economic growth. So it is critical that we have policies
in place that promote the construction and expansion of broadband
networks in all parts of our country.
I also believe it is important to maintain the United States'
leadership in wireless. The wireless market in the United States has
been a tremendous success story. The policies the FCC put in place a
decade ago resulted in this country leading the world in the deployment
of 4G wireless technologies. The current challenge is to ensure that we
maintain that leadership as 5G and other advanced and competitive
wireless networks (terrestrial and satellite alike) come online.
Spectrum and infrastructure are going to play key roles in
determining whether we meet that challenge. On the spectrum front, the
FCC must continue to pursue an all-of-the-above approach. We need a
spectrum pipeline that can deliver a mix of low-, mid-, and high-band
spectrum into the commercial marketplace. And we need to ensure that
providers can choose from a mix of licensed, unlicensed, and shared
spectrum bands to meet consumer demand, whether to connect people or
the burgeoning Internet of Things. On the infrastructure side, the FCC
must make certain that its policies are tailored to facilitating next-
generation deployments.
Finally, while technology continues to evolve, one constant is the
FCC's obligation to promote public safety. This includes taking steps
to facilitate the transition to Next-Generation 911 (or NG911), which
can bring life-saving advances to those in need of emergency services
and innovative solutions to our public safety community. It also means
that the FCC must play its part in ensuring that public safety
officials and first responders have access to the advanced
communications technologies that will allow them to do their jobs
safely and effectively. I believe that all stakeholders must work
together to ensure that the agency is fulfilling its public safety
obligations.
Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and Members of the
Committee, I want to thank you again for considering my nomination. I
look forward to answering your questions.
______
a. biographical information
1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): Brendan
Thomas Carr.
2. Position to which nominated: Commissioner, Federal
Communications Commission.
3. Date of Nomination: June 29, 2017.
4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):
Residence: Information not released to the public.
Office: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW,
Washington, D.C. 20554.
5. Date and Place of Birth: January 5, 1979; Washington, D.C.
6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your
spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including
stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).
Spouse: Machalagh Carr, Oversight Staff Director, Committee on Ways
and Means, U.S. House of Representatives.
7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school
attended.
B.A., Georgetown University, Georgetown College (2001)
J.D., and Certificate, Institute for Communications Law
Studies, Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law
(2005)
8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all
management-level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to
the position for which you are nominated.
Federal Communications Commission
General Counsel (4/2017-Present)*
Acting General Counsel (1/2017-4/2017)*
Legal Advisor for Wireless, International, and Public
Safety, Office of Commissioner Ajit Pai (2/2014-1/
2017)
Attorney-Advisor, Wireless, International, and Public
Safety Team, Administrative Law Division, Office of General
Counsel (6/2012-2/2014)
Legal Intern, Office of Commissioner Kathleen
Abernathy (9/2003-12/2003)
Law Clerk, Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement
Bureau (6/2003-
8/2003)
Wiley Rein LLP
Associate (9/2005-8/2008 and 8/2009-5/2012)
Judge Dennis W. Shedd, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth
Circuit
Law Clerk (8/2008-7/2009)
U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and
Commerce, Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the
Internet
Legal Intern (2/2004-4/2004)
Venable, Baetjer, Howard & Civiletti LLP
Paralegal (9/2001-8/2002)
Credit Debt Solutions
Sales (6/2001-8/2001)
*Denotes management-level job that is relevant to the position for
which I have been nominated.
Denotes non-managerial job that is relevant to the position
for which I have been nominated.
9. Attach a copy of your resume.
A copy is attached.
10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time
service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other
than those listed above, within the last ten years. None.
11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee,
partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any
corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise,
educational, or other institution within the last ten years.
As indicated below, I am a member of the Federal Communications Bar
Association (FCBA). While I served a three-year, uncompensated term as
a Member of the FCBA's Executive Committee, I was not an officer of the
FCBA. Moreover, my three-year term on the FCBA's Executive Committee
expired at the end of June 2017.
12. Please list each membership you have had during the past ten
years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable,
educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or
religious organization, private club, or other membership organization.
Include dates of membership and any positions you have held with any
organization. Please note whether any such club or organization
restricts membership on the basis of sex, race, color, religion,
national origin, age, or handicap.
American Bar Association
I was a member of the ABA from August 2013 until
February 2015. During my time as a member, I served as
Vice-Chair (from August 2013 to approximately February
2014) and then as Co-Chair (from approximately February
2014 to February 2015) of the Communications Committee of
the ABA's Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice
Section.
Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle
I have been a member of this Catholic church in
Washington, D.C. from 2006 to the present.
District of Columbia Bar
As a lawyer, I have been a member in active standing
of the D.C. bar from 2006 to present.
Federalist Society
I have been a member from 2007 to present.
Federal Communications Bar Association
I have been a member of the FCBA from approximately
2005 to present. In that time, I have held several
positions with the FCBA--specifically: (1) Member, FCBA
Charity Auction Committee (2011); (2) Co-Chair, FCBA Young
Lawyers Committee (2011-13); (3) Chair, FCBA Charity
Auction Committee (2012); (4) Member, FCBA Nominations
Committee (2013); (5) Young Lawyers Representative to the
FCBA Executive Committee (2013, and (6) Member, FCBA
Executive Committee (2014-2017).
Maryland Bar
As a lawyer, I have been a member in active standing
of the Maryland Bar from 2005 to present.
Maryland State Bar Association
I was an active member of this voluntary bar
association from 2005 to around 2010.
University Club of Washington D.C.
I have been a member of this social/athletic club
since 2006.
13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office
(elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any
campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are
personally liable for that debt. No.
14. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar
entity of $500 or more for the past ten years. Also list all offices
you have held with, and services rendered to, a state or national
political party or election committee during the same period.
In 2011, I donated $500 to Marco Rubio's 2010 campaign for Senate
in connection with the retirement of debt. However, the FEC website
identifies this as a donation to ``Rubio, Marco via Marco Rubio for
President.''
15. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary
society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition
for outstanding service or achievements.
Dean's Award in Appreciation for Dedicated Service to the
Communications Law Student Association, Catholic University of
America, Columbus School of Law (2005)
Bishop Scholarship, Catholic University of America, Columbus
School of Law (2002-2005)
Note and Comment Editor, Catholic University Law Review
(2004-2005)
Member, Catholic University Law Review (2003-2004)
Second Honors, Georgetown University (Fall 1999)
Dean's List, Georgetown University (Spring 2000)
16. Please list each book, article, column, or publication you have
authored, individually or with others. Also list any speeches that you
have given on topics relevant to the position for which you have been
nominated. Do not attach copies of these publications unless otherwise
instructed.
Based on my recollection and research, I have identified the
following:
Panel Discussion, Modernizing Europe's Digital Rules,
European Internet Forum and GSMA Mobile World Congress 2017,
Barcelona, Spain (February 26, 2017)
Panel Discussion, Meet the 8th Floor International Legal
Advisors, Federal Communications Bar Association, Washington,
D.C. (October 24, 2016)
Panel Discussion, Hot Policy Topics, Competitive Carrier
Association 2016 Annual Convention, Seattle, Washington
(September 21, 2016)
Panel Discussion, Emerging Issues in Wireless: The FCC and
NTIA Perspective, CTIA Super Mobility 2016, Las Vegas, Nevada
(September 7, 2016)
Remarks at New Direction's Digital Single Market Summit,
Brussels, Belgium (October 14, 2015)
Panel Discussion, Washington Goes Mobile--FCC & NTIA Experts
on the Issues, CTIA Super Mobility 2015, Las Vegas, Nevada
(September 9, 2015)
Panel Discussion, The Regulatory Landscape: Updates and Hot
Issues in Washington, Competitive Carrier Association 2014
Annual Convention, Las Vegas, Nevada (September 9, 2014)
Panel Discussion, A View from Washington, PCIA's 2014
Wireless Infrastructure Show, Orlando, Florida (May 20, 2014)
Panel Discussion, Meet the Wireless Advisors, Federal
Communications Bar Association, Washington, D.C. (March 20,
2014)
Co-Author, Developments in Administrative Law and Regulatory
Practice 2013 (Communications), ABA Section of Administrative
Law and Regulatory Practice (2013)
Co-Author, ``Fifth Circuit Upholds FCC's Shot Clock/Tower
Siting Ruling,'' Wiley Rein LLP (Winter 2012)
Co-Author, ``FCC Provides Guidance on Net Neutrality
Rules,'' Wiley Rein LLP (Summer 2011)
Co-Author, ``FCC Adopts Net Neutrality Rules,'' Wiley Rein
LLP (Winter 2010)
Speaker, ``Regulatory Year In Review,'' 37th Annual ACUTA
Conference, Las Vegas (Summer 2008)
Speaker, ``Regulatory Update From Washington,'' 36th Annual
ACUTA Conference, Miami (Summer 2007)
Speaker, ``E-Discovery: What Your Lawyer Wants From You,''
Voice Report Podcast (Spring 2007)
Speaker, ``2006 Legislative & Regulatory Wrap-up,'' ACUTA
Seminar, Washington (Winter 2007)
Co-Author, ``How Federal Preemption Helps Tower Owners,''
Above Ground Level Magazine (Fall 2006)
17. Please identify each instance in which you have testified
orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
governmental capacity and specify the date and subject matter of each
testimony. None.
18. Given the current mission, major programs, and major
operational objectives of the department/agency to which you have been
nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you
believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for
which you have been nominated, and why do you wish to serve in that
position?
I believe my background and experience qualifies me to serve as a
Commissioner at the FCC. I went to law school fifteen years ago to
study communications law and policy, and I ultimately obtained a
certificate in communications law studies in addition to my J.D.
During law school, I interned twice at the FCC and once with the
U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet. Those
experiences provided me with valuable insights, and many of the
professionals I met during those internships continue to be my mentors
and friends. Those experiences also confirmed that I made the right
decision to study communications law, and they solidified my interest
in spending my career working as a lawyer on telecom issues.
After graduating law school, I accepted a job at a law firm where I
could gain broad experience working on various telecom issues.
The law firm experience also helped sharpen my legal research and
writing skills. I later accepted an appellate clerkship, which gave me
the chance to learn how judges make decisions. It also provided me with
exposure to many different areas of law and improved my analytical
skills.
Given my interest in telecom, I applied over five years ago for a
GS position with the FCC's Office of General Counsel. It was an honor
to get the chance to work at the FCC. In that job, I focused on
providing legal advice to FCC staff in the agency's wireless, public
safety, and international bureaus, and I learned a lot about the
agency's processes and procedures. Following that experience, I served
for nearly three years as an advisor to FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai on
wireless, public safety, and international issues. Since then, I have
been serving as the FCC's General Counsel, where I provide legal advice
to the Commission and FCC staff on all matters within the agency's
jurisdiction.
I believe these experiences show that I am qualified to serve as a
Commissioner.
Turning to the second part of the question, I wish to serve as a
Commissioner because I believe in public service and in the FCC's
mission. The American public has much to gain from telecom policies
that promote their interests, that create good-paying jobs, that grow
the economy, and that help unleash new innovations. I want to work on
putting those policies in place. Whether it is promoting broadband
infrastructure deployment, facilitating the roll out of 5G
technologies, protecting consumers, or advancing public safety, the
agency and its talented staff make a real difference in the lives of
all Americans. It would be an honor and a privilege to work as an FCC
Commissioner and, alongside the many skilled professionals at the
agency, help put telecom policies in place that will advance the public
interest.
19. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to
ensure that the department/agency has proper management and accounting
controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large
organization?
The Commission has an obligation to ensure that there are proper
management and accounting controls in place so that the American public
knows that their government is operating in an effective and efficient
manner. If confirmed, I would work to ensure that the agency follows
strong internal controls, and I would want to take as active a role as
possible in ensuring that the agency is properly managed.
With respect to my own management experience, I have served as the
FCC's General Counsel, which includes overseeing a staff of about 80
people. The Office of General Counsel reviews nearly every major action
the FCC takes and is responsible for advising all Commissioners, the
heads of the agency's bureaus and offices, and all FCC staff on matters
before the agency. The Office of General Counsel consists primarily of
an Administrative Law Division, which provides FCC leadership and staff
with legal advice on a broad range of communications and general
administrative law issues, and a Litigation Division, which represents
the Commission in Federal court when parties challenge an agency
action. As the General Counsel, my job is to supervise and support this
team. I have done my best to accomplish this by being proactive,
meeting formally and informally with the professionals in the group,
timely reviewing, drafting, and providing feedback on matters, and
actively helping the team to identify and implement practical solutions
to the many questions that are presented to the Office of General
Counsel for review.
20. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the
department/agency, and why?
1. Promoting Broadband Deployment. One of the key challenges the FCC
faces is ensuring that every American has access to broadband.
In the five years that I have worked at the FCC, I have had the
chance to meet consumers, innovators, and entrepreneurs from
across the Nation that depend on broadband access for jobs and
opportunity. So the FCC must continue to promote policies that
will spur broadband deployment and competition throughout the
country. Getting this right is important because the
connectivity and opportunity broadband deployment enables can
harness the talents of all Americans, create good-paying jobs,
and help promote our Nation's economic recovery. If confirmed,
I would work to ensure that the FCC pursues policies that will
promote broadband deployment and competition.
2. Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Wireless. The wireless market in
the United States has been the envy of the world. The policies
the FCC put in place a decade ago resulted in this country
becoming the leader in the deployment of 4G wireless
technologies. The challenge is to ensure that we maintain that
leadership as 5G and other advanced and competitive wireless
networks (terrestrial and satellite alike) come online.
Spectrum and infrastructure are going to play key roles in
determining whether we meet that challenge. On the spectrum
front, the FCC must continue to pursue an all-of-the-above
approach. We need a spectrum pipeline that can deliver a mix of
low-, mid-, and high-band spectrum into the market. And we need
to ensure that providers can choose from a mix of licensed,
unlicensed, and shared spectrum bands to meet consumer demand.
On the infrastructure side, the FCC must take a fresh look at
its approach and ensure that its policies are tailored to
promoting next-generation deployments. If confirmed, I would
work to ensure that the U.S. maintains its leadership in
wireless.
3. Promoting Public Safety: While technology continues to evolve,
one constant is the FCC's obligation to promote public safety.
This includes taking steps to facilitate the transition to
Next-Generation 911 (or NG911), which can bring innovative
solutions to our public safety community and life-saving
advances to those in need of emergency services. It also means
that the FCC must play its part in ensuring that public safety
officials and first responders have access to the advanced
communications technologies that will allow them to do their
jobs safely and effectively. If confirmed, I would work with
all stakeholders to ensure that the agency is fulfilling its
public safety obligations.
b. potential conflicts of interest
1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation
agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates,
clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement
accounts.
During my time working at Wiley Rein LLP, I contributed to and
participated in the firm's 401(k) plan, which included a matching
contribution from the firm. That plan is with Fidelity Investments.
Neither I nor my former employer have made any further contributions to
the defined contribution plan, which is a diversified holding, after I
left my former employer in 2012.
2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal,
to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business,
association or other organization during your appointment? If so,
please explain. No.
3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in
the position to which you have been nominated.
In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with
the Office of Government Ethics and the FCC's Alternate Designated
Agency Ethics Official to identify any potential conflicts of interest.
Any potential conflicts of interest that might arise will be resolved
in accordance with the terms of my ethics agreement with FCC's
Alternate Designated Agency Ethics Official. I understand that my
ethics agreement has been provided to the Committee. I am not aware of
any potential conflicts of interest other than any that are the subject
of my ethics agreement.
4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial
transaction which you have had during the last ten years, whether for
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the
position to which you have been nominated.
In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with
the Office of Government Ethics and the FCC's Alternate Designated
Agency Ethics Official to identify any potential conflicts of interest.
Any potential conflicts of interest that might arise will be resolved
in accordance with the terms of my ethics agreement with FCC's
Alternate Designated Agency Ethics Official. I understand that my
ethics agreement has been provided to the Committee. I am not aware of
any potential conflicts of interest other than any that are the subject
of my ethics agreement.
5. Describe any activity during the past ten years in which you
have been engaged for the purpose of directly or indirectly influencing
the passage, defeat, or modification of any legislation or affecting
the administration and execution of law or public policy.
For the past five years, I have worked at the FCC and been involved
in various public policy debates on a wide-range of communications law
issues. In my time at the agency, I have also been asked on occasion to
review or discuss legislative proposals. Prior to joining the FCC, I
was an associate at a law firm where I worked on a broad spectrum of
communications and other issues. At no time in my career, however, have
I been a registered lobbyist.
6. Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest,
including any that may be disclosed by your responses to the above
items.
Any potential conflicts of interest will be resolved in accordance
with the terms of my ethics agreement with the FCC's Alternate
Designated Agency Ethics Official, which I understand has been provided
to the Committee.
c. legal matters
1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics,
professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a
complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special
Counsel, professional association, disciplinary committee, or other
professional group? If yes:
a. Provide the name of agency, association, committee, or group;
b. Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
personnel action was issued or initiated;
c. Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
personnel action;
d. Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action,
complaint, or personnel action.
No.
2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by
any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal,
State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain. No.
3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were
an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency
proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please
explain. No.
4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain. No.
5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual
harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or
any other basis? If so, please explain. No.
6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information,
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in
connection with your nomination. None.
d. relationship with committee
1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with
deadlines for information set by congressional committees? Yes.
2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can
to protect congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal
for their testimony and disclosures? Yes.
3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested
witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with
firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes.
4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly
constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be
reasonably requested to do so? Yes.
______
Resume of Brendan Carr
Experience
Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC
General Counsel, Office of General Counsel (April 2017-Present)
Acting General Counsel, Office of General Counsel (Jan. 2017-April
2017)
Chief legal advisor to the Commission and FCC staff on all
matters within the agency's jurisdiction, including broadband,
wireless, wireline, media, consumer protection, public safety,
enforcement, and competition matters
Manage staff of about 80 lawyers and other professionals
Advise all FCC personnel on compliance with ethics laws and
serve as the agency's head ethics official
Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC
Legal Advisor, Office of Commissioner Ajit Pai (Feb. 2014-Jan. 2017)
Served as legal advisor on wireless, public safety, and
international issues
Developed policies that promote broadband deployment
Worked with FCC staff across the agency to implement key
policy priorities
Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC
Attorney, Office of General Counsel, Administrative Law Division (July
2012-Feb. 2014)
Provided legal and strategic advice on a broad range of
wireless, public safety, and international matters
Advised the Commission on its legal authority to achieve
various competition and spectrum policy goals
Wiley Rein LLP, Washington, DC
Associate, Communications, Litigation, and Appellate Groups (Sept.
2005-Aug. 2008 & Aug. 2009-June 2012)
Researched and drafted appellate briefs in cases involving
appeals of FCC orders and other matters
Advised clients regarding compliance with the Communications
Act and other Federal and state laws
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, Columbia, SC
Law Clerk, Judge Dennis W. Shedd (Aug. 2008-July 2009)
U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Washington, DC
Legal Intern, Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the
Internet (Jan. 2004-May 2004)
Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC
Legal Intern, Office of Commissioner Kathleen Abernathy (Sept. 2003-
Dec. 2003)
Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC
Law Clerk, Enforcement Bureau, Spectrum Enforcement Division (May 2003-
Aug. 2003)
Education
Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law, Washington, DC
J.D. Magna Cum Laude and Certificate, Institute for
Communications Law Studies (May 2005)
Catholic University Law Review, Note and Comment Editor Vol.
54; Staff Member Vol. 53; President, Communications Law Student
Association; Recipient, Dean's Award; Bishop Scholar
Georgetown University, Georgetown College, Washington, DC
B.A. in Government with minors in History and Anthropology (May
2001)
Second Honors; Dean's List; Presented research paper at the
Inter-disciplinary Student Conference
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Carr.
I'm going to start off, and I'm going to ask, because we're
going to have a vote coming here quickly, and then the
Republicans are all invited to the White House for a noon
meeting. So we're going to have to try and wrap this up by that
time. So if everybody can be respectful of everybody else's
time, we'll try and move this along.
Chairman Pai, Ms. Rosenworcel, and, Mr. Carr, I know each
of you appreciates the importance of cooperation between the
FCC and Congress. Nevertheless, these nomination hearings give
us an opportunity to underscore that point. If confirmed, will
you pledge to work collaboratively with this Committee and its
members to provide solid, thorough, and timely responses to our
requests for information?
Chairman Pai. Yes.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Yes.
The Chairman. And to the panel, in every broadband report
since the FCC adopted its USF reforms in 2011, the Commission
has stated that broadband is not being deployed to all
Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion while also noting
the disparity of broadband between urban and rural areas.
Nonetheless, many of the small providers deploying broadband in
the hardest to serve parts of America have seen USF funding for
their project cut repeatedly and in increasing amounts. The law
requires the FCC to ensure broadband is made available in rural
areas in a manner that's reasonably comparable to services in
urban areas, but by its own account, the FCC has failed to do
so.
To each of you I would ask, will you commit to conducting a
thorough economic analysis of the impact of these cuts on
broadband deployment in rural areas before allowing any further
reduction in the percentage of recovery for high-cost areas?
Chairman Pai. Yes.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Yes.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Chairman Pai, you have proposed an FCC inquiry to evaluate
new uses for mid-band spectrum, something that I called for in
a letter to you last month. How can Congress support the FCC's
efforts to bring mid-band spectrum forward for commercial use
in a timely fashion? And what key issues does the FCC think
will need to be addressed to make this happen?
Chairman Pai. Thank you for the question, Chairman. I think
you highlighted in your letter one of the key areas of action
that has long been dormant to the FCC. We traditionally have
focused on bands below 3.7 gigahertz and above 24 gigahertz.
And pursuant to your letter, we took a look at the lay of the
land and thought this is ripe for a Notice of Inquiry. And so
recently I proposed to my colleagues, and we'll be voting on
soon, a Notice of Inquiry that would tee up a variety of bands
between 3.7 and 24 gigahertz, in particular, the 3.7 band, the
5.9 band, and the 6.4 gigahertz bands. We are hopeful that
these bands in particular will generate substantial public
comment and that we will be able to maintain U.S. leadership in
spectrum policy by figuring out which areas are possible for
licensed and unlicensed innovation going forward.
In terms of the Committee's efforts, we would certainly
want to keep you informed every step of the way. And if you
have particular views on bands that you think the FCC should be
focusing on, we would certainly welcome that input.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Commissioner Rosenworcel, in a hearing earlier this year on
broadband infrastructure, we looked at how a number of states
have passed legislation aimed at reducing barriers to broadband
deployment. Some states and municipalities have streamlined
their processes to foster private investment in new commercial
services while others have not. To help address existing
barriers, we are also exploring potential legislative
solutions.
So the question is, apart from direct investment, what do
you think can be done at the Federal level to speed broadband
infrastructure and deployment?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator, for the question. I
think there are a variety of things that can be done, some of
which have been discussed before this Committee, including
``dig once'' policies and ensuring that all Federal actors use
the same contracts to facilitate deployment on Federal
property.
Furthermore, I think it would be useful for the FCC going
forward to contact other Federal actors in this country, like
the Department of Transportation, the Department of the
Interior, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, that have facilities
all across the country and see if through a Memorandum of
Understanding we can't reach a commitment that any efforts to
deploy or collocate on those facilities could be accomplished
in a short period of time.
With one-third of the Nation's lands being Federal lands, I
think we can set a good example and hopefully export that
example to municipalities across the country.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Chairman Pai, the National Legal and Policy Center reports
that 1.3 million comments filed in the net neutrality
proceeding are from international filers, with more than
300,000 coming from the same address in Russia in support of
the 2015 Title II rules. And there have been many other stories
of fake or abusive comments being filed.
So the question is, how do you weigh these kinds of
suspicious comments with those comments that are more
substantive and based on sound policy arguments?
Chairman Pai. Thank you for the question, Chairman. This is
a key issue. Obviously, the FCC, in undertaking this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, wanted to establish an open process where
anyone who had an interest in the issue could voice his or her
views. And to my understanding, there have been concerns on all
sides about the veracity of some of these comments.
At the end of the day, once the comment period closes and
the FCC's talented staff takes stock of the facts in the
record, we are ultimately guided by the Substantial Evidence
Test, which is outlined in Section 706 of the Administrative
Procedure Act and was expounded by the Supreme Court in the
Consolo case in 1966. Essentially the question is, has the
agency collected evidence that a reasonable person would agree
would be adequate to support whatever conclusions were
ultimately made? That has long been our lodestar on this and
any other issue that we contemplate. And so that's eventually
the standard that we will apply, and we will figure out what
the appropriate judgment is based on those facts that are in
the record.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Nelson.
Senator Nelson. Mr. Chairman, isn't it interesting that we
have to be concerned about comments being filed from Russia?
It's a new day.
Mr. Carr, I want to follow up a policy question, that it's
hard to recall a similar situation where someone was nominated
to serve at the FCC alongside rather than what has been
typical, to follow their current boss. And, of course, it
raises a question of independence. And it's necessary that this
Committee raise this question of independence.
How independent can you be of Chairman Pai? Can you name
for the Committee a time at which you substantively disagreed
with Chairman Pai on an FCC matter or proceeding?
Mr. Carr. Senator, thank you very much for the question. I
think it's a good one. Independence is critically important for
the agency and for the decisionmakers at the agency. I've been
at the Commission for over 5 years in a variety of roles. I've
had various clients in those jobs, and I hope that I've always
served their interests.
When I had the chance to work for the Commissioner, I gave
him my best candid advice. Sometimes he took it, sometimes he
didn't take it. What I can commit to you going forward is I'll
make my own decisions, I'll call it the way I see it based on
the facts, the record, and what I think serves the public
interest independent of where other people come out. At the
same time, I would hope that, if confirmed, all five
Commissioners can find common ground far more often than not.
Senator Nelson. OK. But that's not the question. The
question is, can you name an instance, substantive
disagreement, as we evaluate your independence?
Mr. Carr. Senator, thank you. As I noted, I gave him my
best advice I could on a variety of issues. He didn't always
agree with me on those, but given the importance of having sort
of a candid and free exchange with staff, and I think I want to
leave it at that for now, that I can commit to you going
forward that I'm going to be independent in my decisionmaking.
Senator Nelson. Well, we appreciate that commitment, but
we've got to evaluate your independence. So you simply will not
name an incidence for the Committee's evaluation where you
might have disagreed with him.
Mr. Carr. Having been sort of a lawyer at the time for then
Commissioner Pai, I think I just want to leave those
discussions.
Senator Nelson. Well, let me ask you this: do you see any
instances in the future that you would disagree with him?
Mr. Carr. I certainly have no interest in agreeing with him
when I don't believe that that's the right outcome. As I've
noted, my hope is the agency works best when we work in a
bipartisan basis. I think the vast majority of what we do
should be consensus based. I would look to work with all
Commissioners if confirmed, but there is no one individual that
once I make my mind up is going to move me off that position. I
think my record over the years shows that I'm not a shrinking
violet and I'm confident standing on my own feet and making
these decisions.
Senator Nelson. Mr. Carr, that is not confidence building
of those of us who are wondering about your future independence
from the boss that you have so ably served in the last number
of years.
Well, let me ask you about the E-rate program. It's a great
success story of the 1996 Telecom Act. As you know, students
have access that they never had before. Just in my state alone,
libraries have received over $160 million in E-rate funds in
2015, and this program, it's making a real difference in the
lives of citizens in our state.
The Nation's students and the teachers and the libraries
are going to hold us accountable for any changes if we roll
back the E-rate program, a bipartisan program I might say, that
has been bringing Internet connectivity and broadband to
schools and libraries.
So I asked the Chairman on previous occasions, and I will
ask you now, will you commit to wait--and I will remind you the
FCC previously said it would wait until at least next year
before attempting to make changes to this critical program. We
need to see how the FCC's previous E-rate modernization efforts
are working in order to guarantee that the Nation, and, in
particular, our students, can realize the benefits from the
reform efforts. Can you make that commitment?
Mr. Carr. Senator, thank you for the question and thank you
for the work that you've done on E-rate. I agree with you that
this is a critically important program that is serving
important needs. What I can commit to you is that I approach
this issue with an open mind as to timing, as to outcome, and I
don't have sort of a preordained view of the approach here.
Senator Nelson. So you cannot commit to waiting before we
get those reports on evaluating the E-rate program?
Mr. Carr. Senator, I think it's important that before
making any changes to a program, we know that if it's working
or if it's not working, if it needs a tweak or if it in fact
does not need a tweak.
Senator Nelson. Can you commit to waiting to see the
evaluation before you start making changes to the E-rate
program?
Mr. Carr. Senator, I'm not familiar with the specifics in
terms of what that evaluation would be or what timeframe it
would be, but I can commit to you that I would not be making or
casting a vote to change a program until we had information
about whether it was working or not working.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Nelson.
Next up is Senator Lee.
STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH
Senator Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Thanks to all of you for being here.
This hearing gives us a really good opportunity to talk
about how the American people can best take advantage of
emerging technologies that give people access to more
information.
We're currently facing a lot of problems in this area,
challenges I guess one could say. Some of those challenges are
physical and logistical. Other challenges relate to and are the
product of government interference, legal and regulatory
problems that the Federal Government itself has created.
The Federal Communications Commission's 2015 Open Internet
Order is the perfect example of the intrusive, heavy-handed
government regulation causing delay in industry, causing
uncertainty in the industry, and, in effect, in the long run, I
believe, limiting access by the American people to this
technology that has the ability to benefit so many people.
A recent New York Times article claimed that total
investment by publicly traded broadband companies increased by
5.3 percent as compared to the two-year period immediately
before the issuance of the 2015 Order, that is, during the two-
year period encompassing 2013 and 2014, to the end of the two-
year period immediately following it, that is, 2015 and 2016.
But this claim highlights a couple of major problems that
result from overregulation, and I'll address each of them in
turn.
First, it fails to disclose what the actual investment in
infrastructure is. This 5.3 percent figure that I cited from
the New York Times study refers to total top-line investment,
not to capital investment in the United States, not to
expenditure in this type of infrastructure here at home.
More accurately, domestic investment in broadband actually
plummeted, it fell, after the 2015 Order, with some analysts
finding reductions as large as 5.6 percent. So they're saying,
in fact, that the relevant number actually went down, went down
to an even greater degree than the New York Times article was
suggesting it went up.
So first dealing with this issue, Mr. Pai, while it may not
be possible to prove causation here definitively, would you
agree that the FCC's 2015 Open Internet Order has discouraged
companies from investing in broadband infrastructure,
especially in rural areas and among smaller ISPs in the United
States?
Chairman Pai. Senator, that is one of the concerns that we
have raised, and that's part of the reason why we're testing
that proposition in the context of the current Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking.
Senator Lee. Now, I want to follow up on that with my
second point, the second concern I have, with the point raised
by the New York Times article. The second one is a little more
abstract. If the Internet Service Providers are not investing
in broadband infrastructure, then where is their money going?
You know, they might conserve cash or pay dividends, but in
many cases, Internet service providers choose simply to invest
elsewhere, either overseas or in other industries.
For example, AT&T announced shortly after the 2015 Order
was issued that it would spend over $3 billion in Mexico to
expand access to 100 million potential subscribers by 2018.
Just as in countless other industries, overwhelming regulation
of the Internet in the United States promotes consolidation
instead of competition and helps incumbents instead of
disruptors, competitors. And one thing we know about
competition is when we have more of it, prices go down and
quality goes up, and the opposite happens when we have less of
it.
So, Mr. Pai, if our goal is to encourage domestic
investment by and promote competition between Internet Service
Providers in the United States, shouldn't we return to the
Clinton era light-touch approach to the Internet?
Chairman Pai. Senator, that is what the FCC has proposed.
And our goals here, of course, are to preserve the free and
open Internet that all of us cherish, and to promote the
massive infrastructure investment that is necessary to connect
rural and urban Americans alike with digital opportunity. And
that's what we're exploring in the context of the current
proceeding.
Senator Lee. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chairman, I see my time is expired.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Lee.
Senator Markey.
STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS
Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Pai, in 2016, almost half of all venture capital
funds invested in this country went toward Internet-specific
and software companies. That's $25 billion worth of investment.
At the same time, to meet Americans' insatiable demand for the
Internet, U.S. broadband, and telecommunications industry
invested more than $87 billion in capital expenditures in 2015,
and that's the highest rate of annual investment in the last 10
years.
We've hit a sweet spot. The investment in broadband and
wireless technology is high. Job creation is high. The venture
capital investment in online startups is high. So these net
neutrality protections are a problem. It doesn't need any
fixing. The system is working. Yet, Mr. Chairman, you're
proposing to undo the Open Internet Order. What is the problem,
Mr. Chairman, that you are trying to fix?
Chairman Pai. Thank you for the question, Senator. I think
one of the concerns that we have raised is that these
regulations might be dampening infrastructure investment----
Senator Markey. They might be, but there is no evidence of
it.
Chairman Pai. Well, there has been evidence raised, and
that's part of the reason why we are testing this proposition
in the context of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Some have
suggested the FCC should simply issue a declaratory ruling
saying that the facts in the law are so, and that's the way
it's going to be, but we wanted to test this proposition in an
open and public process.
Senator Markey. Well, you know, publicly traded companies
are required by law to provide investors accurate financial
information, including reporting any risks or financial
burdens. However, I have found no publicly traded ISP that has
reported to its investors by law that Title II has negatively
impacted investment in their networks. Many, in fact, have
increased deployment and investment.
So what is the evidence that you're relying upon that you
proceed with toward a potential repeal of these net neutrality
protections?
Chairman Pai. Senator, in the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, we cited some evidence that among the top 12
Internet service providers in terms of size, that investment
was down. Also, a number of smaller providers, including
municipal broadband providers, fixed wireless providers, small
cable companies, and other submitted evidence. But we want to
hear that perspective as well, that you just outlined.
And so we want to make sure, what are the facts in this
context? And, again, this is part of the reason why we have a
notice-and-comment process as opposed to simply the
administering of decree that we find that these rules are in
fact harming them or going to get rid of them immediately.
Senator Markey. Yes. Well, since these net neutrality rules
have been in place, the Internet has thrived. We've seen
tremendous job creation. It's the spot where younger people,
newer companies, go. It's an entrepreneurial engine of growth,
the greatest that we've had in generations in the country's
history. And so from my perspective, as you look at this, I
feel that the evidence right now is not there. And if it was,
the companies, the broadband companies themselves, would have
been in fact providing that evidence to their investors in
their filings, and they have not done so.
So anecdotal evidence is not evidence. OK? There is no
factual basis for that change, and I just think it's going to
go right to the heart of the Internet's growth and job creation
in the coming generations.
Now, if I could, just moving on to the E-rate, I was the
House author of the E-rate when it passed in 1996 into law. Is
there any question in your mind, Mr. Chairman, that this
program is working and that the funding levels are at a level
that meet the needs of our country?
Chairman Pai. Senator, for years I've said that E-rate is a
program worth fighting for, and that is not an abstraction to
me. I visited an Alaska Native school in Fort Yukon, Alaska. I
visited libraries in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. I've seen how
the program is working, and we want to extend that to every
student and every library patron in the country.
Senator Markey. So you will commit to us that you will
preserve the success of this bipartisan program and not
decrease its funding level or the programmatic changes that
undermine or weaken the E-rate?
Chairman Pai. Senator, we have not made any decisions on
that score. We're trying at this point to make sure that the
program works----
Senator Markey. So you won't make a commitment that you
won't reduce the funding?
Chairman Pai. Well, Senator, we're studying obviously ways
to improve the program, if there's any way to make it better--
--
Senator Markey. Ms. Rosenworcel, will you commit that you
won't reduce the funding?
Ms. Rosenworcel. E-rate is our Nation's largest education
technology program, and it is a successful one, and I believe
that the changes that were put in place in 2015 have been
successful. They have reached schools and students in every
state across this country.
Senator Markey. Mr. Carr, will you commit that you won't
reduce the funding?
Mr. Carr. Senator, thank you. I have an open mind as to
what the budget and the numbers should be, and I'm happy to
make a decision when the record is developed on it.
Senator Markey. Yes. Well, I haven't heard clear
commitments, and I think that's very troubling, to be honest
with you, because this is the democratizing force within our
society. As each of you made clear, you believe that it's key
for our future. Reducing the funding, of course, is not going
to help to make sure that every child in our country has access
to the technology they're going to need in order to compete not
only in our own country, but globally in the 21st century. So I
have not been satisfied with the answers which I've heard.
Again, Ms. Rosenworcel, are you saying that you will not
reduce the funding?
Ms. Rosenworcel. I will not reduce the funding.
Senator Markey. Thank you.
So, Mr. Carr, Mr. Pai, I wish that I heard the same
commitment from you as well.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Moran [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Markey.
I arrived at the appropriate time in which it's my turn to
talk and also hold the gavel.
[Laughter.]
Senator Moran. Let me start with all three of our nominees.
We're following the repack issue closely. Last week, the FCC
announced that the total reported reimbursement costs received
from broadcasters who are required to repack as a result of the
spectrum auction was over $2.1 billion. We know that the TV
Broadcaster Relocation Fund, is only authorized to $1.75
billion. If that $2.1 billion is a correct number, then there
is a significant funding shortfall.
Any requests or suggestions that the Commission and
Congress need to act to provide additional resources to prevent
broadcasters from going dark? And do you believe that the 39-
month repack deadline is sufficient?
Chairman Pai. Senator, thank you for the question. As you
pointed out, the estimates have come in a little bit above $2.1
billion. Our fund administrator, as well as the FCC's career
staff, will have to evaluate those cost estimates and determine
whether they are appropriate or not. That number of 2.1 could
go down, it could go up. But I am in a position to say at this
point that we expect, our anticipation is, that the required
expenses to reimburse these broadcasters will be above $1.75
billion. And so I would expect that it would be necessary, if
broadcasters are to be held harmless in this repack, that
Congress would have to provide additional funding.
Senator Moran. Either of the other nominees want to add
anything? Let me follow up, if not, about the time deadline.
Chairman Pai. Oh, yes, Senator. So we are obviously--this
is a very complex process. We have a number of different phases
to which broadcasters have been assigned. We have also given
broadcasters the opportunity to seek placement in a different
phase, and some of them have taken advantage of that. So I'm
not in a position at this point to say whether the 39-month
period is not going to be sufficient, but if we get any
semblance of the record that would suggest that it isn't going
to be sufficient, then we will certainly notify the Committee
promptly.
Senator Moran. Thank you. Let me turn to 5G. We're the
world leader in 4G. I'm worried that we're not taking the
necessary steps to maintain that leadership as we attempt to
deploy 5G. I'm told by carriers that the regulatory barriers to
deploy small cell networks are outdated, hampering investment
and economic growth. Would you agree that 5G deployment is
critical for our economy? And what steps, if so, is the FCC
taking to eliminate barriers and cost to deployment?
Chairman Pai. Senator, I do believe it is absolutely
essential for 5G to develop quickly. And our goal is to make
sure that the U.S. is at the forefront of innovation and 5G.
There are two basic building blocks in terms of a
successful 5G economy in my view, one is spectrum and one is
infrastructure. With respect to spectrum, I think the agency
has spoken for several years now with a unified voice, that we
want to be as inclusive as we can in terms of low-, mid-, and
high-band spectrum. We want to tee up as much spectrum as we
can for commercial use and for 5G innovators to experiment
with, and that's part of the reason why, as I pointed out to
Chairman Thune, that we have teed up this mid-band Notice of
Inquiry that we'll be voting on, on August 3.
In terms of infrastructure, you pointed out one of the key
problems is that there's a lot of infrastructure that's
required for 5G networks. Instead of large cell towers, we're
talking about thousands, tens of thousands, of small cells and
other small infrastructure. But we need to make sure that our
regulatory review is tailored to the nature of the deployment
and to make sure that we work cooperatively with all
stakeholders, including governments, in order to make sure that
our 5G economy thrives consistent with the public interest.
Senator Moran. Commissioner Rosenworcel or Mr. Carr?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you for the question. On a going-
forward basis, the network topology of 5G is going to be very
different than what it was in 4G. We're going to have small
cells dotting our landscape. And so we're going to need to make
sure that not just FCC policies, but national environmental
policy and national historic preservation policies are adjusted
to reflect the realities of those facilities, which are very
different than traditional large cell towers or macrocells.
Senator Moran. Thank you.
Mr. Carr. I would echo those same points. You know, 5G
deployment is going to look very different, and I tend to view
it through not just innovations, but jobs and economy. If we
get the framework right, it could be $275 billion in investment
over the next decade to deploy 5G. That could be 3 million new
jobs, and when you combine it with IoT, you're looking at a
trillion dollar boost to the economy. So we need to get this
piece of it right.
Senator Moran. Thank you all three. Let me ask Chairman Pai
a final question. When do you expect to have the proceedings
finalized and begin to make spectrum available? What is the
status of the spectrum frontier proceedings?
Chairman Pai. Senator, we don't have a particular timeframe
that I can report to the Committee at this point, but we are
actively studying it and we are working with stakeholders to
figure out those parts of the spectrum frontier bands that were
teed up where we can take action, and if there are other areas
where more deliberation is needed, we will obviously put those
on hold. So I can't give you a specific timeframe, but I can
tell you that it's the top priority in terms of spectrum policy
at the Commission.
Senator Moran. Thank you all three.
Senator Schatz.
STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ,
U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you to all the nominees and their families.
Congratulations. I wanted to follow up on a question.
Mr. Carr, I wanted to ask you the first question. Whether
it's 7, 8, 9, 10 million comments, is it fair to say this is a
record number of comments?
Mr. Carr. I believe that's right, Senator, yes.
Senator Schatz. So my question for you is, what weight does
that get in the process? I understand you have a legal standard
when considering this matter, but what weight does the fact
that millions of people have expressed themselves with the FCC,
a historic number, what weight does that get?
Mr. Carr. I think it's very important. I think it shows the
level of interest and the passion in this issue, and that's
something that we need to be taking into account.
Senator Schatz. Thank you.
Commissioner Pai, during your confirmation hearing, I asked
if you agreed with the President's comments calling the media
the enemy of the state? At the time, you didn't answer the
question totally on point, and I understand. You're a Trump
appointee, and you're trying to strike that right balance in
terms of being an independent agency, but still understanding
that you're a Trump appointee, and not wading into either
Presidential politics or partisan politics, but since then, the
President has made a number of additional comments about the
media. He consistently refers to the media as ``fake news
media,'' ``garbage media,'' and made unsubstantiated claims
about various networks and newspapers. For example, on July 2,
the President posted a video of himself wrestling CNN with the
hashtag ``FraudNewsCNN.'' On June 28, the President tweeted,
``The AmazonWashingtonPost, sometimes referred to as the
guardian of Amazon not paying Internet taxes, which they
should, is fake news.''
So the question I have for you, Chairman Pai, is since we
last heard from you, and given that context, have there been
any direct or indirect communications about the media between
you, your office, and the White House that this Committee
should be aware of?
Chairman Pai. Senator, thank you for the question. I have
consistently stated that I believe, and I dare say my
colleagues at the FCC believe, that First Amendment freedoms,
including the freedom of the press are critical, that we value
what broadcasters, newspapers, and others do to keep people
informed, and I have consistently stood up for that value
throughout my time at the Commission. And if I were ever asked
by anyone in the administration to take retaliatory action, for
instance, in a media regulatory proceeding, I would not do so.
Senator Schatz. OK. So have there been any communications
about the media between you, your office, and the White House
that the Committee should be aware of?
Chairman Pai. Senator, I have been aware of the comments
that the President has made and----
Senator Schatz. Right, but has there been any communication
that this Committee should be aware of in light of the exchange
that you've had with members of the Committee during the
confirmation hearing? I understand your position, and I
understand that you're saying were you to ever be asked to do
anything inappropriate, you would decline to do anything
inappropriate. My question is, have there been any overtures or
communications, direct or indirect, that we ought to be aware
of in light of the sort of unsatisfactory resolution of this
issue in the first hearing?
Chairman Pai. Senator, I don't believe so, but if that ever
changes, I commit to the Committee and to you that I will make
sure that you are informed.
Senator Schatz. Thank you.
Mr. Carr, in 2014, when President Obama expressed his
support for net neutrality rules, the Department of Commerce
submitted an ex parte notice with the FCC officially putting
the President's statement in the record. Did the White House,
this White House, file an ex parte with the FCC yesterday when
it announced its support for the current proceeding to unravel
the Open Internet Order?
Mr. Carr. I personally am not aware of any filing at this
time.
Senator Schatz. Is one required? As GC of the Commission,
do you believe one is required?
Mr. Carr. There is sort of a reticulated standard under the
ex parte rules----
Senator Schatz. A what standard?
Mr. Carr. A reticulated detailed standard in the ex parte
rules. And I would have to refresh my recollection of how those
rules work and whether that would be implicated----
Senator Schatz. Can you follow up with the Committee on
this issue?
Mr. Carr. I'm happy to.
Senator Schatz. Commissioner Rosenworcel, I have no
questions for you except to say thank you for your public
service and your patience. Thank you to your family. What
happened to you is unfair. We have to move expeditiously on
your nomination.
And a quick question for each of the nominees. On E-rate,
Hawaii is one of the Nation's leaders in school broadband
thanks to E-rate modernization. Do you commit to keeping the
current E-rate program intact to ensure that all of our
country's students can get the connectivity that they need?
Chairman Pai. Senator, absolutely. I believe in a strong E-
rate program, and that is my commitment going forward.
Senator Schatz. Thank you.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes, absolutely.
Mr. Carr. Yes, I agree.
Senator Schatz. Thank you.
Senator Moran. Senator Blumenthal is recognized.
Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Senator Moran.
Chairman Pai, thank you for the conversation we had
yesterday. I want to pursue just very quickly the questions
that my colleague Senator Schatz asked regarding contacts with
the White House. Are you aware of any contacts or intervention
by the White House in any past or pending merger, including the
AT&T/Time Warner merger?
Chairman Pai. Senator, I am not. No one at the White House
has ever weighed in with me and indirectly with the staff, as
far as I know, on any pending transaction.
Senator Blumenthal. Those kinds of contacts would be
absolutely improper and probably illegal, correct?
Chairman Pai. Well, Senator, I would defer to others as to
legality, but I'll simply say that as a leader of an
independent agency, it is our goal to be an independent actor
reviewing the facts in the law as we see them and not as others
might see them.
Senator Blumenthal. I've been alarmed by reports, and I've
written to the nominee by the Trump administration for
Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust expressing my concern
about those reports that indicated that the White House might
try to use the merger as a way to impede or intimidate the
exercise of First Amendment rights, and you would be troubled
as well, I would assume.
Chairman Pai. Senator, absolutely. As I suggested to you
yesterday, I'm an antitrust lawyer by training. I look at the
facts in the law and I don't allow extraneous political
considerations to intrude on that inquiry.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you. Are you familiar with the
lawsuit brought by state attorneys general against broadband
providers for advertising or offering speeds that they have
failed to deliver?
Chairman Pai. I've seen press reports of one. I'm not aware
if there's a class action of some sort that I should be aware
of.
Senator Blumenthal. As a former attorney general, the
allegations in the complaint certainly seem to me like fraud.
They're charging customers for Internet speeds they fail to
provide, which seems a little bit like theft, stealing. Would
you agree?
Chairman Pai. Well, Senator, I'm not aware of those
particular allegations, but obviously I believe, as we made
clear last week when we took action on slamming and cramming,
that a consumer should get what they pay for, and they should
not have to pay for what they did not ask for.
Senator Blumenthal. As you know, Section 706 of the
Telecommunications Act requires the FCC to report annually on
whether broadband Internet is being deployed to, quote, ``all
Americans in a responsible and timely fashion,'' end quote, and
to take immediate action if it is not. So I would assume that
it would be important to you in fulfilling that obligation,
conducting that review, that companies lying to you about what
the speeds they're delivering to their customers would prompt
some action by the FCC, correct?
Chairman Pai. Well, Senator, I am not familiar with that
interpretation of Section 706. Traditionally, it has been
focused more on deployment, but I'll be happy to take a look at
that or any other legal authority that the FCC might have to
vindicate consumer interests.
Senator Blumenthal. Would you commit to reviewing the
lawsuit that has been brought by 35 states and taking action,
if appropriate?
Chairman Pai. Senator, absolutely. If you wouldn't mind, I
will follow up with your staff and give you the answers that
you need.
Senator Blumenthal. I want to talk briefly about the cost
of wired broadband. Are prices for broadband Internet going up
or down?
Chairman Pai. Senator, it depends on the marketplace. I
think that in some places it is prohibitively expensive, in
some places where there is more competition, the prices are
lower. And our goal is obviously both ubiquitous access and
broad competition in all markets so that every consumer has a
fair chance to enjoy the benefits of the digital revolution.
Senator Blumenthal. I think that the FCC has a
responsibility to know what's happening with broadband prices,
does it not?
Chairman Pai. It does, but again it depends on the
particular marketplace. Every marketplace is different. And so
overall we want to make sure that we have rules in place that
promote competition in every single jurisdiction.
Senator Blumenthal. Do you have an overall assessment of
whether broadband prices are going up or down?
Chairman Pai. I don't currently. That's part of the reason
why we've initiated a Section 706 inquiry that I proposed to my
colleagues back in June. And so that's one of the reasons why
we teed that up, is to figure out, what are the facts in the
marketplace as of 2017? The most recent one was done a couple
of years ago.
Senator Blumenthal. I would like to invite comments by any
of the other nominees.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you for the question, Senator
Blumenthal. This is purely anecdotal. In my house, the cost is
going up. I believe that the agency has a responsibility to
assess the deployment of broadband pursuant to Section 706, as
the Chairman mentioned. And I think on a going-forward basis,
it would be useful if price was a consideration in that
assessment. I think consumers would benefit from that.
Senator Blumenthal. Mr. Carr?
Mr. Carr. Senator, thank you for the question. I agree. I
think we need to be taking full stock of the market when we're
deciding whether it is competitive or not.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
My time is expired. So there are a lot of other questions,
including going into this one in greater depth, and I look
forward to working with you on them.
Thank you.
Senator Wicker [presiding]. Senator Gardner.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you
again to our nominees today.
Chairman Pai, always great to see you, and thank you for
appearing today in this nomination hearing. As we've discussed
many times before, we have an orphan county issue in Southwest
Colorado preventing Coloradans from receiving Colorado TV, an
issue that Commissioner Rosenworcel, I believe, saw firsthand
during her last tenure at the Commission.
While the FCC approved La Plata County's decision in
Southwestern Colorado, their initial market modification
application, out-of-state broadcasters lodged opposition
against it. And we've had back-and-forth comments now. It's my
understanding that the FCC record is complete, and the
Commission may either reaffirm or reverse their original
approval decision.
It's my hope that the Commission will act swiftly to make a
decision on this issue, and I would just like to have your
commitment that the Commission will review the La Plata County
application and make a decision on review of the comments
submitted.
Chairman Pai. Absolutely, Senator, I will.
Senator Gardner. Thank you.
The rest of the Commissioners, if you would like to follow
up on that.
Ms. Rosenworcel. If confirmed, yes.
Senator Gardner. Thank you.
Mr. Carr. Yes.
Senator Gardner. Thank you.
Mr. Carr, we're facing a spectrum crunch in the United
States as more and more consumers opt to stream video and use
other intensive applications over their mobile wireless and Wi-
Fi devices. The economy benefits from billions of dollars
annually being invested in expanding access to commercial
spectrum and seeing platforms and devices develop over the
airwaves. And I think we have to have a mix of low-band, mid-
band, and high-band spectrum to continue this incredible
economic progress.
And so, Mr. Carr, do you believe it's important for
Congress to promote the benefits of establishing a spectrum
pipeline to highlight the need for continuing to free up
spectrum for commercial use through relocation and better
coordination among incumbents?
Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator. Yes, I do. And when you look
at data traffic from 2010 to 2016, some estimates say it's
grown 35 times over that period of time. So I think we need an
all-of-the-above approach. And I think your efforts and those
of Congress on the spectrum pipeline would be very welcome.
Senator Gardner. If other nominees would like to comment on
that.
Ms. Rosenworcel. The answer is yes.
Senator Gardner. Thank you.
Chairman Pai. Yes, Senator.
Senator Gardner. Very good. Thank you.
Chairman Pai, I want to commend the Commission for
releasing a draft order on Mobility Fund Phase II that
recognizes the existing Form 477 data is not adequate for
determining accurate mobile coverage across the country. And I
would hope to get your commitment at the Commission that the
Commission will continue to work to ensure that mapping data
used at the FCC represents an accurate on-the-ground account of
mobile coverage.
Chairman Pai. Absolutely, Senator. We're going to be voting
on August 3 on some steps that make sure that the data we take
into the Commission is accurate so that our output is similarly
worthy of the American people's trust.
Senator Gardner. Thank you. Because obviously in the
Western Slope of Colorado, where you have significant
mountains, valleys, and peaks, and the Eastern Plains, we have
vast expanses of land what appears to have cell phone coverage
on the map, I can tell you the mile marker where the map is not
true.
[Laughter.]
Senator Gardner. Commissioner Rosenworcel, if confirmed,
will you also work to ensure the Commission's mapping is
accurate? Mr. Carr? Do both of you want to answer that?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes.
Mr. Carr. Yes.
Senator Gardner. Thank you.
Chairman Pai, the United States obviously being an
incredible leader in 5G technology, and I think you and Senator
Moran had a discussion about that, but I would just reiterate
the importance of 5G, the opportunities that it poses for this
country, the challenges it poses, and how we can work together
to address it. So I know you've already covered that, but thank
you.
And I know a number of members wait to question, and I'll
yield back my time.
Senator Wicker. Thank you. Thank you.
And Senator Fischer is next.
STATEMENT OF HON. DEB FISCHER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA
Senator Fischer. Thank you, Senator Wicker.
Thank you, Chairman Pai, for visiting Nebraska. A couple of
years ago we had some good meetings with stakeholders, a couple
different meetings. I understand you took a road trip recently,
and you bypassed our state.
[Laughter.]
Senator Fischer. So we hope to get you back there soon.
As you know, Senator Klobuchar and I, along with more than
50 of our Senate colleagues, sent you a letter in April, and we
urged the FCC to take steps to ensure that rural consumers can
purchase standalone broadband. And I want to thank you for your
response and for your acknowledgement that this is a problem
and it's not yet fixed.
Will you commit to continue working with your colleagues
and with Congress to solve this problem so that our rural
consumers can have that in a timely way?
Chairman Pai. I will, Senator, absolutely.
Senator Fischer. And I would ask Commissioner Rosenworcel
the same question.
Ms. Rosenworcel. If confirmed, yes.
Senator Fischer. And, Mr. Carr.
Mr. Carr. Yes, Senator.
Senator Fischer. Thank you.
Chairman Pai, in Nebraska, we have several counties that
are considered orphan counties, and Senator Gardner just spoke
about some of them, and that means they're in a designated
market area for a state other than Nebraska, and I think it's
26 of our counties out of 93 that are affected by this.
In 2015, following the directions set by Congress in the
Satellite Reauthorization bill, the FCC adopted rules to make
it easier for people living in those orphan counties to access
in-state programming. And while these modifications are a good
step, I still am concerned that they really are too burdensome,
and they're really complicated for small communities to be able
to undertake those. What's your opinion of them?
Chairman Pai. Senator, we want to make the process easier,
and that's part of the reason why we have adopted some reforms.
If there are others that are worth considering, please let us
know, and we will be happy to take that into account so long as
the constituents you're referring to are not Denver Bronco
fans.
[Laughter.]
Senator Fischer. Mm-hmm. You know, just a minute.
[Laughter.]
Senator Fischer. We have, you know, Western Nebraska, we
don't have sports--a pro sports team. In Nebraska, we're all
Husker fans, so I'll clarify that for you.
[Laughter.]
Senator Fischer. The FCC, though. Are there any actions
that you can take proactively that would be helpful?
Chairman Pai. I think part of it involves making sure that
we process these applications efficiently. Part of it is also
encouraging others who might be stakeholders, local government
entities, for instance, or individual consumers, to be able to
put into place any of the facts that they think are necessary
for us to make an informed judgment, and for them to be able to
tell us, ``Look, we want to hear what the local weather is in
Western Nebraska, but we're getting information from outside
the state that's not relevant to us,'' that's very helpful to
us because the core value of the entire broadcast business
after all is localism. And that's one of the things that I
think is important for constituents in Western Nebraska and
around the country, to know that when they tune on TV, they
will be able to get information that is relevant to them.
Senator Fischer. I would be interested in visiting with you
more about options that you believe the Commission would take,
and with the other Commissioners as well, or if you believe
there are actions that Congress should take in order to have
that localism truly be effective.
And, Commissioner Rosenworcel, I am sure that you recall
that as he was about to end his term, Chairman Wheeler asked
the FCC's Wireless Bureau to initiate an eleventh hour
investigation of whether certain carriers, zero-rating
services, violated the net neutrality rules. And I was glad
when Chairman Pai rescinded that report and stated that the FCC
would not focus on denying Americans free data. And these plans
are very popular, and they provide innovated benefits to
consumers.
I also find it concerning that Chairman Wheeler issued a
report on his way out the door, after Congress had already
requested that he refrain from issuing controversial items
after the 2016 election.
So, Commissioner, what is your view of zero-rating
services? Do you believe that they provide a tangible consumer
benefit, or do you believe or do you agree with Chairman
Wheeler's report?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you for the question, Senator. To be
clear, I believe that that investigation and those reports were
issued after my departure from the agency. I understand that
with zero net rating, there is the possibility of free
services, and I understand the allure of free services for some
consumers, but I also think, at its extremes, some types of
zero net rating can undermine network neutrality, and that
leads me to be concerned. I think it's an area that merits more
study, but to be candid with you, I do have concerns.
Senator Fischer. Thank you.
Mr. Carr, do you have any comments on that?
Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator. I think, you know, as an
agency, the FCC should be trying to promote competition,
innovation, that includes across different types of service
plans and pricing plans, so I think we need to promote those
types of innovations.
Senator Fischer. And thank you very much to all of you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Fischer.
Senator Peters.
STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN
Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And to our nominees, thank you for your willingness to
serve the public in this very important position, and thank you
for being here today.
Ms. Rosenworcel, I certainly appreciate your strong
commitment as a Commissioner to maintaining a free, open, and
fair Internet. If confirmed, I hope that you're going to
continue with this commitment to broadband Internet as an
essential tool for millions of Americans and also for small
businesses and fast-growing startups in Michigan as well as all
across the country.
Allowing established corporations to prioritize their
services or slow down their competitors I believe would put the
small businesses at a competitive disadvantage and could very
well stifle innovation that's so important for our country.
Would you agree that net neutrality under FCC's 2015 Open
Internet rules helps level the playing field for small
businesses and startups, allowing them to compete fairly
against large established players?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes, Senator, I agree.
Senator Peters. Great. Thank you.
Chairman Pai, an issue that I've talked about many times,
including with you yesterday in my office, I appreciate the
opportunity to spend some time with you, is the 5.9 gigahertz
band, which is vitally important to automotive safety systems,
which will dramatically decrease highway deaths when fully
deployed. Given the fact that we have nearly 40,000 people
dying on our highways every year, this will be truly lifesaving
technologies deployed by auto companies. And for the past 2
years, this Committee has engaged with the FCC, the Department
of Transportation, NTIA, as agencies conduct joint testing of
two proposals for the 5.9 spectrum sharing.
I certainly appreciate our meeting again and your
commitment to keep the members of this Committee informed of
any developments on the 5.9 docket I think is extremely
important to ensure that any decision made for spectrum sharing
are based on data that is both rigorous as well as fully
transparent. So could you please provide this Committee a
status update as to where the testing process is now and the
timeline for making any decisions in that area, please?
Chairman Pai. Thank you for the question, Senator, and I
appreciate your concern, and I'm grateful to the courtesies you
extended to me yesterday as well.
As you know, this is an area where testing has been
exceptionally important. In January, a new round of testing
began, and it became clear that supplemental testing was
appropriate. The agency targeted nine different devices that I
believe are currently being evaluated at the FCC Lab in
Columbia. We are studying the variety of data points that are
coming out of those tests. And we haven't yet reached the point
where we can draw any definitive conclusions, and, therefore, I
can't give you a specific timeframe, but if and when that
testing does conclude, we will keep the Committee apprised, and
in particular you because I know you have a great interest in
this issue.
Senator Peters. Well, I appreciate that. And also just a
follow-up question. How would you characterize the coordination
that you're seeing between those three agencies? And have you
run into any roadblocks in that coordination? And is there
anything that these agencies or players can do that would allow
for a more transparent and smooth process in your mind?
Chairman Pai. Thank you for the question. I think thus far
we have worked very cooperatively with our sister agencies on
this issue, as on many other issues. And so we're all trying to
figure out the best answer here, and so, thus far at least, it
has been a very fruitful and productive relationship.
Senator Peters. Great. Also in follow-up again, Chairman, I
understand that one of your biggest priorities at the FCC is
expanding broadband coverage, closing the digital divide. We
had a long discussion about that yesterday. And as you know,
one of the most important aspects of this is accurate data
collection. As we've heard from Senator Gardner, as well as I
think Senator Fischer brought up the issue as well, so that we
can understand which areas truly have Internet access and
target our efforts to those that do not. And I know you've been
working on this through the Mobility Fund Phase II and the Form
477 reform process.
I'm proud to be a cosponsor of the Rural Wireless Act of
2017 with both Senator Manchin and Senator Wicker--I appreciate
Senator Wicker's leadership on this issue--which would require
the FCC to maintain more up-to-date and accurate data on
wireless coverage, particularly rural areas, but the
legislation would also direct the FCC to establish methodology
within 6 months to improve the validity and reliability of
wireless coverage data and to ensure that coverage data is
collected in a consistent, robust, and efficient way. I would
like to hear more about your plan to reform Form 477 data, and
particularly, would your plan contribute to the type of
methodology that we have outlined in our bill?
Chairman Pai. I appreciate that perspective, Senator. So
with respect to Mobility Fund Phase II, obviously we are not
relying on the Form 477 data as such, given some of the
concerns that have been expressed. We have a tailor-made
significant data collection to ensure that we are able to
proceed with the Mobility Fund auction in a timely way while we
consider the broader issues relating to Form 477.
With respect to Form 477, we have undertaken a
comprehensive review. And at a high level, essentially the goal
here is to make sure that the agency has a very clear picture
of where coverage is and where it is not because the
substantial distorting effects that can result from us
operating on the basis of bad data are tremendous. I mean,
obviously we're diverting subsidies to areas that might not
need the help, we are disincentivizing companies from building
out in areas that are unserved. And if you're in the Upper
Peninsula of Michigan or in Detroit, you need to be able to
have coverage if the FCC says, according to its data, you have
coverage.
And so I'll be happy to work with you on that effort, and I
certainly commend you for your work on that legislation, which
would help us establish some of these standards along the way.
Senator Peters. All right. I appreciate it. I appreciate
your efforts. Thank you.
Chairman Pai. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Peters.
Next up is Senator Cortez Masto.
STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Welcome and thank you for your willingness to serve. And
thank you for the opportunity to meet with all of you. And
welcome to your family, a very exciting day for all of you.
I will have to say I am a little partial to Mr. Carr
because his wife is a native Nevadan I found out. Fantastic.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cortez Masto. Mrs. Rosenworcel, let me start with
you. In the conversation we had, as you well know, we talked a
little bit about the intersection of innovation and
transportation, which obviously is of interest, not just to me,
but to the state of Nevada as well. Where do you see the
constructive place for the FCC to work toward the safe and
reliable advancement of autonomous connected vehicles, unmanned
aircrafts, and smart communities?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you for the question, Senator. Lots
of interesting things are happening with drones and with
autonomous vehicles. A lot of them involve tests, and those
tests are going to require spectrum. I think the FCC should
develop Part 5 experimental license practices that make those
tests easier for industries, research institutions, and
universities. We can do a lot more with these new facilities if
we can test them and have the spectrum necessary to facilitate
those tests, and then get those services in the marketplace.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. I appreciate that. And I
also appreciate the comments with respect to E-rate. I hear
this in Nevada as well. Not only did five of our school
superintendents come to visit me here, but I've had the
opportunity to sit down with our public libraries, and it is a
benefit not just to our urban but our rural communities, and
connecting many people that would not have access to education,
to information that is necessary for workforce development,
applications, so many things. So I'm a big supporter. So thank
you for those comments.
Mr. Carr, when we were together, we talked a little bit
about a concern about cybersecurity and what we need to do in
this space. In the last FCC hearing, I had asked Commissioner
O'Rielly about FCC's place in the challenging cybersecurity
sphere, including the Commission's Cybersecurity and
Communications Reliability Division, that works with the
communications industries to develop and implement improvements
that help ensure the reliability, redundancy, and security of
the Nation's communications infrastructure.
What specifically can the FCC be doing to aid in the
concern and challenge of cybersecurity?
Mr. Carr. Senator, thank you for the question.
Cybersecurity is an important issue, whether it's IoT or just
traditional networks. The FCC, as you note, has a group called
CSRIC that works to develop best practices that the agency can
help push into the marketplace.
The FCC also has network-based expertise, and in this
space, DHS has considered the sector-specific agency in charge
of sort of communications in this area. And so I think we
should be taking our network-based expertise and experts
working with the DHS and trying to sort of consolidate the
efforts there so we don't have an alphabet soup of agencies
potentially working at cross-purposes in the area of cyber.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. I appreciate those
comments.
And then, Chairman Pai, a couple of questions for you, but
let me follow up with one that Senator Blumenthal started with.
And just for clarification, as you sit here today, you are not
aware that USTelecom and NCTA have asked the FCC for a ruling
confirming ISPs are following Federal transparency rules by
posting online their average performance during times of peak
usage, is that correct?
Chairman Pai. Oh, Senator, I'm sorry, I thought Senator
Blumenthal was referring to a lawsuit brought by state
attorneys general. I wasn't aware of that particular lawsuit
that he was referring to.
Senator Cortez Masto. OK. Are you aware that USTelecom and
NCTA have asked the FCC for a ruling confirming the ISP's role
there?
Chairman Pai. Yes, I am aware of that.
Senator Cortez Masto. OK. So I am aware that the various
AGs are concerned that that industry petition to the FCC on
cost transparency represents nothing more than the industry's
effort to shield itself from state law enforcement. What is the
current status of the ruling? And can you speak to your
perspective on whether this is a fair consumer protection issue
to be concerned about?
Chairman Pai. Thank you, Senator. We are actively studying
that issue. We haven't made any determinations yet. We've
obviously been focused on a lot of things at the Commission,
but I can assure you and assure the Committee that we'll keep
you posted before any decision is made, and we'll make sure
that we take the appropriate steps to keep you up to date.
Senator Cortez Masto. Is there a timeline that you can give
us?
Chairman Pai. We have no particular timeline on that
petition.
Senator Cortez Masto. OK. Thank you. And then I appreciate
your response to my QFR from the last FCC hearing when we were
talking a little bit about Federal siting for telecom services
on public and tribal lands.
Chairman Pai. Yes.
Senator Cortez Masto. And in the QFR, you mentioned that
your Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee would be providing
recommendations on how to reduce or eliminate barriers. You
also noted your intention to invite Federal representatives
from key agencies, such as the Department of Interior, to
participate. When can we expect to see the recommendations? And
will they be made public?
Chairman Pai. They will be made public, Senator. The
working groups of the Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee
have been very actively working. We don't have a specific time-
frame on when they are going to report back to us, but the
general ask I gave of them when I initiated the first meeting
was to give us a sense of with respect to the model state code
and the model local codes for deployment at least by the end of
the year, sometime by the fall ideally, if they could give us
some preliminary recommendations at least on where we could
move productively there.
On the other recommendations, they haven't given us a
timeframe. They're obviously working really hard, and we want
to encourage that in a full and transparent way without pushing
them before they're ready to make a decision.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
And I notice my time is up. Thank you very much. I
appreciate the conversation today.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cortez Masto.
Senator Booker.
STATEMENT OF HON. CORY BOOKER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY
Senator Booker. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Carr, are you aware that in the United States of
America, of all the human beings on the planet Earth, one-third
of the incarcerated women are--of all the incarcerated women on
the planet Earth, that one-third of them are in American
prisons?
Mr. Carr. I was not previously aware of that statistic.
Senator Booker. OK. Are you aware that the majority of them
are parents of children under 18?
Mr. Carr. I am now.
Senator Booker. OK. Are you aware that these women don't
get adequate sanitary products and often have to scrape
together dollars to buy tampons and pads? Are you aware of
that, sir?
Mr. Carr. Senator, I am now, yes.
Senator Booker. So do you know that in social science data,
that women who are able and in power to communicate with their
children, that it benefits society in multiple ways, lowers
recidivism rates, lowers the rates of those children themselves
being disciplined at school, lowers the rates at which those
children are expelled from school, lowers the rates in which
those children are incarcerated themselves? Do you know that?
Mr. Carr. Yes, Senator.
Senator Booker. OK. So help me understand how in the United
States of America, if--have you been to a female prison, sir?
Mr. Carr. I've been to a number of prisons.
Senator Booker. Have you been to a female prison, sir?
Mr. Carr. No, I don't believe I have.
Senator Booker. Have you sat with formerly incarcerated
women?
Mr. Carr. I can't recall.
Senator Booker. You can't recall if you've sat down with
women who have been incarcerated to listen to their experiences
in prison?
Mr. Carr. I can certainly say I've never sat down where
that has been the topic of discussion.
Senator Booker. OK. Well, I have, sir, and when you hear
that women have to make incredibly difficult decisions whether
they buy tampons or call their kids at home because of the
usury rates with which these charges they face just trying to
communicate with their children. So can you help me understand
what the logic is behind the FCC abandoning its defense of
capping the cost of these calls, which often are dollars for
minutes? Help me understand that decision.
Mr. Carr. Senator, thank you for the question, and thank
you for your advocacy on this issue. It's a critically
important one, as you pointed out. There is a market failure
when it comes to the rates and the services for inmate calling.
I don't think there is any doubt about that. The question is,
how do we go about solving that?
The FCC, through a number of good faith efforts, 2013,
2015, 2016, took steps to try to address it. Unfortunately,
when those decisions were appealed to the courts, the D.C.
Circuit on four separate occasions entered stays finding it was
more likely than not that the FCC's decision was unlawful.
So to your question, when the administration turned over,
and there was one piece of one of those appeals that was coming
up quickly on oral argument, there was a majority at the FCC
that did not support the FCC's position there. So the question
was, do we abandon the appeal altogether, or do we try to work
to see what portions of that decision we can cobble a majority
together to defend and then go to the court and strenuously
defend them? I'm glad that it was that latter choice that we
did. And the court's decision ultimately did uphold the FCC's
jurisdiction to cap interstate rates and some of the
significant reforms it did with ancillary fees.
There is certainly more work to be done here, and I would
commit to you to working with you and your staff to find lawful
ways that we can address this issue.
Senator Booker. But we abandoned our defense of the
authority of the FCC to cap intrastate prison calling rates.
Mr. Carr. That's correct.
Senator Booker. And your feelings on that abandonment?
Mr. Carr. I wish that we had the authority to do it. It's a
problem. The Communications Act, as set up by Congress, did
not, in my judgment, give the FCC authority to take that step.
But I would welcome specific grants of authority that would
give the FCC the jurisdiction to act here.
Senator Booker. Well, I patently disagree with you about
the authority of the FCC, the urgency of the problem, and the
harm that that failure to defend has caused.
I have other questions, Mr. Chairman, but unfortunately my
time has expired, and out of respect for my fellow colleagues,
I'll conclude.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Booker.
Senator Udall is up next.
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Udall. Thank you, Chairman Thune. Thank you very
much.
Chairman Pai, the last time you were before this Committee,
you were hesitant to answer direct questions about the
President's attacks against FCC-regulated media companies that
have reported stories critical of the administration. And I
appreciate that you were more clear and direct in your written
responses on March 17.
However, President Trump has continued his unprecedented
and dangerous attacks on media organizations that report
stories he does not like. On June 28, President Trump tweeted,
and I quote here, ``The AmazonWashingtonPost, sometimes
referred to as the guardian of Amazon not paying Internet taxes
(which they should) is fake news.'' Many people viewed this
tweet as a threat by the President of the United States to
pursue higher taxes against a company in retaliation for
negative news coverage, and I believe that's outrageous.
On July 5, the New York Times reported this about the White
House and CNN, and I quote here, ``White House advisers have
discussed a potential point of leverage over their adversary, a
senior administration official said: a pending merger between
CNN's parent company, Time Warner, and AT&T.''
Consistent with this reporting, the President himself was
clear on this topic in an October 2016 speech just before the
election. I quote then Candidate Trump. ``As an example--,''
this is a quote direct, ``As an example of the power structure
I'm fighting, AT&T is buying Time Warner, and thus CNN, a deal
we will not approve in my administration because it's too much
concentration of power in the hands of too few,'' end quote.
Speaking of concentration of power, there is another major
media merger pending before the FCC, the proposed acquisition
of the Tribune Company by Sinclair Broadcasting. There are real
concerns that this merger would violate media ownership rules,
but the FCC has already helped pave the way for this merger by
reinstating the so-called UHF discount that enables TV
companies to get bigger. Sinclair now requires all their local
stations to air video commentary pieces by a former Trump
administration staffer who generally supports the Trump
administration. Sinclair's CEO has also been quite
complimentary of you personally.
The contrasting approach here creates the very real
perception that the Trump administration would act to reward
friendly coverage and punish negative coverage. So in light of
the developments since March, I would like to seek renewed
answers from you on two questions I posed in March.
First, will you reassure us that you will exercise your
authority as Chairman of the FCC to regulate the media in an
impartial manner?
Chairman Pai. Yes, Senator.
Senator Udall. Thank you. Have you had any communications
with the White House directly or through an intermediary
regarding any media regulatory issues since March?
Chairman Pai. Senator, I have not directly had any
conversations with anyone in the administration with respect to
media regulatory proceedings. To the best of my knowledge, no
one on my staff or in the FCC has indirectly had any such
conversations as well.
Senator Udall. Thank you. Finally, do you believe it is
appropriate for any Federal official with power over media
organizations to attack or threaten them with legal or
regulatory retaliation over negative news coverage, media
coverage?
Chairman Pai. Senator, I certainly have never done so, and
I commit to you that I will not do so, so long as I have the
privilege of serving at the agency.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much for that answer. I'm
going to follow up with Mr. Carr and Ms. Rosenworcel.
Mr. Pai responded on March 17 to a letter from every
Democratic member of this Committee that posed six questions
along these lines. Will you both commit to answer these same
six questions for the record prior to a Committee vote on your
nominations?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes, Senator.
Senator Udall. Mr. Carr?
Mr. Carr. Yes, Senator.
Senator Udall. Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this
opportunity to note that Senator Hassan and I have requested a
hearing in this Committee on the current state of the U.S.
media landscape. We have not had a hearing on that topic in
over 8 years, and I think it's a very timely one, and I hope
you could reconsider that.
One quick question here, and this should be quick, because
I think it's a yes or no.
Recently, there has been a spike in violence and
intimidation against individual journalists. A Republican
Congressman famously body-slammed Ben Jacobs, a reporter for
the Guardian, after being asked about his position on the House
health care bill 1 day before his special election. A West
Virginia reporter was arrested while asking HHS Secretary Price
about the health care bill as well. Trump White House staff
reportedly have threatened to keep files of dirt on White House
reporters. FCC security also manhandled CQ reporter John
Donnelly and pinned him against a wall after he sought to ask
questions of Commissioner O'Rielly.
Will each of you commit to speak out against violence and
intimidation against reporters and commit that you personally
will set a good example for press access in your own public
activities?
Chairman Pai. Yes.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes, absolutely.
Mr. Carr. Yes, Senator.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Udall.
What I'm going to do, I intend to stay at least through the
entire first round for everybody. But Senator Wicker does have
to go. I'm going to recognize him next, and then we'll continue
to move down the list that we have here.
So Senator Wicker.
STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER F. WICKER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI
Senator Wicker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And, Chairman Pai, as you know, accelerating broadband
development in rural areas is a priority for many members on
both sides of the dais. I've worked closely with you and the
Commission to ensure that the agency's data collection methods
regarding mobile broadband coverage are standardized.
Standardized data is necessary to ensure that funds used to
expand broadband deployment are targeted to truly underserved
and unserved communities in rural America and in my state of
Mississippi.
Would you agree that standardizing data collection is
important to target funds accurately to deploy the broadband in
underserved and unserved areas? And will you commit to ensuring
that the baseline coverage data collected from carriers for the
Mobility Fund Phase II Challenge Process be standardized? And
please discuss how the draft order circulated last week on the
Mobility Fund Challenge Process achieves that objective.
Chairman Pai. Thank you, Senator. And this is one of the
reasons why we broke with longstanding practice in my second
week in office and instituted a policy of publishing every
single proposal in order that the FCC was considering at least
three weeks in advance.
Nowhere is the thicket more complicated than this one. We
want to make sure that we get it right for America's wireless
consumers, and that requires us getting the data right. And so
last week, as you pointed out, we published the proposal that
we're going to be voting on, on August 3 to ensure that this
data is accurate.
And I understand that standardized data collection is one
of the issues that has been flagged. We would love to work with
you and your staff, any interested stakeholders frankly, to
make sure that on August 3 we ensure that we have a process
that makes the input accurate so that the output can be worthy.
Senator Wicker. Will this be a one-time data collection?
Chairman Pai. With respect to Mobility Fund Phase II,
currently that is our expectation, but obviously we are always
open to suggestions on ways to improve our overall data
collection or to broaden----
Senator Wicker. Well, what I would like to mention to all
three of you then, there is a serious question as to how the
Mobility Fund Challenge Process will ensure that recipients of
the funds are meeting build-out commitments over the 10-year
period. Would you like to comment on that?
Chairman Pai. I'd be happy to, Senator. Every dollar that
is spent by the FCC that is ultimately collected from the
taxpayers has to be deployed, it cannot be simply poured down
the drain, and that requires build-out. And so we have
instituted aggressive reporting obligations and build-out
obligations as well to ensure that that money actually goes to
building out 4G LTE in unserved parts of the country. We do not
want that money to be wasted. America's wireless consumers
simply don't have time to wait.
Senator Wicker. Let's have a further discussion on that
with members of the Commission.
While the draft order specifies that cell edge probability
and the cell loading factor will be used by carriers when
creating rural coverage maps, some people remain concerned that
additional factors, such as the assumed signal strength, also
need to be standardized or disclosed in order for the data you
receive to be reliable. Will you commit to working with me and
those stakeholders to address these concerns before the order
is finalized?
Chairman Pai. I would be happy to, Senator.
Senator Wicker. Thank you. And I look forward to you
briefing me and my staff about your efforts in this regard.
Chairman Pai. Thank you.
Senator Wicker. Now let's talk about the Federal permitting
process. And I'll go back to you, Mr. Chairman. I understand
the FCC is working on a proceeding to modernize the
Commission's approach to the National Environmental Protection
Act and the National Historic Protection Act to accelerate the
deployment of wireless infrastructure. There are many onerous
rules in place today that prevent or delay deployment,
including the implementation of antenna sites that are critical
to wireless network build-out.
Please discuss how an update to the Commission's approach
toward environmental and historic reviews may accelerate the
deployment of mobile broadband and the proliferation of 5G
networks to both urban and rural areas, particularly in
existing public right-of-ways that have already undergone
environmental and historic reviews where broadband
infrastructure has already been deployed. And do you think
Congress needs to act on this issue?
Chairman Pai. All great points. Obviously, the regulatory
review, including environmental and historic preservation
review, that applied traditionally to 100-foot cell towers may
not be as relevant when you're talking about a small cell that
could be as small as a pizza box or that you could hold in your
hand. And so we want to make sure for these less obtrusive,
lower power deployments that we tailor the regulatory burden to
the nature of the deployment, as Commissioner Rosenworcel has
pointed out. And so that's one of the things we're looking to
work with all interested stakeholders on, to figure out what is
the appropriate calibration of those rules with respect to
small cells, and distribute antenna systems, and the like.
In terms of additional authority, it may be helpful in some
cases for Congress to give us that authority with respect to
5G, for example. The FCC's jurisdiction over pole attachments
is somewhat circumscribed. And so we would be happy to work
with you, any members of the Committee who are interested, to
find creative solutions that would help us secure the benefits
of the wireless revolution to come.
Senator Wicker. Mr. Carr, do you think Congress needs to
act in this space, or do you have the authority you need?
Mr. Carr. Senator, thank you for the question. There are
certainly some actions that the FCC can take in terms of
streamlining. Congress's help here would certainly be welcome,
whether it's ``dig once'' legislation or work with respect to
Federal lands, where the FCC might have more limited authority.
Senator Wicker. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Wicker.
Senator Cantwell.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you
for this hearing.
I wanted to ask Chairman Pai, we had a town hall on net
neutrality, and I know the Chairman mentioned comments that may
be, you know, artificial and coming into the FCC in regards to
the possible change to net neutrality laws. I know that that's
not--my constituents have very real stories, and we have a very
big Internet economy and app economy and want to continue to
grow that with a very high concentration of software engineers
and great schools like the University of Washington.
So I hope that you will be pulling out of that kind of data
entered into the FCC real examination of business models and
challenges that any change--and obviously we're against any
change to this rule at this point in time--that you are really
going to look at the details that individual businesses and
consumers in my state are filing with the FCC as it relates to
this and not just push out saying, oh, it was just a bunch of
bots or a bunch of Russians.
Chairman Pai. We definitely will, Senator. And when I say
we will make a full and fair review of the record, it means
exactly that: that we don't exclude points of view for any
ideological or political reasons. We take an accurate
assessment of what is in the record, and that includes the
perspectives from startups and consumers of the types who made
their voices heard at the town hall that you held.
Senator Cantwell. Thank you. Well, we certainly hope you
will do that because it's very, very important to us that we
continue that economy.
Second, when I look at this issue in general about
cybersecurity and the FCC, and I look at the numbers,
Department of Homeland statistics, of 209 cyber attacks on
critical infrastructure in 2016, you know, a big increase,
don't you think that the FCC should be doing more to look at
the communication risks of the communications sector
specifically, not just advocating that to Homeland Security?
We're certainly pushing legislation here on the critical
infrastructure side with the DOE to make sure like on pipelines
and the electricity grid, but why not you take more
responsibility at your post in looking at the potential hacking
and cybersecurity risks of our communications systems?
Chairman Pai. Senator, this is a critical issue, and in
this capacity as Chairman, I have had the ability to be briefed
in a classified setting in a secure facility at the FCC on
these issues. I can assure you that I take a firsthand
appreciation of how serious it is.
At the end of the day, we are guided by the rule of law,
and Congress has, for better or worse, given us relatively
circumscribed authority in this area. Within the limits of that
authority, I have certainly tried to engage as best we can with
our sister agencies to provide them information about some of
the threats to the networks that we see and to keep myself
apprised on some of the threats as they materialize. If
Congress gives us additional authority, I can assure you that I
would faithfully administer it to ensure that businesses and
consumers everywhere are protected.
Senator Cantwell. Ms. Rosenworcel, is there more that we
could be doing at the FCC now in giving direction to the
communication industry on security?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes, Senator. You know, the very first
sentence of the Communications Act speaks about the use of
communications for the safety and life and property. I think
Congress was very clear that they intended the FCC to have a
role. So I would disagree with my past colleague sitting here
to my right.
Senator Cantwell. Well, I'm just--you know, maybe this is
something for the future, since we did have, Mr. Chairman, a
good cybersecurity hearing earlier in the year. I just think
that everyone's devices, now that everything is networked, now
that everything is together, they are the entry point
obviously, and I'm very concerned after the Washington Post
issued this story about how the Russian government hacking of
our energy infrastructure at a nuclear power plant, I'm just
thinking it's time to take all of this serious, as so many
devices are the most vulnerable entry point to a network that
now is controlled by people in remote situations. So hopefully
we could follow on, on our last cyber hearing and get more
input.
But thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cantwell. That is an issue
that I think will be an ongoing concern for this Committee and
for all the people across this country. Yes.
Next up is Senator Baldwin.
STATEMENT OF HON. TAMMY BALDWIN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN
Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Recently, in Wisconsin, I held roundtables on rural
broadband access in two communities, Eagle River, in Vilas
County, which is near the northern border in our state with the
Upper Peninsula of Michigan, and Monticello, which is in Green
County near the Illinois border, southern border, of our state.
And they're very diverse communities, but there were
certainly some very similar themes that I heard in both
communities about their lack of broadband access and how it
harms their economic development, how it affects their ability
to attract new families to live there or vacation there, how it
affects local health care providers to fully utilize the
promise of health IT and electronic medical records, an example
of which is in Green County, the southern county I visited. The
local hospital does have a sophisticated health IT system, but
patients can't access their electronic medical records at home
without access to broadband or do something simple like
uploading a photo of a healing wound to avoid a travel to a
clinic or a hospital if there's no need. And so these were
themes I know you're well familiar with.
I also heard intense frustration of those people on the
ground who just want to fix this problem, who want to deploy
the fiber or whatever means, the disconnect between the needs
of these communities and the Federal programs that they know
exist to help get broadband to places like theirs. And so I
know, Mr. Carr, we talked a little bit about this in our
earlier meeting. How would you respond to the folks of Eagle
River or Monticello, Wisconsin, who ask, What is the FCC going
to do to make sure that people like them have access to this
critical resource?
Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator, for the question and for your
advocacy on these important issues. There is a lot that the FCC
can and should be doing. One is we need to reduce the cost of
getting services, networks, out to these parts of the country.
The agency right now has some infrastructure proceedings that
are teed up on that.
Spectrum is going to be a key resource as well. There is
more we can be doing to push spectrum out into the marketplace.
And obviously at the end of the day, universal service support
is going to be critical to many parts of the country. We need
to be making sure that we're targeting those funds to these
areas that need it.
Senator Baldwin. I want to continue to focus on rural
broadband deployment and mention--and this is for the whole
panel. I have a two-part question.
One is there has been some confusion or at least lack of
clarity as to whether the President's infrastructure proposal
would include broadband or not. His initial proposal that was
unveiled did not mention broadband, but it was reported that
last month in Iowa he told an audience there that broadband
would absolutely be a part of his $1 trillion package.
Because I'm concerned about the lack of clarity, I guess
we'll start with you, Mr. Carr, and then Ms. Rosenworcel, and
then Mr. Pai, I want to know where you stand with regard to
whether broadband should be a part of this infrastructure
program.
But the follow-up question is, if we indeed successfully
advocate for these resources in an infrastructure package,
would you advocate for those resources to be deployed through
existing FCC programs, through new FCC programs, or programs
outside of the FCC's orbit?
Mr. Carr, why don't we start with you and then Ms.
Rosenworcel.
Mr. Carr. Senator, thank you for the question. Obviously,
with the usual caveat that I defer to Congress and the
administration working out how to put together an
infrastructure package, I believe the Secretary of
Transportation has recently also said that she believes that
broadband should be part of it. I think that would be a good
idea. The FCC does have an existing mechanism, USF, which could
be one potential avenue for distributing those funds.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator, for the question. This
may come as no surprise, but the administration has not spoken
to me about exactly what is going to be in that infrastructure
proposal with respect to rural broadband, so I have no special
knowledge about it. But I do know this, that if we wind up
having additional programs for broadband, whether it's at the
FCC or somewhere else, we need to make sure that the right hand
and the left hand are talking to one another. We have had many
programs in the past at the Department of Commerce, the
Department of Agriculture, in addition to the FCC, and the one
thing I have been struck by is the lack of conversation about
how those programs work together.
Chairman Pai. Senator, in March, in my first major speech
as Chairman, I said that if there were to be an infrastructure
plan, I would urge strongly that digital infrastructure, that
broadband, be a part of it.
And I also urged, with respect to your second question, in
that same speech, that those funds be channeled to the FCC's
existing mechanisms, which are tried and true. We have measures
for fiscal responsibility and accountability, and at the end of
the day, if you approve that package, then you can go to your
constituents and say the tax dollars that you have sent to the
FCC were wisely spent.
I would also add with respect to coordination, there is a
Rural Prosperity working group that I'm privileged to be a part
of. It's convened by the Secretary of Agriculture. And so I've
spoken to him, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development, and others to figure out ways to
synthesize our efforts so that it's not a bunch of cooks
cooking a bunch of different meals, we're all focused on the
one prize here, which is delivering rural broadband in a
consistent and clear way.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Baldwin.
Senator Hassan.
STATEMENT OF HON. MAGGIE HASSAN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE
Senator Hassan. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Ranking Member,
especially for allowing this hearing to go on this long so we
all get a chance to ask questions. I really appreciate it.
I also really appreciate the three of you. Congratulations
on your nominations. And also congratulations to your family,
and particularly an incredibly well-behaved group of children
who are sitting through this hearing.
Mr. Carr. I don't see mine, so----
[Laughter.]
Senator Hassan. You know, everybody has their tolerances,
but I think they're all doing extremely well.
I wanted to touch for just a minute on a topic that Senator
Udall raised, and I think others have, too. Obviously there is
a link between the strength of our democracy and a free press.
And the First Amendment in our Constitution enshrines this
national value by guaranteeing freedoms for the press and
guards against censorship. And I share many of my colleagues'
concern that this administration has very little regard for
this value.
To Senator Udall's point, he and I have asked for a hearing
kind of on the state of the media and press since there hasn't
been a hearing on this issue since I think it's about 2009,
because of the hostility we're seeing directed at the free
press and because of the increase in consolidation and the
prospect of even more. So I'll reiterate that request as well.
But my question for each of you is, if confirmed, will you
commit to upholding the values of the United States
Constitution throughout your duties, including those shrined in
the First Amendment protecting the free press?
Mr. Pai.
Chairman Pai. Yes, Senator.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes, Senator.
Senator Hassan. Thank you.
Mr. Carr. Yes.
Senator Hassan. Thank you very much. I wanted to come back
to the E-rate program. And, Ms. Rosenworcel, you have really
worked diligently on these policies, and I really enjoyed our
conversation about your work to help close the so-called
homework gap. I am really grateful for your efforts because
you're really working to ensure that all across the country our
students have access to quality broadband so that they can
complete their studies and ultimately compete in a global
marketplace.
When I was Governor, I started the New Hampshire School of
Connectivity Initiative, a cross-agency partnership to bring
high-speed Internet access to all of our schools. Since that
initiative began in 2015, more than 25,000 of our students have
received broadband access at school. The program would not be
possible without E-rate.
I am really pleased that the current Governor of New
Hampshire has continued my administration's initiatives on
broadband, including following through with setting aside state
matching funds for the proposal for broadband.
In order to truly reap the educational benefits of a
connected classroom, we are seeing more and more that simply
having connection is not enough, right? We need greater
broadband speeds and higher capacity to meet the needs of our
students. Fiber certainly holds a promise for connecting in
this regard. But we are still in a situation in my state, the
Granite State, where nearly 16 percent of our schools lack
service providers who will be able to build out fiber
connections for them.
So what is your response to these communities? And how can
we help them succeed in getting access to fiber? Will E-rate
continue to be a top priority for you? I've heard from Chairman
Pai it will be from him. But just how can we help these folks
who still don't have the level of connectivity we need to
really help those students succeed?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator, for the question. E-
rate is absolutely vital. It is the best tool we have to reach
every school and every student in this country with the
broadband they need for modern education. To the extent that
the program hasn't reached some corners of New Hampshire, that
is something that certainly I would be happy to talk to you
about. I think it has that potential.
Reforms were put in place in 2015, and promises were made
to every school and library in this country that E-rate dollars
would be available to them, and I want to make sure that that
promise is kept.
Senator Hassan. Thank you very much.
To Chairman Pai and Ms. Rosenworcel, I applaud your
efforts, truly a bipartisan initiative, to advance balanced
spectrum policy, which is clearly hard to say fast, in the
United States. With the rapid expansion of wireless-dependent
services woven into our daily lives, which many of us have
referenced, we need to make sure we're doing everything we can
to avoid a spectrum crunch and provide greater access to this
fundamental finite resource.
New Hampshire is a home to many innovators, entrepreneurs,
creative businesses, as well as companies that provide
manufacturing support for the Internet of Things. Identifying
licensed and unlicensed spectrum for greater use will not only
ensure that we have the reliable services we are accustomed to,
but it will also spur innovation and create new market
opportunities for our economy to thrive.
So I realize that my time is about to expire, but,
Commissioner Rosenworcel, can you discuss the role of
unlicensed spectrum in providing services to Americans as well
as fostering wide-scale wireless innovation?
And, Chairman Pai, just briefly, with the emerging
prevalence of the Internet of Things and driverless cars, et
cetera, do you believe we're postured to meet the increasing
demand given current policies for unlicensed spectrum?
So, Ms. Rosenworcel, and then the Chairman.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes. Thank you for the question. If you
have ever used a television remote control or a garage door
opener or gone on Wi-Fi, you have used unlicensed spectrum. It
powers our lives. And as we connect more things, more people,
more places, and more devices, we are going to need more of it
because unlicensed spectrum has low barriers to entry, and that
means it's where innovation can happen, and innovation without
permission. And I think a good spectrum and wireless economy
requires both licensed spectrum and unlicensed.
Senator Hassan. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Chairman Pai. Senator, I agree with Commissioner
Rosenworcel, and I think one of the great things about our
unlicensed economy is that our innovators exemplify the spirit
that Winston Churchill brought to the table in 1941 when he
said, urging for the U.S. to give them more material to fight
the war, ``Give us the tools and we will finish the job.'' If
we give these unlicensed innovators wide swaths of spectrum,
low-, mid-, and high-band, there's no telling what kinds of
innovations they may be able to pioneer, and we want our
American innovators to be at the forefront of that. And so
that's one area where, as I mentioned earlier in response to a
question of Senator Moran, I believe, that the FCC has spoken
with a unified voice, and hopefully with Congress's support,
we'll be able to continue to do that going forward.
Senator Hassan. Thank you.
And thank you, Mr. Chair, for letting me go so far over
time.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Hassan.
Senator Klobuchar.
STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you to all of you. I am thinking I'm the last person
here to ask questions, and so Senator Thune can go off to the
White House. One more. OK.
[Laughter.]
Senator Klobuchar. All right. So I know that many of my
colleagues have asked about net neutrality, so I will simply
say that it's very important to our country and innovation and
everything else.
The second thing that's very important is broadband
deployment. And as you know, I have worked very hard on this
``dig once'' policy. And Senator Fischer and I and others have
been pushing on Universal Service Fund funding and trying to
figure out how we can get more funding into rural areas, and I
know we did some standalone work here, and the FCC came up with
a compromised position, but it still is an issue, as you know,
in rural areas' deployment. And I just wondered if I could get
each of your thoughts about what you think we could do on this
end and what you could do on your end to really get this moving
so that we don't have this digital divide, which is getting
tougher and tougher for rural states.
Mr. Pai.
Chairman Pai. It's so important, Senator. Thank you for
your interest in this issue. And I've seen these challenges for
myself, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, when I helped lay
some fiber in Minneapolis, and I held a roundtable in Madelia,
where some rural broadband companies talked about some of these
challenges.
I think there are a lot of tools in the toolbox that
Congress could give the FCC. I have publicly endorsed Senator
Capito and Senator Coons' Gigabit Opportunity Act, which would
provide tax incentives to Internet service providers to provide
some of those digital connections in hard-to-serve rural and
urban locations alike.
I also think it would be helpful for ``dig once'' and other
similar policies to be the law of the land. It would be helpful
for the FCC to have additional authority over things like pole
attachments, so some of those critical cost elements that go
into building a broadband network.
In the meantime, I can assure you that, as my colleagues
have pointed out during this hearing, that we are committed to
using every tool in the toolbox that we currently have to make
that deployment proposition an easy one. Whether it's making
wireless infrastructure siting easier, promoting more
competition in urban areas, this is the front and center for
us, as I imagine it is for you.
Senator Klobuchar. OK. Thank you.
Ms. Rosenworcel.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Sure. The agency working with local
jurisdictions should try to come up with a model code, one that
includes policies like ``dig once'' and has a series of shot
clocks for response, and then hopefully with that model code,
the agency can build into its policies incentives for
communities to adopt it. And if it does that, I think that
could help expedite deployment nationwide.
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you. And, of course, getting some
funding on our end with the infrastructure bill would be----
Ms. Rosenworcel. That would always----
Senator Klobuchar.--also helpful.
Mr. Carr.
Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator. I agree with many of the
points that have been made. I think your ``dig once'' work will
be very helpful. As you know, the cost of adding conduit on the
front end is relatively small compared to the cost of trying to
dig up the streets and deploy it down the road. I think that
would be helpful.
There are other steps that the agency has teed up on the
infrastructure side to help streamline that. And, of course, on
the USF side, continue to target our subsidies to the right
places.
Senator Klobuchar. Very good. And you and I talked about
rural call completion. What do you think we could do to get
even more transparency to get the better completion rates?
Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator. It's an important issue.
Rural call completion has been an issue for a number of years.
The FCC has recently began a proceeding to see how they can
potentially take more action to fix that. I know there is some
legislation that's been introduced as well that might get at
intermediary providers that could also help make sure that
those calls are always going through.
Senator Klobuchar. OK. Thank you.
Ms. Rosenworcel, I worked with Senator Thune on the Rural
Health Care Connectivity Act to make skilled nursing facilities
eligible for funding through the Universal Service Fund's Rural
Health Care Program. The bill was signed into law last year.
And the $400 million cap on the program was exceeded for the
2016 funding year, and I'm concerned that the current funding
shortfall could cutoff vital telemedicine services. How can the
FCC address the funding needs of rural health care facilities
providing vital telemedicine services?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you for the question. The agency's
Rural Health Care Program has historically been
undersubscribed, but a few years ago was adjusted and new
opportunities were made available, including skilled nursing,
and as a result of that success, demand has increased
considerably. So now the agency going forward is going to have
to wrestle with how to prioritize that demand. From my part, I
don't think it should be the first application in the door, but
we should put some priority on truly rural areas because I
think that's what Congress intended when it laid down this law.
Senator Klobuchar. All right. Thank you very much. I have a
few other questions I'll ask on the record. But thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Klobuchar. And a very good
piece of legislation I might add.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. Next up is Senator Duckworth.
STATEMENT OF HON. TAMMY DUCKWORTH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. I want to thank the Chair and
Ranking Member for convening today's hearing and I want to
thank the nominees who are participating in this important
conversation.
Chairman Pai, I want to thank you for offering to meet with
me yesterday, but as you can tell, I had a really terrible
cold, and yesterday I sounded like Chewbacca.
[Laughter.]
Senator Duckworth. We would not have had a good
conversation. I'm hoping I head into Kathleen Turner territory
here soon, but I'm transitioning.
[Laughter.]
Senator Duckworth. Chairman Pai, last month a Federal court
struck down regulations that cap the soaring cost of phone
calls made by prison inmates. And I know that my colleague
Senator Booker has asked a question about this as well. In that
2-to-1 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
stated that while rates charged for in-state prison calls could
be extraordinarily high, the FCC exceeded its legal authority
in 2015 when it created rate caps for such calls. The FCC
initially prepared a legal defense of its decision, but
abandoned it earlier this year after you became Chairman, and
in a June 13 article in the New York Times, they attribute this
decision to you.
Chairman Pai, am I correct that in opposing the
Commission's efforts to protect families and inmates from
outrageously high rates for calling services, you are not
endorsing astronomically expensive prices, rather, you simply
believe that Congress has not provided FCC with the authority
to impose rate caps on intrastate prison calls?
Chairman Pai. Correct, Senator. That is a purely legal
position that we took, and I would welcome additional authority
should Congress see fit to provide it.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. So looking ahead, I plan to
work with my colleagues to help address that issue. And, in
fact, I plan to introduce a Video Visitation and Inmate Calling
in Prisons Act to rein in the often ridiculous prices prisoners
and their families are forced to pay to communicate. The bill
would provide the FCC with clear authority to institute
commonsense rules for video visitation and inmate calling
services, including capping outrageously high rates, and would
require the Bureau of Prisons to institute long overdue rules
to make sure video visitation service contracts are effectively
managed and overseen.
If enacted, this good government consumer-oriented
legislation will help establish video visitation as a
supplement to, and not a replacement of, in-person visitation,
with the ultimate goal of reducing recidivism through increased
family contact and regular communications.
I believe that this legislation would address your concerns
about clarifying FCC authority when it comes to prison calling
services. Will you commit to working with me to pass this
legislation during the 115th Congress?
Chairman Pai. I will, Senator. I look forward to working
with you on it.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
And I believe, Mr. Carr, you had previously committed to
this as well. And I would like to give Commissioner
Rosenworcel, both of you, the opportunity as well.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Absolutely I would commit to working with
you. I mean, the number that sticks with me here is there are
2.7 million children in this country who have a parent in
prison, and we know that recidivism is affected by the ability
to stay in close contact with family. So I think it is
imperative that the FCC continue its work here, and I would
work with you in any way to make sure that that legislation is
successful.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
Mr. Carr.
Mr. Carr. Yes, Senator, I agree. I would welcome the chance
to work with you on this issue.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
Ms. Rosenworcel, on June 22, President Trump announced that
his infrastructure proposal will promote and foster and enhance
broadband access for rural America. According to the FCC's 2016
Broadband Progress Report, 56 percent of rural Illinoisans lack
adequate broadband service as opposed to only four percent of
urban communities in Illinois. Ensuring that every Illinoisan
has reliable Internet access to find a job, improve their
businesses, or educate their children is a top priority. And,
in fact, many of our kids can't do their homework because they
don't have broadband.
While we still haven't seen any actual details on the
administration's infrastructure package, several accounts
suggest it will rely heavily on various forms of tax incentives
to encourage providers to deploy and upgrade broadband in rural
areas. And some have expressed support for using Connect
America Fund as a mechanism for distributing potential
infrastructure funding.
Is this an appropriate mechanism, the Connect America Fund?
And how would you modify the program to accommodate this role
to ensure that funding injected into the system supplements
industry investments and does not actually take over?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator, for the question. It's
an important one, and also complicated, so let me try to give
you a quick answer. I think what is most important to me here
is something I mentioned to one of your colleagues earlier,
that if there are additional programs as a result of an
infrastructure package, it is absolutely imperative that we
think about how they work in conjunction with the FCC's annual
$4.5 billion fund for universal service. I think it's
imperative that the right hand talks to the left, and we don't
duplicate efforts, or somehow wind up with policies that crowd
out private investment that would have occurred without that
spending.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
Now, Chairman Pai, along with your fellow Commissioners,
you've highlighted the importance of consensus-based
decisionmaking at the FCC and expressed frustration about
delegated authority. Is that a fair statement?
Chairman Pai. Yes, Senator.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. You issued a press release in
December 2014 with Commissioner O'Rielly about these concerns,
and similarly Commissioner Clyburn expressed frustration
earlier this month about learning that the FCC approval of the
Sinclair-Benton deal--about learning about that through a press
release.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the
record a 2014 press release from Chairman Pai and a July 2017
tweet from Commissioner Clyburn.
The Chairman. Without objection.
[The information referred to follows:]
______
Tweet from Commissioner Clyburn
______
Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
In August of last year, the FCC voted 3-to-2 to adopt new
disclosure requirements for shared service agreements. Is that
correct?
Chairman Pai. I believe that data is correct, yes.
Senator Duckworth. So subject to approval by OMB, each
broadcasting station that is party to a shared service
agreement, whether in the same or different television markets,
would be required to file a copy of the SSA in its online
public inspection file.
Chairman Pai, did FCC withdraw its request to OMB to
approve the collection of SSA information on January 27, 2017?
And if so, why? And does the FCC plan to resubmit its request
to OMB?
Chairman Pai. Senator, I confess I am not familiar with
that particular information collection at this point, but I'm
happy to get back to you with a status report on where that
information collection stands.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
Commissioner Rosenworcel and Mr. Carr, were you aware of
that development?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Because I no longer serve at the agency
right now, I don't have up-to-date details on that, but, you
know, were I confirmed, I would be perfectly happy to follow up
with you and provide you with more information.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
Mr. Carr. I think, Senator, similarly, I don't recall right
now the specifics of that one.
Senator Duckworth. OK. Well, thank you all for being very
kind.
And again, Chairman Pai, I apologize for having to cancel
our meeting yesterday.
You've been very generous, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Duckworth.
And I think that exhausts the questions for today. So again
I want to thank all of our nominees for being here, for your
testimony, for your responses to our questions. As was pointed
out earlier, some of the most exciting things that are
happening in the digital economy fall under this Committee's
jurisdiction and under the regulatory authority of the FCC. And
so we want to make sure that we're doing everything we can to
advance the new technologies and make sure that people all
across the country, no matter where they live, have access to
high-speed Internet and all the advantages that come with that
that are available to people in populated areas around the
country as well.
So we're looking forward to moving this process along. And
again thank you for your willingness to serve, for your
families, for their dedication and commitment to the worthy
cause of public service. And we'll look forward to hopefully
being able to get the nomination process--confirmation process
I should say, moving quickly.
I want to enter into the record on behalf of Senator Nelson
four letters of support for Jessica Rosenworcel's nomination to
the FCC.
[The letters referred to follow:]
National Association of Elementary School Principals
Alexandria, VA, July 17, 2017
Hon. John Thune,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Bill Nelson,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Thune and Ranking Member Nelson:
The National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP)
strongly supports President Trump's nomination of Jessica Rosenworcel
to serve on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). We appreciate
your decision to schedule her confirmation hearing this week and
encourage the Committee and the full Senate to approve her nomination
without delay.
Ms. Rosenworcel understands that the FCC's longstanding efforts to
ensure all Americans have access to high capacity broadband is
especially important to the Nation's students, teachers and principals.
Broadband connectivity enables digital learning opportunities, expands
access to resources, research and data, and promotes valuable
collaboration and engagement among students, families, and educators.
These advantages are often particularly important in the isolated rural
and high cost communities that are most likely to depend on outside
assistance to acquire broadband connectivity. Thanks to the E-rate, and
other Federal communications initiatives, broadband connectivity is
expanding, but the Nation needs continued strong and effective
leadership at the FCC to help the families, schools, and communities
that have not yet leaped across the digital divide.
Ms. Rosenworcel's prior service demonstrates that she will
contribute to the agency's broadband leadership and work. Her
understanding of schools' and students' broadband needs, technical
expertise, and collaborative style, make her an excellent choice for
this vitally important leadership position. If confirmed, we are
confident she will help the agency address the Nation's most difficult
broadband challenges and ensure more students and educators have access
to the tools and resources they need to succeed academically and
professionally.
Sincerely,
L. Earl Franks, Ed.D., CAE,
Executive Director.
______
AASA
Alexandria, VA, July 17, 2017
Hon. John Thune,
United State Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Bill Nelson,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Thune and Ranking Member Nelson,
On behalf of AASA, The School Superintendents Association,
representing more than 10,000 school superintendents and system leaders
across the country, I write to express our strong support for the
nomination of Jessica Rosenworcel to serve on the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC).
The work of the FCC is unique in that the connectivity demands and
needs of the future are nearly impossible to predict. The FCC's track
record of success depends on having commissioners with an unwavering
commitment to addressing these unknown demands, including supports for
communities facing geographic and/or economic obstacles.
Ms. Rosenworcel has a long history as a champion of connectivity
and equity, ensuring all communities have access to the type of
connectivity that is essential to opportunity and success in today's
increasingly digital world. She is a disciplined and principled public
servant, committed to the FCC's work to regulate interstate and
international communications via radio, television, wire, satellite and
cable across the Nation. Specific to the schools our members run and
the 50 million students they serve, Ms. Rosenworcel has supported the E
Rate program since its inception and was a driving force in the 2014
modernization that helped transform E Rate to better support all
schools and communities with access to broadband. She is able to
balance the connectivity needs of the Nation with policy and
implementation opportunities and constraints, and to do so in a manner
that brings communities together. We look forward to further
opportunities to collaborate with the FCC and Ms. Rosenworcel as they
work to better connect those communities that remain un(der)served.
AASA supports the nomination of Ms. Rosenworcel to the FCC and
strongly urges the Committee and full Senate to approve her nomination.
Thank you for considering our endorsement, and please do not hesitate
to contact me with any questions about our support for the nomination,
our support for E-Rate, or a broader conversation about the importance
of education technology and broadband access for today's 24-hour
learners.
Sincerely,
Daniel A. Domenech,
Executive Director.
______
National Association of School Superintendents
Burlingame, CA, July 18, 2017
Hon. John Thune,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Bill Nelson,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Thune and Ranking Member Nelson:
The National Association of School Superintendents (NASS)
encourages you and your colleagues to approve President Trump's
nomination of Jessica Rosenworcel to serve on the Federal
Communications Commission (``FCC''). During her prior FCC service, Ms.
Rosenworcel distinguished herself as knowledgeable, creative and
effective decision maker and our members welcome the president's
decision to reappoint her.
Ensuring school and community access to high capacity broadband
must be a steadfast national priority. Equipping students, educators,
and families with cutting-edge broadband services creates innovative
learning opportunities and rich forums for professional and family
collaboration and engagement. Unfortunately, despite significant
broadband expansion, these opportunities are not universal. Many rural,
high-cost, and low-income communities lack access to affordable and
robust broadband networks. This lack of critical telecommunications
infrastructure compounds educational inequities in our poorest
communities and hampers schools' efforts to prepare all students for
success after graduation.
Ms. Rosenworcel recognizes broadband's potential to expand and
improve educational opportunities and to fundamentally transform
struggling communities. Our members deeply appreciated her efforts to
strengthen the E-rate for schools and update the Lifeline program to
address the ``homework gap.'' As Congress and the new Administration
pursues new infrastructure investments and takes other steps to build
on this work, we believe Ms. Rosenworcel would provide an impactful and
valuable perspective at the FCC.
Thank you for carefully considering our perspective. We appreciate
your leadership on this important matter and would be pleased to tell
you more our membership's work to strengthen the Nation's school
districts and improve academic and life outcomes for kids.
Sincerely,
Tom Armelino,
Executive Director,
NASS.
______
California School Boards Association
Association of California School Administrators
Hon. John Thune,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Bill Nelson,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Thune and Ranking Member Nelson:
The Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) and
California School Boards Association (CSBA) strongly support President
Trump's nomination of Jessica Rosenworcel to serve on the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC). On behalf of ACSA's more than 17,000
school leader members and CSBA's over 5,000 locally elected school
board members, we urge you to lend your support to her nomination and
move it promptly through committee for the full Senate's consideration
before the August recess.
California's students and teachers increasingly depend on high
capacity broadband access--in and out of school--to support teaching
and learning. Similar to other states, California's digital transition
has been uneven. Far too many rural, low-income, and other hard to
serve communities lack access to the robust telecommunication networks
that open doors to additional educational, workforce and other
opportunities. Given this problem, our members strongly support federal
initiatives, like the E-rate and Lifeline programs--that are designed
to help states and localities address connectivity challenges.
Ms. Rosenworcel has demonstrated a clear understanding of
broadband's inherent educational, economic, and social value. She also
developed a strong track record for problem solving and bipartisanship
that will serve the FCC well as the agency works to build on the
Nation's progress toward universal, high capacity broadband access.
Erika K. Hoffman,
Legislative Advocate,
California School Boards Association.
Adonai Mack,
Director of Political Affairs and Strategy,
Association of California School Administrators.
cc: California Delegation
The Chairman. And I would also say that we're going to keep
the hearing record open until Friday, July 21, and during that
time, Senators are asked to submit any other questions that
they might have for the record. Upon receipt, we would ask our
witnesses to submit their written answers to the Committee by
July 31 so that we can get you all scheduled for a markup real
soon.
With that, this hearing is adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 12:21 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
The City of New York
New York, NY, July 21, 2017
Hon. John Thune,
Chairman,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Bill Nelson,
Ranking Member,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman John Thune, and Ranking Member Bill Nelson:
I write in support of the Honorable Jessica Rosenworcel's
confirmation for a second term as commissioner at the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC). As Chief Technology Officer for the
City of New York, and having served in technology leadership roles for
two other municipalities and in the private sector as a two-time
technology startup founder, I have witnessed Commissioner Rosenworcel's
leadership in shaping America's digital future, and empowering
children, families, and businesses with new ideas. While serving on the
Intergovernmental Advisory Committee (IAC) for the FCC gave me direct
experience with the important role Commissioner Rosenworcel had in
shaping the future and her tireless dedication to the work.
In New York City, home of the second largest tech sector in the
country, we have relied on Commissioner Rosenworcel to help protect New
Yorker's access to the Internet, and digital privacy. Since joining the
Commission in 2012, Commissioner Rosenworcel helped it focus on
policies to protect consumers, promote innovation, expand spectrum
access, and support first responders. She has been a leading advocate
for kids, focusing on the ``homework gap'' and access to the tools they
need to succeed at school in the digital age. Commissioner
Rosenworcel's leadership has inspired cities like New York City and
others to take bold steps to address this issue, and in turn, inform
the FCC's work.
Commissioner Rosenworcel's tenure as an FCC commissioner has not
only helped children and families access the Internet, but has helped
communities like ours to build stronger schools, improve city services,
and unleash more entrepreneurial and creative potential. I know she
will continue to fight for these policies, and be guided by the values
of opportunity, equality, competition, and innovation. Therefore, New
York City proudly and strongly supports Commissioner Rosenworcel's
nomination, and I urge Congress to approve her confirmation.
Sincerely,
Miguel A. Gamino Jr.,
Chief Technology Officer,
City of New York.
______
National School Boards Association
Alexandria, VA, August 1, 2017
Hon. John Thune,
Chairman,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Bill Nelson,
Ranking Member,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Re: Nomination of Jessica Rosenworcel, Esquire to Federal
Communications Commission
Dear Chairman Thune and Ranking Member Nelson:
On behalf of our state associations and the 90,000 school board
members who govern our country's 14,000 local school districts, the
National School Boards Association (NSBA) urges your support and
confirmation of Jessica Rosenworcel, Esquire as a Commissioner of the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
During Ms. Rosenworcel's first term at the FCC, she passionately
advocated policy positions that help to ensure all our Nation's
students have access to the high-quality education that they deserve.
Specifically, Ms. Rosenworcel worked to close the ``homework gap''
by highlighting the disparities in broadband service that often make it
difficult for students in rural areas and underserved communities to
complete their school work. NSBA also applauds Ms. Rosenworcel's
commitment to ensuring the integrity and success of the Universal
Service Fund and E-Rate program, a critical component to ensuring
equity and access to schools and libraries for telecommunications
services that support 21st Century skills and learning.
As our Nation's public schools need the leader ship and advocacy
efforts of Ms. Rosenworcel, NSBA strongly supports her reappointment to
the FCC. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Thomas J. Gentzel,
Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer.
______
Hispanic Leadership Fund
Washington, DC, September 29, 2017
Hon. John Thune, Chairman,
U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Bill Nelson, Ranking Member,
U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Thune and Ranking Member Nelson:
The Hispanic Leadership Fund supports the reconfirmation of Federal
Communications Chairman Ajit Pai. Throughout his tenure at the FCC--
both as a Commissioner and now as Chairman--he has repeatedly proven
himself to be a public official who is rooted in equality and
transparency. The Hispanic Leadership Fund (HLF) fully endorses his
continued role as Chairman and urges the U.S. Senate to reconfirm him.
HLF is a non-partisan organization that has advocated since 2008
for public policy frameworks that ensure the American Dream is within
reach for everyone. This includes the kind of common sense regulatory
policies that Chairman Pai has advocated for since his first day at the
FCC. From addressing robocalls to publishing proposals and orders
before they're voted on, the Chairman has brought a sensible approach
to the FCC that prioritizes consumer interests above all.
Challenging the status quo is not always easy, and Chairman Pai has
faced pushback from special interest groups who fundraise off divisive
issues, most notably `net neutrality'. As we stated back in April when
the Chairman announced his intension to ``reverse the mistake of Title
II'' reclassification of the internet, HLF believes that a primary
reason the internet has flourished is because it operated in a light-
touch regulatory environment. This approach worked well under the
presidencies of both Democrat Bill Clinton and Republican George W.
Bush, and we believe it should be restored. In doing so, the flow of
investment and innovation will pick up to the benefit of working
families across the country.
Beyond his commitment to sensible regulatory policy, Chairman Pai
is dedicated to diversity and inclusion. He is the first Indian-
American to Chair the FCC and is unequivocally committed to ensuring
that all Americans--regardless of race, gender, religion, ethnicity, or
sexual orientation--have the opportunity to participate and thrive in
the digital era rather than finding themselves on the wrong side of the
digital divide.
In less than a year as Chairman, he has already catapulted the
issue of America's digital divide into the spotlight. Chairman Pai took
initiative to reinstate the Advisory Committee on Diversity and Digital
Empowerment (ACDDE) in which 31 appointees, including myself, provide
counsel to the Commission regarding how best to empower disadvantaged
communities and accelerate the entry of small businesses into the
media, digital news and information, and audio and video programming
industries. Additionally, the Committee will provide recommendations on
how to ensure disadvantaged communities are not denied the wide range
of opportunities made possible by next-generation networks.
Unfortunately, in recent years, the activity of the ACDDE had been
minimized at the FCC under previous chairmen.
Finally, we believe strongly that the reconfirmation of Chairman
Pai should not fall victim to today's tumultuous political games and an
environment that too often places blind partisanship above the public
interest. The U.S. Senate should recognize that before them is a highly
qualified, committed, and fair nominee whose reconfirmation will
continue to put the interests of real, everyday Americans at the helm
of the FCC. We respectfully urge all Senators to vote to reconfirm Ajit
Pai as Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission.
Sincerely,
Mario H. Lopez,
President.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. John Thune to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question. Millions of rural Americans lack access to broadband, and
bridging the digital divide is a priority for me and the Committee. As
traditional fiber, cable, and 4G broadband is deployed throughout the
country, policymakers must nevertheless be creative and open-minded
when exploring all options to achieving universal service. What role do
you see for unlicensed spectrum (Wi-Fi, TV White Spaces, millimeter
wave, etc.) in connecting unserved rural households with broadband
Internet access?
Answer. I strongly believe that unlicensed spectrum should play an
important role in providing broadband service to rural areas, and I am
committed to moving ahead expeditiously to achieve this goal. We can
and should build on earlier successes in this area. For instance,
Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs) already are providing
broadband service in many rural areas using unlicensed spectrum,
particularly in the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz ``Wi-Fi'' bands.
Also, several years ago, the FCC developed rules for providing
broadband service on an unlicensed basis in the TV white spaces. I
supported the Commission's decision in 2015 to revise the TV white
space rules to facilitate deployments in rural areas by allowing for
higher power to serve longer distances. And last year, we provided
additional spectrum for unlicensed in the millimeter wave bands,
doubling the available spectrum to cover 57-71 GHz.
It is essential that we move ahead with a renewed sense of purpose
to bring broadband to every American. That's why the Commission is
actively considering different methods for expanding access to
spectrum, including unlicensed spectrum. For instance, we teed up a
Notice of Inquiry on mid-band spectrum for Commission consideration at
our August open meeting that, among other things, explores how we can
make more mid-band spectrum available for unlicensed use.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roger F. Wicker to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question 1. Chairman Pai, there has been a lot of discussion
recently about using TV white spaces to help deliver rural broadband.
Can you comment on the challenges and opportunities of potentially
using TV white spaces to deliver broadband to rural areas?
Answer. The Commission's rules provide for unlicensed operation in
TV white spaces, including in rural areas. In 2015, we revised the TV
white space rules to facilitate deployments in rural areas, such as by
allowing for higher power to serve longer distances. This spectrum
offers excellent properties for delivering broadband over the distances
typically needed to serve rural areas. For example, the signals travel
long distances and overcome obstacles such as trees and rolling
terrain.
One challenge is that the Commission must balance wider deployment
of white space broadband services and the availability of channels for
low power TV stations and translators that are displaced by the TV
incentive auction. Moreover, as is the case for many nascent services,
the early equipment involving TV white spaces is costly.
Question 2. Within the USF Program, the annual budget for the high
cost program is $4.5 billion, the annual budget for the E-Rate program
is $3.99 billion, and the annual budget for the low-income program is
$2.25 billion, increasing to $2.28 billion for 2018. In light of these
funding levels, and the Nation's challenges in managing the cost and
quality of health care, the FCC's rural health care annual budget of
$400 million, minus USAC administrative expenses, which has not been
changed in nearly 20 years, appears woefully inadequate. Will you work
to ensure that rural health care support is adequate to meet the needs
of the nation?
Answer. The rural healthcare program provides important funding to
eligible health care providers (HCPs) for telecommunications and
broadband services necessary for the provision of health care. I deeply
appreciate the importance of these HCPs serving rural communities and
the need for universal service funding in making sure all Americans
have access to state-of-the-art healthcare. As the son of a doctor in
Kansas who often travelled many miles to see his patients, I am well
aware of the difficulty so many in rural America have in getting
adequate healthcare.
I have long made ensuring the viability of the RHC program for
rural participants a priority. When the FCC created the Healthcare
Connect Fund in 2012, I pushed the Commission to make sure that the
majority of the funds were targeted at rural healthcare providers. And
last December, I pushed the agency to crack down on waste, fraud, and
abuse in the program to ensure sufficient funding for the many good
actors that need it. I have asked Commission staff to look closely at
the RHC program and to consider ways to strengthen it.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roy Blunt to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question 1. Are you considering major changes to the E-Rate program
and, if so, can you elaborate how any changes may impact rural schools
and libraries that depend on the program for connectivity?
Answer. I am deeply committed to doing everything within the FCC's
power to close the digital divide. I believe an effective E-rate
program--one that promotes better connectivity for students and library
patrons alike--can be a powerful tool to help bridge that divide. That
is why, four years ago, I said that ``E-rate is a program worth
fighting for.''
Unfortunately, there have been serious flaws in the administration
of the E-rate program, specifically related to the process by which
schools and libraries apply for E-rate funding, that are preventing
many schools and libraries from receiving that funding. I have asked
USAC, which administers the program on the FCC's behalf, to provide a
detailed report on plans to fix existing problems so that the program
is in full compliance with our rules and works for applicants and
participants. And in general, I believe that we must focus on cutting
unnecessary red tape and making the E-rate application process easier
for schools and libraries.
Question 2. Will you commit to ensuring the E-Rate program remains
strong in rural Missouri?
Answer. Yes.
Question 3. During the broadcast television incentive auction, the
FCC paid 28 UHF television stations more than $984 million to relocate
to a VHF channel. Is the UHF discount is still necessary?
Answer. In April, the Commission voted to reinstate the UHF
discount until it could review in a more holistic proceeding later this
year both the discount and the FCC's national television multiple
ownership rule. This action returned the marketplace to the status quo
that existed before October 2016. As you know, last year, the previous
Commission voted to eliminate the UHF discount. However, it did so
without simultaneously considering whether the national ownership cap
should be modified. As the UHF discount and national television cap are
inextricably linked, this decision was made in error. The national cap
establishes a national ownership limit, and the discount is used to
calculate whether the limit has been reached. Because of this
connection, eliminating the UHF discount substantially tightened the
national cap without any analysis of whether this tightening was in the
public interest given current marketplace conditions.
Later this year, the Commission will launch a new proceeding that
will broadly consider both whether the national ownership cap should be
modified and whether the UHF discount should be retained. Any decision
on whether the UHF discount remains necessary will be based on the
facts compiled in that proceeding along with the relevant law.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ted Cruz to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Net Neutrality
So called ``net neutrality'' as implemented in former FCC Chairman
Tom Wheeler's Open Internet Order was a bureaucratic power grab that
took the Internet which has long been a transformational tool that has
allowed innovation and creativity and created new economic
opportunities for all Americans and turned the Internet into a
regulated public utility under Title II of the Communications Act.
Title II gives the government new authority over the Internet which
could be used to determine pricing and terms of service.
What's concerning about the Title II debate is the influence that
edge providers such as Google, Facebook and Netflix had with the Obama
White House. For example, The Intercept has reported that between
January 2009 and October 2015, Google staffers gathered at the White
House on 427 separate occasions. The Intercept further notes that the
frequency of the meetings increased from 32 in 2009 to 97 in 2014. This
is concerning given that President Obama released a video on November
10, 2014 weighing into the net neutrality debate and advocated that the
FCC regulate the Internet as a public utility. Not only did the
Commission move forward and implement Title II but edge providers like
Google were exempted from Title II.
Question 1. Were you concerned with the influence that the Obama
White House had with the FCC in advocating for Title II?
Answer. Yes.
Question 2. Building off the previous question, as you know, the
FCC is funded by fees paid by those it regulates. Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, and Amazon collectively have a market capitalization in
excess of two trillion dollars. Are you troubled by the fact that not
only did these companies have a cozy relationship with the Obama White
House but that they use the regulatory process to seek the regulation
of their competition-broadband providers, yet they contribute very
little if anything towards offsetting the cost of the FCC's operations?
Do you have thoughts on how we might remedy this inequity?
Answer. Unfortunately, it is a common practice for companies to
lobby government officials to either seek regulatory largesse and/or
impose burdensome regulations on their competitors so that they can
gain a competitive advantage. I have seen this practice during my time
at the Commission and am troubled by it. In my view, the best way to
remedy this problem is for the Commission to embrace a philosophy of
regulatory parity and not use the regulatory process to reward favored
industries and punish disfavored industries.
5G Wireless Technology Deployment
We are on the cusp of the wireless industry introducing the next
generation of technology--5G. That upgrade to our existing networks is
expected to bring us higher data speeds, lower latency, and the ability
to support breakthrough innovations in transportation, healthcare,
energy and other sectors. And as recent studies have shown, 5G is
expected to provide significant benefits to state and local
governments, allowing them to become smart cities. However, those
networks will also require many more antenna sites than we have today--
they will increasingly rely on small cell technologies. To recognize
these benefits, a study performed by Deloitte shows that several steps
are necessary to remove impediments to antenna siting. Texas is leading
the way, as evidenced by recent legislation (Texas Senate Bill 1004)
signed into law just last month that streamlines the deployment of
next-generation 5G networks. It's also my understanding that the
Commission has initiated a proceeding designed to evaluate whether some
of those obstacles can be removed.
Question 3. Can you tell me what you hope to achieve in the ongoing
proceeding and when it might be concluded?
Answer. The Wireless Infrastructure Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM) and Notice of Inquiry (NOI), adopted on April 20, 2017, was
intended to take a comprehensive look at the federal, state, and local
regulatory requirements that affect the speed with which, and cost at
which, wireless networks can be deployed and modernized. The Commission
also adopted the same day a Wireline Infrastructure NPRM seeking
comment on barriers to the deployment of wireline infrastructure
(including the fiber that is critical to carrying wireless traffic).
In the wireless item, the Commission sought comment on regulatory
impediments to wireless network infrastructure investment and
deployment and on how to remove or reduce such impediments, consistent
with the law and the public interest. The NPRM/NOI seeks comment on
measures to streamline state and local government review of proposed
infrastructure deployments and asks, for instance, about the timelines
for local zoning reviews, the remedies available to applicants for
missed deadlines, and the reasonableness of fees. In addition, the
proceeding is examining how we might revise the Commission's rules and
procedures for complying with the National Historic Preservation Act
and the National Environmental Policy Act in ways that might help
reduce the costs and delays associated with those review processes,
while still satisfying our legal obligations and protecting important
resources. Our objective is to facilitate and accelerate the deployment
of the infrastructure needed to meet the country's needs for advanced
wireless service and to make next-generation technologies available to
all Americans. The comment cycle in this proceeding closed on July 17,
2017, and we are in the process of reviewing the record that's been
compiled.
FCC Priorities
Question 4. My top priority is regulatory reform. Please identify
three meaningful regulations that you are interested in repealing
during your tenure at the FCC.
Answer. (1) I am interested in repealing the copper retirement
rules that the Commission adopted in 2015 so that carriers can spend
less money maintaining the fading copper networks of yesterday and more
money building and expanding the next-generation networks of tomorrow.
(2) I am interested in repealing the main studio rule, which
appears to be an outdated regulation that imposes unnecessary costs on
radio and television broadcasters.
(3) I am interested in repealing the outdated requirement that
carriers completing payphone calls conduct annual audits of their
payphone call tracking systems and file annual audit reports with the
Commission, since these audits often cost more than the amount of the
compensation being reviewed.
ICANN
Question 5. Last year the previous administration allowed the
Federal Government's contract with ICANN to expire. Do you think that
was a wise and prudent decision?
Answer. I spoke out against that decision at the time. For
instance, over three years ago, I wrote about my ``serious doubts'' in
National Review, arguing that ``[t]he current model of Internet
governance has seen a tremendous success. It's allowed the Internet to
remain free and operate reliably. If America steps back, foreign
governments will be all too eager to step forward. . . . [T]he United
States should not apologize for its leadership in promoting a free
Internet.'' See ``Giving Up the Internet: Still Risky,'' National
Review (Apr. 23, 2014), available at http://www.nationalreview.com/
article/376384/giving-internet-still-risky-ajit-pai.
Question 6. Microsoft and Facebook and YouTube, which is owned by
Google, all of whom supported President Obama's Internet transition,
have signed a code of conduct with the European Union to remove so-
called hate speech from European countries in less than 24 hours. Do
you think these global technology companies have a good record of
protecting free speech? And what can be done to protect the First
Amendment rights of American citizens?
Answer. I am always concerned by the impulse to censor unpopular
speech, whether at home or abroad. During my tenure at the Commission,
I have consistently spoken out about the importance of protecting free
speech. If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed, I will continue to do
whatever I can to safeguard the First Amendment rights of the American
people.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently made
a recommendation in a May 2017 report that the Universal Service Fund
should be moved from a private bank into the U.S. Treasury. What are
your thoughts on this proposal? Do you foresee such action having an
impact the long-term solvency of the fund as it relates to the Federal
Government's future efforts to reduce the national deficit?
Answer. I agree with this recommendation, and the Universal Service
Administrative Company is actively working in coordination with the FCC
and the Treasury to transfer the USF funds as recommended by GAO. I
have not seen any evidence that moving the funds to the U.S. Treasury
would affect the long-term solvency of the USF, nor am I aware of
potential, specific impacts on the national deficit. Indeed, moving
these funds to the U.S. Treasury will give the Federal Government the
greatest ability to protect these funds from improper use and safeguard
their important role in ensuring that every American gets connected.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to
Hon. Ajit Pai
I want to thank you and the current FCC Commissioners for working
with my staff to help alleviate some of the burden that the reduction
in reimbursement from the Rural Health Care program placed on Alaskan
health care providers.
In my state, the price of telecommunications services is so
expensive that many rural health care providers cannot afford them
without support from the Rural Health Care program. Telemedicine
services in Alaska are essential for many of our villages, and they are
only possible if a health facility has connectivity.
In enacting the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Congress
specifically directed the FCC to ensure that rural health care
providers have access to telecommunications services at rates that are
reasonably comparable to those for similar services in urban areas of
the State. As you are aware, for the first time the demand for funding
from the Rural Health Care program exceeded the $400 million cap.
Question 1. Will you work to ensure the sustainability of the Rural
Health Care Program as the FCC moves forward to review further reforms
to universal service programs?
Answer. Yes.
Question 2. If confirmed, what steps would you take to address this
funding issue?
Answer. The rural healthcare program provides important funding to
eligible health care providers (HCPs) for telecommunications and
broadband services necessary for the provision of health care. I deeply
appreciate the importance of these HCPs serving rural communities and
the need for universal service funding in making sure all Americans
have access to state-of-the-art healthcare. As the son of a doctor in
Kansas who often travelled many miles to see his patients, and as a
regulator who has seen firsthand the healthcare challenges in Alaska, I
am well aware of the difficulties so many Americans have in getting
adequate healthcare.
I have long made ensuring the viability of the RHC program for
rural participants a priority. When the FCC created the Healthcare
Connect Fund in 2012, I pushed the Commission to make sure that the
majority of the funds were targeted at rural healthcare providers. And
last December, I pushed the agency to crack down on waste, fraud, and
abuse in the program to ensure sufficient funding for the many good
actors that need it. I have asked Commission staff to look closely at
the RHC program and to consider ways to strengthen it.
Question 3. Will you consider beginning a rulemaking proceeding to
evaluate the changes necessary to ensure that the program budget is
sufficient to fulfill the purposes of the program?
Answer. Yes, as noted above, I have asked Commission staff to look
closely at the RHC program and to consider ways to strengthen the
program.
Question 4. What steps do you plan to take to increase the
transparency and accountability of USAC?
Answer. I agree with you that USAC must be more transparent and
accountable than it's been in the past. That's why in my first week on
the job, my office directed the Office of the Managing Director and the
Wireline Competition Bureau to more actively oversee how USAC conducts
its duties.
And I myself have directly intervened when necessary. For example,
serious flaws in the administration of the E-rate program have
prevented many schools and libraries from getting that funding. I have
asked USAC to provide a detailed report on plans to fix the existing
problems so it can administer the E-rate program in a manner that is
fully compliant with our rules and that works for applicants and
participants.
Similarly, after the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
recently released a report confirming that waste, fraud, and abuse are
still all too prevalent in the Lifeline program, I directed USAC to
take immediate action to stop this abuse of the program and establish
procedures for ongoing vigilance to protect the Fund.
Last Congress, I questioned the previous Chairman, Chairman
Wheeler, about a constituent of mine who had license renewal
applications pending at the FCC for more than 13 years, which I find
unacceptable. At my urging, the FCC acted on some of those pending
applications, but requested more information which my constituent
submitted and continues to wait for an answer.
Question 5. What type of action do you plan to take, or have you
taken, to improve the timeliness of FCC action on items submitted for
approval or for review?
Answer. I agree that it is important for the FCC to act on matters
in a timely manner. That's why, for instance, I have made clear that
section 7 of the Communications Act will be enforced during my tenure
as Chairman. That provision states that the Commission will decide
within one year whether any petition for a new technology or service is
in the public interest. Unfortunately, the Commission has failed to
abide by this deadline in the past. I have placed the Commission's
Office of Engineering and Technology in charge of enforcing compliance
with section 7.
I also believe that the Commission should consider establishing
deadlines for resolving applications for review, petitions for
reconsideration, and waiver requests.
Question 6. Will you commit to acting on the applications pending
at the FCC for Peninsula Communications, Inc. as soon as possible?
Answer. Yes.
It is my understanding that environmental assessments (EAs), when
required under the FCC's rules, are currently not subject to any
processing timelines or dispute resolution procedures. As a result,
environmental assessments for new facilities can languish for an
extended period of time--sometimes years. This is an unfortunate
barrier to feeding our Nation's hunger for expanded wireless broadband.
Given my seat on this committee and on EPW, I have a particular
interest in finding ways to streamline these procedures.
Question 7. Will you commit to finding ways to streamline the FCC's
review of environmental assessments, including through the adoption of
``shot clocks'' to resolve environmental delays and disputes, in
addition to working on additional infrastructure reforms?
Answer. Yes, I commit to seeking ways to streamline the
Commission's environmental review process consistent with the public
interest and our obligations under the National Environmental Policy
Act and other environmental statutes. The Commission opened a
rulemaking proceeding in April of this year seeking comment broadly on
how we can improve and streamline our environmental review, in the
context of a broader examination of regulatory impediments to wireless
infrastructure deployment. The record in that proceeding closed in
July, and staff are currently reviewing comments.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Dean Heller to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question. Chairman Pai, some incumbent spectrum users have made
private capital investments--hundreds of billions of dollars over
decades--because of the certainty of and their reliance on existing
spectrum usage rules. Will you ensure that these incumbent users are
treated fairly should you consider changing existing spectrum usage
rules?
Answer. Yes. The Commission is committed to policies that promote
investment, encourage innovation, and foster next generation networks.
Our work toward such policies includes a commitment to fair treatment
of incumbent licensees that have already built out their networks.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Mike Lee to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question 1. I've heard from concerned constituents that some of the
FCC's proposals in its AM radio proceeding could cause them to lose
access to certain stations. I know FEMA has also raised concerns that
these proposals could even impact the reception of Presidential alerts
in times of crisis. As the Commission noted earlier in this proceeding,
the issues surrounding AM radio interference protections are highly
technical and necessitated additional study, yet in the Further Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission tentatively proposed rule
changes to reduce interference protections for AM stations. Could you
tell me what studies the Commission has done during the proceeding to
support the Commission's tentative conclusions to reduce interference
protections, or are more studies required? We want to be sure that the
proposals do not harm but rather revitalize AM radio.
Answer. The Commission's tentative conclusions were premised on the
goal of improving AM facilities. The Commission did not undertake its
own studies prior to seeking input on the proposals. As part of the
record, commenters have provided studies, and other commenters have
provided comments about those studies. The Commission will continue to
analyze the docket, including these studies, as it considers whether to
craft final rules regarding this proposal. We have not yet reached any
determination as to whether additional studies are required.
Question 2. There is currently a 180-day ``shot clock'' that limits
the length of time the FCC has to review a transaction. Unfortunately,
the FCC's review in several high-profile transactions in recent years
have taken longer than 180 days. The AT&T/DirecTV deal took 412 days;
Comcast/Time Warner took 381 days; Sinclair/Allbritton took 361 days;
and Charter/Time Warner Cable took 314 days. In each of those cases,
the FCC was able to ``pause'' its shot clock--although in a few of
those deals, the FCC still exceeded 180 days, even taking account of
the paused shot clock. Those deals were ultimately approved. But if the
FCC waits too long to complete its review, it may effectively kill a
deal. Do you agree it's concerning that a deal could die because FCC
exceeds the 180-day limit on its review?
Answer. Yes, I do.
Question 3. Would you support legislation that required the FCC to
complete review within 180 days or else seek an extension in court, and
do you commit to working with my staff as they develop this type of
legislation?
Answer. I have supported codifying the 180-day shot clock in the
Commission's rules, and I would be happy to work with you on
legislation to enshrine it in a statute.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ron Johnson to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question 1. As the expert agency, rather than have 50 different
standards for measuring broadband speeds, isn't the FCC in the best
position to determine how broadband speeds should be measured in the
United States?
Answer. Yes, I believe the FCC has the most technical expertise in
that area.
Question 2. Doesn't the Commission already do this through its
annual Measuring Broadband America Report?
Answer. Yes, although I should note that not all Internet service
providers participate in that program.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Bill Nelson to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question 1. Past members of the FCC have sought out the guidance of
state and local elected officials on matters pending before the agency.
What role does consultation with state and local governments play in
your decision making?
Answer. I believe that it is important for the Commission to
consult with state and local governments. Indeed, during my time at the
Commission, I have personally met or spoken by phone with the Governors
(at the time) of Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New
Hampshire, New York, and South Carolina. I have also met with a wide
range of local government officials, from mayors to school
superintendents to sheriffs, to discuss issues of concern in their
communities.
Question 2. I applaud the FCC's ongoing efforts in the incentive
auction. However, applications of many rural service providers and
small businesses have yet to be processed. Can you please commit to
ensuring that the Commission will make processing of the remaining
license applications a priority?
Answer. Yes.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question 1. The FCC's 2018 budget states that the mission of the
FCC includes ``promoting safety of life and property through the use of
wire and radio communication.''
Does ensuring that our communications networks are hardened against
cyber-attacks, fall into the definition of ``promoting safety of life
and property through the use of wire and radio communication''?
If not why not?
Answer. Under the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, part of
the FCC's mission is to promote ``safety of life and property through
the use of wire and radio communications.'' Communications Act Sec. 1.
And reliable, resilient, and secure commercial communications networks
allow for access to critical network services like 911, emergency
alerting, and National Security/Emergency Preparedness (NS/EP)
communications. Such networks therefore promote the safety of life and
property.
Question 2. Does ensuring that our communications networks are
hardened against cyber-attacks fall into the public safety mission of
the FCC?
Answer. Promoting reliable, resilient, and secure communications
networks falls within the public safety mission of the FCC.
Question 3. Will you commit to using all of the tools available to
you as the Chairman of the principal agency in the Federal Government
with expertise and regulatory authority over our communications
networks, to make sure those networks are resilient and hardened
against cyber threats?
Answer. The FCC will do whatever we can, in consultation with other
stakeholders and within the confines of our statutory authority, to
promote network resiliency, reliability, and security.
Question 4. According to Department of Homeland Security
statistics, of the 290 cyber-attacks on critical infrastructure in
2016, 62 or just over 20 percent were on communications networks.
For each of the 62 attacks on communications critical
infrastructure in 2016, please detail what the FCC involvement was and
what actions the FCC took to assist in recovery and remediation.
Please include:
a. coordination is with other Federal agencies and the
Administration; and
b. oversight the FCC performed over carriers' that experienced cyber
breaches including reporting requirements and enforcement
actions; and
c. outreach or notice required or facilitated to consumers impacted
by any cyber breach.
Answer. We do not have sufficient information to confirm FCC
involvement following the 2016 attacks cited by DHS, all of which took
place before I became the Chairman. Providers submit cyber incident
information directly to the Industrial Control System Cyber Emergency
Response Team (ICS-CERT) within DHS. ICS-CERT maintains this
information as confidential pursuant to the Protected Critical
Infrastructure Information (PCII) Program. As such, this information is
not shared with the FCC. Providers are obligated to report network
outages to the Commission, but because the Commission lacks access to
ICS-CERT's cyber incident information, we are unable to cross-reference
any action we may have taken with respect to the above-referenced
incidents.
Question 5. Please detail what provisions in the Communications Act
or any other legal authority you believe limit the FCC responsibility
and ability to act with regard to cybersecurity policy and cyber-
attacks on communications networks. Please provide legal analysis to
support your assertion.
Answer. It has long been the law that ``an agency literally has no
power to act . . . unless and until Congress confers power upon it.''
Louisiana Public Service Commission v. FCC, 476 U.S. 355, 374 (1986).
With respect to cybersecurity, Congress has only given the Commission
authority to engage in informal coordination with the Department of
Homeland Security and other Federal agencies. See, e.g., Cybersecurity
Act of 2015, 6 U.S.C. Sec. 1501 et seq.; Critical Infrastructure
Information Act of 2002, 6 U.S.C. Sec. 131 et seq. and 6 U.S.C.
Sec. 148(c)(1).
However, the FCC does not have an express statutory mandate to
regulate cybersecurity as a general matter. To be sure, Section 1 of
the Communications Act includes a policy statement that national
defense and public safety are among the agency's purposes.
Communications Act Sec. 1. But the courts have explained that ``policy
statements alone cannot provide the basis for the Commission's
exercise'' of authority. See, e.g., Comcast v. FCC, 600 F.3d 642, 654
(D.C. Cir. 2010).
Question 6. Please detail what language would have to appear in the
Communications Act and/or other legal authorizing texts that would
create a statutory mandate for the FCC to have authority over
cybersecurity in the context of the Nation's communications networks.
Answer. There are a variety of ways in which this could be done.
For example, section 2(a) of the Cybersecurity Responsibility Act of
2017, which was introduced earlier this year by Congresswoman Yvette
Clarke, would give the FCC the explicit authority to promulgate rules
in this area.
Media Ownership
Question 7. In 2016, the Court of Appeals chastised the FCC for
making changes to media ownership rules without the benefit of having
completed statutorily mandated reviews of the media marketplace and
media ownership rules that were required in 2010 and 2014. Basically
the court was saying that the FCC's policy making needed to be based on
data and analysis.
Given the court's guidance that any FCC changes to media ownership
rules should be grounded in the type of up-to-date data and analysis
required by the quadrennial review process, will you commit to
completing the next quadrennial review before leading the FCC in any
process that changes the existing media ownership rules?
Answer. Because there were petitions for reconsideration filed of
the Commission's 2016 media ownership order, the current quadrennial
review is not yet complete. And in my view, the Commission should
complete the current quadrennial review before starting the next one. I
believe that this is quite consistent with the Third Circuit's view on
the importance of the Commission completing its statutorily mandated
reviews of the media ownership rules.
Question 8. Has the Commission done data collection and analysis
that would support changing or eliminating the duopoly rule, joint
sales agreement rules or broadcast cross ownership rules?
If so please summarize the data and analysis here.
Will you commit to collecting data about the current media
marketplace and conducting the analysis of the current media
marketplace and making those findings available to the public in the
context of the quadrennial review and/or report to Congress before you
lead the Commission to make any changes to FCC rules that will impact
the constellation of media ownership rules including: duopoly rules,
joint sales agreement rules and broadcast cross ownership rules?
Answer. I commit that the draft text of any order that would change
the Commission's media ownership rules in the context of the
quadrennial review will be made public three weeks before any
Commission vote. That draft text would include analysis and data on
which the Commission would be relying to justify any changes to the
rules. This step would bring unprecedented transparency to the
Commission's quadrennial review process; it has never been done before
in any quadrennial review. The record in the Commission's current
quadrennial review proceeding contains substantial data and analysis
submitted by commenters with a variety of views on whether the current
rules should be changed. Should I determine that this data and analysis
supports changing the current media ownership rules, the explanation
for that determination will be made public three weeks before any
Commission vote in the draft text of the order.
Question 9. Senator Shaheen and I sent a letter to the Commission
in June 2016 asking that the FCC commit to providing an assessment of
whether the $1.75 billion budget and 39 month timeline for the
incentive auction repack are sufficient for a successful repack of the
broadcasters.
Then Chairman Wheeler wrote back to us later in the year committing
to provide the information to us in a timely fashion after the
completion of the forward auction.
In response to QFRs after the FCC oversight hearing earlier this
year you agreed to send us the information at the close of the forward
auction.
I understand that the forward portion of the incentive auction is
now completed and that the FCC believes that there will be a shortfall
for the repack.
When can we expect a written response to our inquiry?
Answer. Our fund administrator (EY, formerly Ernst & Young) and its
team of engineers are currently reviewing each cost estimate submitted
to the Commission by broadcasters and MVPDs and communicating with
filers to gather more information and/or cost justification to
determine whether the submitted costs are reasonable in accordance with
the Spectrum Act. Once that review is complete in the fall, we will
provide you with a full written response to your and Senator Shaheen's
inquiries. Below, however, is a snapshot on where things currently
stand.
The Commission has now received cost estimates from all but eight
of the reimbursement-eligible broadcasters and some eligible MVPDs. On
July 14, 2017, we publicly announced that the preliminary aggregate
cost estimates received as of that date was approximately $2.115
billion. Estimates continue to be submitted and, in the course of
review, revised, and when I testified in the House of Representatives
on July 19, the aggregate total was $2.139 billion. While the estimates
will continue to change as we proceed with the post-incentive auction
transition process, we expect the final number to be above the $1.75
billion that Congress has provided the Commission to reimburse impacted
broadcast stations and MVPDs.
As a result, unless Congress acts to raise the $1.75 billion cap,
the substantial likelihood is that local broadcasters will be required
to pay some portion of their repacking costs out of their own pockets.
The Commission is prepared to work with Congress to address this issue.
At this time, we do not have reason to believe that the 39-month
timeline will be insufficient. But there are a variety of tools at the
Commission's disposal to assist stations should unforeseen
circumstances prevent them from completing the repack on time.
Six-month construction permit extensions for stations that
for reasons beyond their control cannot complete the
modifications to their facilities during their construction
period;
Special temporary authority (STA) to operate using a
temporary facility or at lower power while they complete their
tower modifications or other necessary construction; and
An STA to operate on a channel in the TV band that is
available because it was relinquished by a winning bidder in
the auction.
Of course, should the facts as they develop lead us to the
conclusion that the post-incentive auction transition process generally
cannot be completed in 39 months, we reserve the right to extend that
deadline.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question. A provision based on my Rural Spectrum Accessibility
Act--that I introduced last Congress with Senator Fischer--was included
in the MOBILE NOW Act that passed the Senate Commerce Committee in
January. This provision would require the Federal Communications
Commission to explore ways to provide incentives for wireless carriers
to lease unused spectrum to rural or smaller carriers in order to
expand wireless coverage in rural communities. Chairman Pai, what
incentives could be useful to encourage large carriers to lease
spectrum to smaller, rural carriers?
Answer. The Commission's spectrum licensing rules, including its
rules for leasing spectrum, are intended to lower regulatory barriers
to spectrum leasing for small and rural carriers. Our rules also
provide parties with great flexibility in the partitioning and
disaggregation of licensed spectrum. We will continue to explore ways
to eliminate unnecessary rules and regulatory barriers and to provide
incentives to expand wireless coverage in rural communities to deliver
mobile broadband to all Americans.
In addition, because deployment by rural carriers on leased
spectrum counts toward the primary licensee's construction benchmark,
adopting and enforcing meaningful construction requirements that
require licensees to build out in rural parts of their license area in
order to keep their license at the end of the license term incentivizes
carriers to lease spectrum to rural carriers in order to satisfy their
build-out requirements.
Again, I think that we need to continue to think about further
steps that we can take to encourage rural buildout. For instance, in my
September 2016 speech outlining my Digital Empowerment Agenda, I
proposed to substantially increase the buildout obligations associated
with initial licenses and extend license terms from 10 to 15 years.
This would both increase rural coverage and also make build out more
economically feasible for carriers by providing an additional five
years of certainty.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Richard Blumenthal to
Hon. Ajit Pai.
Question 1. It has been reported that the FCC may vote in September
on an order on reconsideration that would roll back many media
ownership regulations.
As you know, the FCC has an obligation to promote diversity and
localism, and its duty to ensure that broadcasters are responsive to
the needs and interests of the local community is enshrined in the
Communications Act. In fact, local broadcasters tout their local news
and other local services as their differentiating factor and value in
the marketplace.
The Third Circuit's opinions in the Prometheus v. FCC line of cases
have repeatedly admonished the Commission for failing to provide
adequate notice of its media ownership decisions. Even more troubling,
the court has repeatedly overturned the FCC when the agency has claimed
that rule changes promote these important goals of localism and
diversity, yet failed to consider adequately the impacts of any such
rule changes. For example, in its 2011 decision the court ruled that
the FCC had not yet ``gathered the information required to address
these challenges,'' and thus ``failed to provide reasoned analysis to
support'' changes to the FCC's cross-ownership rules and other local
ownership limits.
Accordingly, I am shocked you would consider going forward with
such a vote affecting media ownership regulations without a full, up-
to-date Quadrennial Review. And I am even more shocked that you appear
to have abandoned your own views on this subject, espoused before you
became Chairman and took control over such process decisions, when you
seemed to have more regard for those processes designed to ensure full
and fair consideration of such questions. In your dissent from the
prior Commission's joint sales agreement attribution decision, for
example, you said that ``the Commission abdicates its legal obligation
to review our media ownership regulations every four years'' when
``[i]t arbitrarily singles out one aspect of those regulations . . .
and changes our policies in a way that ignores the realities of the
modern media marketplace, [and] will harm localism and diversity[.]''
While you may contend that the record from the last Quadrennial
Review would be sufficient for action on reconsideration, the reality
is that with the incentive auction, proposed broadcast TV mergers, and
other changes in the broadcasting landscape much has changed since that
record was developed. Any revision of media ownership regulations
should go through a fully transparent and robust notice and comment
process, as you have long stated, and be based on an accurate, current
picture of the broadcasting landscape.
Do you commit to conducting a new, full, and open Quadrennial
Review of the Commission's broadcast ownership rules before proceeding
with any action that would affect the FCC's current media ownership
rules?
How would you make sure that any changes would not hurt localism,
diversity, or competition in broadcast television?
Answer. Because there were petitions for reconsideration filed of
the Commission's 2016 media ownership order, the current quadrennial
review is not yet complete. And in my view, the Commission should
complete the current quadrennial review before starting the next one.
I commit that the draft text of any order that would change the
Commission's media ownership rules in the context of the quadrennial
review will be made public three weeks before any Commission vote. That
draft text would include analysis and data on which the Commission
would be relying to justify any changes to the rules. This step would
bring unprecedented transparency to the Commission's quadrennial review
process; it has never been done before in any quadrennial review.
Before deciding to change any of its media ownership rules, the
Commission will assess the impact of that change on the values that the
rule in question is designed to advance, whether it be localism,
diversity, and/or competition.
Question 2. Chairman Pai, during your recent visit with me, we had
a good conversation about what localism means. As you know, the FCC's
obligation to promote diversity, localism, and ensure that broadcasters
are responsive to the needs and interests of the local community is
enshrined in the Communications Act. What do you believe are the
attributes of localism? How do you define localism?
Answer. A broadcast station advances localism when it airs
programming that is responsive to the needs and interests of the
community which it is licensed to serve.
Question 3. As I recall, in our recent conversation, you stressed
the importance of broadcasters being able to determine news important
to the local community.
If a company with broadcast properties required local affiliated
stations to air content during its news programming unconnected to the
local community, would you agree that such practices undermine
localism?
Would you agree that any such content should be clearly identified
as national ``must-run'' content? Would a company's failure to do so
implicate any FCC rules?
If such a company were to endeavor to acquire additional broadcast
properties, would you consider such practices requiring certain ``must-
run'' content relevant to the FCC's review of that merger under your
obligations to protect and promote localism?
Answer. The FCC's rules do not require local affiliates to identify
national ``must-run'' content, and I am not aware any proposal
currently under consideration to mandate such identification.
Local television newscasts generally feature a mix of local and
national news, so I do not believe that any news content focusing on
national issues by definition undermines localism. I do agree, however,
that there could come a point at which the amount of nationally-focused
content in a local newscast could undermine localism.
Any broadcast licensee is required to air programming that is
responsive to the needs and interests of the community to which it is
licensed, and a licensee's failure to comply with that requirement
would be relevant to the Commission's review of a transaction.
Question 4. During this nominations hearing, you said you were not
familiar with an interpretation of Section 706 requiring the FCC to
know Internet speeds being deployed by companies.
In fact, Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires
the FCC to report annually on whether ``advanced telecommunication
capability is being deployed . . .'' and ``advanced telecommunications
capability'' is defined as ``high-speed [emphasis added], switched,
broadband telecommunications capability . . .'' Accordingly, to
accurately conduct such a report, the FCC must know whether companies
are indeed offering telecommunication capability that qualifies as
``high-speed.''
How is the FCC able to fulfill its obligation to conduct its review
pursuant to Section 706 if we cannot trust companies to tell the truth
about the Internet speeds that they are being deployed?
Answer. The Commission's Section 706 proceedings for many years
have relied on data collected in our Form 477, as well as other data
sources. Form 477 data provides a wealth of information on the types
and speeds of broadband connections deployed by virtually all Internet
service providers in the United States. This information is certified
as accurate in accordance with our rules by officials in each company
and anyone making willful false statements in a Form 477 can be
punished by fine or imprisonment under the Communications Act. Going
forward, I anticipate the Commission will continue to rely heavily on
Form 477 data as part of our statutory duty under Section 706. And on
August 3, the Commission will be voting on proposals to improve the
accuracy of the Form 477 data we collect.
Question 5. Chairman Pai, in your April 2017 statement on the
Business Data Services Market, you describe a new ``competitive market
test'' that considers a particular county competitive if ``50 percent
of the locations with BDS demand in that county are within a half-mile
of a location served by a competitive provider or 75 percent of the
census blocks in that county have a cable provider present.''
Essentially, that means if a church in Hartford has only one
choice, but there's another provider a few miles away, there's nothing
for the Commission to do. Potential competition isn't competition.
Can you explain your competition philosophy? Is it your position
that the agency should not protect consumers even when there is a
monopoly? Do you believe a duopoly is sufficient?
Answer. My competition philosophy is informed by a few simple
principles. Consumers benefit most from competition, not preemptive
regulation. Free markets have delivered more value to American
consumers than highly regulated ones. No regulatory system should
indulge arbitrage; regulators should be skeptical of pleas to regulate
rivals, dispense favors, or otherwise afford special treatment.
Particularly given how rapidly the communications sector is changing,
the FCC should do everything it can to ensure that its rules reflect
the realities of the current marketplace and basic principles of
economics. Rules that reflect these principles will result in more
innovation, more investment, better products and services, lower
prices, more job creation, and faster economic growth.
Where a market lacks competition, I do believe the Commission
should intervene in appropriate circumstances. The record in the
Business Data Services Market showed many providers are willing to
build out at least by a half-mile, with some going further. What's
more, there's strong competition well within the half-mile threshold;
about half of buildings with demand are within 88 feet of competitive
fiber facilities, and 75 percent are within 456 feet. Those facts, in
addition to millions of observations from one of the largest data
collections the Commission has ever conducted, are why the Commission
concluded that sufficient facilities-based competition near a location
serve to discipline prices. And to ensure that every consumer is
protected, the Commission maintained a tried-and-true safety valve in
markets deemed competitive. Sections 201 and 202, along with the
section 208 complaint process, will continue to serve as safeguards
against any attempts by incumbents to charge unjust or unreasonable
rates for common-carriage DS1 and DS3 services.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question 1. Last week the FCC announced that the estimated cost to
repack the TV band would be approximately $2.11 billion dollars, which
is approximately $365 million more than the $1.75 billion Congress
included in the Television Broadcaster Relocation Fund. Given this
shortfall, is additional funding necessary to ensure that repacked
television stations are not forced to go out of pocket or cover their
costs?
Answer. We have begun our careful examination of the submissions
received to date. The initial aggregate estimate is subject to change
due to factors such as the agency's review, as well as the fund
administrator's review, of estimates and revisions made by eligible
entities, but the agency expects the final number to be above the $1.75
billion that Congress has provided the Commission to reimburse impacted
broadcast stations and MVPDs. As a result, unless Congress acts to
raise the $1.75 billion cap, the substantial likelihood is that local
broadcasters will be required to pay some portion of their repacking
costs out of their own pockets. I am prepared to work with Congress to
address this issue.
Question 2. Could you explain what happens to a broadcaster if,
through no fault of their own, it cannot complete channel relocation in
the time allotted during the repacking process following the incentive
auction?
Answer. I do not believe that any broadcaster should be forced off
the airwaves through no fault of its own during the post-incentive
auction transition process. And we have a number of tools at our
disposal to prevent this from happening.
Six-month construction permit extensions for stations that
for reasons beyond their control cannot complete the
modifications to their facilities during their construction
period;
Special temporary authority (STA) to operate using a
temporary facility or at lower power while they complete their
tower modifications or other necessary construction; and
An STA to operate on a channel in the TV band that is
available because it was relinquished by a winning bidder in
the auction.
The STA process worked well during the DTV transition and should
allow stations to continue to serve their communities if unforeseen
circumstances arise.
Of course, should the facts as they develop lead us to the
conclusion that the post-incentive auction transition process generally
cannot be completed in 39 months, we reserve the right to extend that
deadline. However, given current facts, we have reached no such
conclusion.
Question 3. When do you expect to have the final analysis of the
reimbursement request?
Answer. The review of initial cost estimates involves a multi-step
process that balances the Commission's need to ensure responsible
stewardship of public funds with ensuring the timely availability of
funds for entities incurring relocation costs. We expect that the fund
administrator's review of initial cost estimates will be completed in
mid-September, after which time we will analyze the data to calculate
an initial allocation. We expect to begin making reimbursement payments
early in the fourth quarter of this calendar year. Additional cost
estimates and changes to estimates will continue to be submitted
throughout the transition period and we will conduct a similar review
of such changes. We will also review invoices for actual costs
incurred. It is therefore not possible to know the precise amount of
the aggregate total costs until the last invoice is submitted and
approved at the end of the transition.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question. Earlier this year, the majority of the Commission
indicated that a market is competitive where only one provider has
service, and potentially a second provider may enter the market. Do you
take the position that the agency should not regulate when there is a
monopoly? What is your view on duopoly and what actions should the
agency take? What is your plan to evaluate, on an ongoing basis,
conditions in business data services?
Answer. Where a market lacks competition, I do believe the
Commission should intervene in appropriate circumstances. The record in
the Business Data Services Market showed many providers are willing to
build out at least by a half-mile, with some going further. What's
more, there's strong competition well within the half-mile threshold;
about half of buildings with demand are within 88 feet of competitive
fiber facilities, and 75 percent are within 456 feet. Those facts, in
addition to millions of observations from one of the largest data
collections the Commission has ever conducted, are why the Commission
concluded that sufficient facilities-based competition near a location
serve to discipline prices. And to ensure that every consumer is
protected, the Commission maintained a tried-and-true safety valve in
markets deemed competitive. Sections 201 and 202, along with the
section 208 complaint process, will continue to serve as safeguards
against any attempts by incumbents to charge unjust or unreasonable
rates for common-carriage DS1 and DS3 services.
Going forward, the Commission plans to evaluate conditions in the
business data services market at least every three years.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Cory Booker to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question 1. WJLP, northern New Jersey's only VHF television
broadcast station, has been ordered by the FCC to identify itself as
channel 33 instead of its real channel, channel 3. Applications for
review of numerous rulings related to this issue have been submitted
with no action for up to three years. It is my understanding that
contested cases can take up to seven years to reach a determination.
What actions have you taken, and what actions will you take if re-
confirmed, to reach a final determination on this case?
Answer. The two Applications for Review filed regarding the issues
related to WJLP are restricted proceedings. However, I can say that
Commission staff are actively reviewing the issues raised, and the
Commission will reach a final determination in these cases as soon as
feasible.
Question 2. E-Rate is an important Universal Service Fund program
that helps underserved schools and libraries connect to high-speed
Internet. I cannot overstate the value of broadband access for these
learning centers. To remain competitive in the 21st century, our
children must learn how to interact with the digital world.
In 2016, my home state of New Jersey received $90 million for E-
Rate, which it used to connect 181,652 students to high-speed Internet
in underserved schools.\1\ For these students, especially those who do
not have access to broadband at home, this a potentially life-changing
advance in educational opportunity. This program is critical to closing
the digital divide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Education Superhighway, July 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nationally, since the E-Rate Modernization Order in 2014, 30.9
million unserved students have been connected to the high-speed
broadband that they need to build our Nation's future.
Will you commit to support the E-rate modernization order in its
current form with need-based prioritized funding for underserved
schools and libraries?
Answer. I am deeply committed to doing everything within the FCC's
power to close the digital divide. I believe an effective E-rate
program--one that promotes better connectivity for students and library
patrons alike--can be a powerful tool to help bridge that divide. This
is why, four years ago, I said that ``E-rate is a program worth
fighting for.''
Unfortunately, there have been serious flaws in the administration
of the E-rate program, specifically related to the process by which
schools and libraries to apply for E-rate funding, that are preventing
many schools and libraries from getting that funding. I have asked USAC
to provide a detailed report on plans to fix the existing problems so
it can administer the E-rate program in a manner that is fully
compliant with our rules and that works for applicants and
participants.
At this point, I believe that our focus should be on cutting
unnecessary red tape and making it easier for schools and libraries to
participate in the E-rate program.
Question 3. The New Jersey Division of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
(DDHH) estimates that there are approximately 850,000 New Jersey
residents who experience hearing loss. Many of these individuals rely
on Video Relay Service (VRS) and Internet Protocol Captioned Telephone
Service (IP CTS) to communicate with family, friends, emergency
services, and other important people. How will you ensure that the FCC
continues to administer these programs consistent with the requirements
of the Americans with Disabilities Act?
Answer. Since day one of my Chairmanship, I've said the Commission
has no higher calling than extending digital opportunity to all
Americans. Every citizen who wants to participate in our digital
economy and society should be able to do so--no matter who you are.
Communications technology has awe-inspiring power to open doors
that have too-long been closed to Americans with disabilities. Last
week marked the 27th anniversary of the ADA becoming the law of the
land. This landmark legislation gave the FCC a mandate to ensure access
to telecommunications by Americans with hearing and speech
disabilities. It's critical that the Commission fulfill its legal
obligation under Title IV of the ADA to ensure that nationwide
telecommunications relay services are available to people who are deaf,
hard of hearing, deaf-blind, or who have a speech disability.
That's why the FCC is seeking to improve video relay services
(VRS), which can be critical to allowing people who are deaf, hard-of-
hearing, or speech-disabled to make calls over broadband using American
Sign Language and a videophone. For example, we have authorized a trial
that will allow VRS users to request interpreters that are skilled in
specialized vocabulary, such as legal, medical, and technical computer
matters, to make communication on their relay calls more effective
(something I had pushed for since 2013). In addition, we are in the
process of establishing performance goals and metrics to ensure the
high quality of the relay services we support. I'm committed to making
sure that technological inclusion is the norm, rather than the
exception. I look forward to working with my colleagues on further
steps to ensure that deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals are provided
with functionally equivalent communications services.
Question 4. Expanding access to broadband connectivity is an
incredibly important part of investing in the future of our Nation and
closing the digital divide. This is especially true in rural areas. How
do you view the role of TV White Spaces in expanding connectivity to
hard-to-reach rural areas?
Answer. The Commission's rules provide for unlicensed operation in
the TV white space, including in rural areas. In 2015, we revised the
TV white space rules to facilitate deployments in rural areas such as
by allowing for higher power to serve longer distances. And earlier
this month, I had the opportunity to visit South Boston, Virginia, to
learn about how the TV white space is being used to provide
connectivity to families in that community. This is an issue that I am
following closely as we need to look at creative ways to provide
connectivity in hard-to-reach rural areas.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tom Udall to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question 1. The FCC and this Committee have been talking about the
need to build out rural broadband for many years. Progress is
happening, but much too slowly. The free market did not deliver rural
electricity--FDR, the New Deal, and the rural electric coops did it
with major USDA support. The free market will not deliver rural
broadband on its own either. We need the government to act. If there is
going to be an infrastructure package, rural broadband must be in it in
a very big way. Will you work with both parties in Congress, and the
White House, to advance a consensus, bipartisan proposal to provide
rural broadband to every part of America that is bold--and provides the
necessary funding to achieve this goal?
Answer. Yes.
Question 2. Chairman Pai, Internet service providers and consumer
advocacy groups have been weighing in on the Commission's proposal to
eliminate the Open Internet Order and reclassify broadband as an
information service. Can you tell me if the Commission is considering
any other proposals that would provide similar legal and regulatory net
neutrality protections?
Answer. In the Restoring Internet Freedom Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, the Commission sought comment on any sources of legal
authority for rules in this area other than Title II. Once the comment
cycle closes, we will carefully review the proposals along these lines
that are submitted into the record.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question 1. Chairman Pai, in a presentation to investors about its
Bonten and Tribune transactions, Sinclair stated that the transactions
would give it ``72 percent household coverage across 108 markets.'' In
2004, Congress enacted the Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 108-
199) that directed the FCC to adopt rules that would cap the reach of a
single company's television stations to 39 percent of U.S. television
households. Last April, the FCC reinstated the UHF discount regulation,
which, for purposes of this national ownership cap, discounts the reach
of UHF stations by 50 percent. In September of last year, the FCC under
then-Chairman Wheeler eliminated this discount. What authority does the
FCC have to change the national ownership cap and UHF cap either
separately or in conjunction with one another?
Answer. I believe that the Commission is required to review the
national ownership cap and the UHF discount in a holistic manner since
they are inextricably linked. In the prior Administration, the
Commission concluded that it had the authority to modify the national
ownership cap and eliminate the UHF discount. The Commission will be
seeking comment on both of those conclusions later this year when we
initiate a rulemaking proceeding about the national ownership cap.
Question 2. In August 2016, the FCC adopted new disclosure
requirements for all joint operating agreements, broadly encompassed by
the term ``shared services agreements'' (SSAs) among broadcast
television stations. Subject to approval by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), each station that is a party to an SSA, whether in
the same or different television markets, would have been required to
file a copy of the SSA in its online public inspection file. Did the
FCC withdraw its request to OMB to approve the collection of
information regarding SSAs on January 27, 2017, and if so, why? Does
the FCC plan to resubmit its request to OMB?
Answer. Yes, the FCC withdrew its request to OMB to approve the
collection of information regarding SSAs so that the Commission could
consider a Petition for Reconsideration regarding that collection.
Depending on the decision that the Commission makes regarding that
Petition for Reconsideration, the OMB approval process may be
restarted.
Question 3. In March 2014, the FCC's Media Bureau issued a public
notice stating that it will closely scrutinize any proposed transaction
that includes ``sidecar'' agreements. In such agreements, two (or more)
broadcast stations in the same market enter into an arrangement to
share facilities, employees, and/or services, or to jointly acquire
programming or sell advertising and enter into an option, right of
first refusal, put/call arrangement, or other similar contingent
interest, or a loan guarantee. In February 2017, the FCC's Media Bureau
rescinded this guidance. Among the 10 markets in which Sinclair states
in its FCC merger application it would need to divest stations in order
to comply with the FCC's media ownership rules, is the St. Louis
television market, which includes more than a dozen Illinois counties.
Would the FCC approve a divestiture to a ``sidecar'' station?
Answer. It would not be appropriate for me to speculate at this
time about a transaction pending in front of the Commission.
Question 4. More than eight million comments were filed during the
initial comment period for the 2017 Open Internet proceeding. During
the 2017 Open Internet comment period, the FCC's electronic comment
filing system was subjected to multiple distributed denial-of-service
attacks. Do you believe these attacks may have kept some portion of
comments from being recorded? In light of these attacks, do you believe
that the FCC's information technology and cybersecurity practices are
adequate? If not, what actions would you recommend to improve them?
Answer. We have had more than 13 million comments filed in the
Restoring Internet Freedom docket at this juncture, and I am confident
that the American people are being provided with ample opportunity to
participate in this proceeding. Following the disruption on May 7-8,
the Commission's career IT professionals have taken a number of steps
to minimize the chances of a similar disruption occurring in the
future, and the Commission's electronic comment filing system has been
working well. We will continue to monitor the situation closely and
effectuate upgrades as necessary going forward to maintain and improve
the resiliency of our systems. It is important to recognize, however,
that the disruption that occurred on May 7-8 did not involve a breach
of the Commission's systems and that our security systems functioned
appropriately on those days.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maggie Hassan to
Hon. Ajit Pai
Question 1. The E-Rate program is critical to achieving our goals
in regards to connectivity in schools and libraries, and the expansion
has helped advance those goals. I have heard concerns from educators in
my state that if confirmed you may take aim at this critical program
which has been successful in connecting numerous students in New
Hampshire and across the country. Will you commit to maintaining the E-
Rate Program at least its current funding levels? Can you commit to
waiting an adequate amount of time so that the Commission can see how
effective the latest changes to the program have been?
Answer. I am deeply committed to doing everything within the FCC's
power to close the digital divide. I believe an effective E-rate
program--one that promotes better connectivity for students and library
patrons alike--can be a powerful tool to help bridge that divide. This
is why, four years ago, I said that ``E-rate is a program worth
fighting for.''
Unfortunately, there have been serious flaws in the administration
of the E-rate program, specifically related to the process by which
schools and libraries apply for E-rate funding, that are preventing
many schools and libraries from getting that funding. I have asked USAC
to provide a detailed report on plans to fix the existing problems so
it can administer the E-rate program in a manner that is fully
compliant with our rules and that works for applicants and
participants.
Currently, my focus is on reducing unnecessary red tape and making
it easier for schools and libraries to apply for the program and
receive funding.
Question 2. A robust emergency alert system is incredibly important
in reaching our Nation's citizens in time of a crises or natural
disaster. I have heard from our local broadcasters that there is great
potential enhanced information delivery capabilities ATSC 3.0 (Next Gen
TV) will be able to provide to the public, during an emergency
situation such as a major flood or hurricane. Could you provide an
update on timing for completion of this proceeding?
Answer. The record in this proceeding recently closed. We are
reviewing that record currently. Our goal is to issue rules in this
proceeding by the end of the year.
Question 3. As you know, pursuant to the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the FCC has an important mandate to ensure that deaf
and hearing-impaired individuals have ``functionally equivalent''
access to telecom services. How will you work to ensure that the
commission fulfils its obligation to individuals with hearing
impairments under the ADA?
Answer. Since day one of my Chairmanship, I've said the Commission
has no higher calling than extending digital opportunity to all
Americans. Every citizen who wants to participate in our digital
economy and society should be able to do so--no matter who you are.
Communications technology has awe-inspiring power to open doors
that have too-long been closed to Americans with disabilities. Last
week marked the 27th anniversary of the ADA becoming the law of the
land. This landmark legislation gave the FCC a mandate to ensure access
to telecommunications by Americans with hearing and speech
disabilities. It's critical that the Commission fulfill its legal
obligation under Title IV of the ADA to ensure that nationwide
telecommunications relay services are available to people who are deaf,
hard of hearing, deaf-blind, or who have a speech disability.
That's why the FCC is seeking to improve video relay services
(VRS), which can be critical for people who are deaf, hard-of-hearing,
or speech-disabled to make calls over broadband using American Sign
Language and a videophone. For example, we have authorized a trial that
will allow VRS users to request interpreters that are skilled in
specialized vocabulary, such as legal, medical, and technical computer
matters, to make communication on their relay calls more effective
(something I had pushed for since 2013). In addition, we are in the
process of establishing performance goals and metrics to ensure the
high quality of the relay services we support. I'm committed to making
sure that technological inclusion is the norm, rather than the
exception. I look forward to working with my colleagues on further
steps to ensure that deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals are provided
with functionally equivalent communications services.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto
to Hon. Ajit Pai
Question 1. Federal Siting for Telecom Services on Public and
Tribal Lands
While we discussed Federal siting issues in relations to your
Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee in the hearing, I just wanted
to follow-up on confirming some specific details.
Can you please commit to setting a date for public display of these
recommendations for Federal siting improvements?
Have you invited the Interior Department to these meetings, and
have they been participating?
What other Federal agencies have you specifically invited to
participate in your advisory committee's activities?
Answer. The Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee (BDAC) is a
crucial component in the FCC's efforts to close the digital divide. The
mission of the BDAC includes making recommendations that would
accelerate the deployment of high-speed Internet access in communities
across the country. The BDAC is comprised of a distinguished group of
30 innovators and leaders who have been working to bring broadband and
next-generation networks to all parts of our Nation. The BDAC is on
pace to deliver an initial set of recommendations by the end of the
year, and we expect more recommendations to follow in 2018. Like the
recommendations of our other Federal advisory committees, we expect
these recommendations to be available to the public.
As you mention, one important area of focus for the BDAC is Federal
siting issues. We just recently got confirmation that the Department of
the Interior, the Department of Agriculture, and the Bureau of Land
Management will participate in the BDAC working group on Federal siting
issues, and we will launch it as soon as possible.
Question 2. Chairman Pai's Proposal for an FCC Office of Economics
and Data: As we discussed in our meeting, I have interest in the Office
of Economics and Data (OED) you've proposed for the Commission.
While I have written to you with additional questions about this
proposal, I know you've committed to providing Congressional
Appropriators your plan, and I would request that you respectfully
provide the plan to myself and the members of the Senate Commerce
Committee.
And specifically, in regards to this new office, can you explain
how this OED office will work in coordination with the public interest
standard statutorily required of the FCC that reviews transactions on a
basis beyond ``purely economic outcomes''?
Answer. You have my commitment to provide a final reorganization
plan to the Committee and otherwise notify the Committee of our
progress. I have not yet received the final recommendations from the
working group that is studying the issue of how to structure the Office
of Economics and Data. But I hope that the proposed OED will be on par
with the Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) and coordinate with
other bureaus and offices within the Commission's organizational
structure. One of my goals is for the reorganization to elevate the
importance of economic analysis within the Commission. The existence of
this office, however, will not in any way change our emphasis on a
broad range of issues that inform our overall analyses, from consumer
protection to sound engineering analysis. Economics is one tool in the
analytic toolbox; it is not the only tool.
Question 3. Diversity in Telecom: After our last hearing, I asked
you in writing about concerns with diversity in the telecom industry,
from gender, to ethnicity. You mentioned that you did not have the
statutory authority to impose equal employment opportunity rules on
Silicon Valley tech firms, as you have at your disposal for
broadcasters and cable operators.
Have you utilized this authority for broadcasters and cable
operators during your tenure as Chairman, or your entire time at the
FCC?
And two, would you support having that kind of authority to ensure
we can create a wider exposure of those jobs, opportunities, and
thought to such an important industry?
Answer. With respect to your first question, the answer is yes. For
example, the Media Bureau this year has already sent out two sets of
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) audit letters covering over 300
broadcast stations to examine whether these broadcasters are complying
with the Commission's EEO rules. With respect to your second question,
I would defer to Congress on whether the FCC should have this statutory
authority. However, I do believe that FCC's Advisory Committee on
Diversity and Digital Empowerment could study why many companies in
Silicon Valley appear to have a less diverse workforce than
broadcasters and cable operators.
Question 4. Working to Bridge the Divide: In relation to the FCC,
we've all heard from the Senate Commerce Chairman, as well as you
yourself, concerns related to the repeated, or all too common, party
line votes that take place at the Commission.
Would you agree it would serve us all better if we could get to
more consensus and work together in the messages and policies you put
forth at the FCC?
If reconfirmed, how will you bridge this apparent divide at the
FCC?
How will you work with ALL of your fellow Commissioners to find
common ground, to get 4-1 or 5-0 votes on the Commissions actions?
Answer. The answer to your first question is yes. With respect to
your second and third questions, I plan to continue working with my
colleagues whenever possible to find common ground. Unfortunately,
there will always be some issues where it is not possible to reach
unanimity. But I firmly believe that with respect to the substantial
majority of the issues we face, it is possible to find common ground so
long as Commissioners are willing to engage in good faith and make
reasonable compromises so that the perfect does not become the enemy of
the good.
I'm pleased to report that this approach appears to be working this
year. For example, under the prior Chairman, only 48 percent of meeting
items were adopted with no dissenting votes. But since I have become
Chairman, 76 percent of meeting items have been adopted with no
dissenting votes.
Question 5. E-Rate: I'm deeply concerned about your noncommittal
stance towards e-rate and any future plans you have for the program.
Are you considering reducing funding for E-rate?
And, are you considering major changes to E-rate?
Answer. I am very committed to doing everything within the FCC's
power to close the digital divide. I believe an effective E-rate
program--one that promotes better connectivity for students and library
patrons alike--can be a powerful tool to help bridge that divide. This
is why, four years ago, I said that ``E-rate is a program worth
fighting for.''
Unfortunately, there have been serious flaws in the administration
of the E-rate program, specifically related to the process by which
schools and libraries apply for E-rate funding, that are preventing
many schools and libraries from getting that funding. I have asked USAC
to provide a detailed report on plans to fix the existing problems so
it can administer the E-rate program in a manner that is fully
compliant with our rules and that works for applicants and
participants.
My immediate focus is on trying to reduce unnecessary red tape and
make it easier for schools and libraries to apply for the program, not
on examining the program's funding level.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. John Thune to
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
Question. Millions of rural Americans lack access to broadband, and
bridging the digital divide is a priority for me and the Committee. As
traditional fiber, cable, and 4G broadband is deployed throughout the
country, policymakers must nevertheless be creative and open-minded
when exploring all options to achieving universal service. What role do
you see for unlicensed spectrum (Wi-Fi, TV White Spaces, millimeter
wave, etc.) in connecting unserved rural households with broadband
Internet access?
Answer. Broadband is more than a technology--it is a platform for
opportunity. No matter who you are or where you live, you need access
to broadband communications for a fair shot at 21st century success.
This is true in urban America, rural America, and everything in
between.
However, access in rural communities can present a real challenge.
Often the cost of financing, constructing, and operating broadband
networks in remote areas is high while the number of households and
businesses over which that cost is spread is low. As a result, the
Commission has had a series of policies designed to boost deployment in
the Nation's most difficult to serve rural areas. The most prominent of
these is the high-cost universal service fund, which provides roughly
$4.5 billion in annual support to wired and wireless providers serving
some of our most remote communities. Other policies, however, also
assist with universal service, including build-out requirements for
spectrum licensees providing wireless service that help ensure
deployment covers both urban and rural populations.
Nonetheless, the data suggests that despite these efforts too many
rural areas are still at risk of being consigned to the wrong side of
the digital divide. In fact, in 2016 the Commission found that more
than 23 million Americans in rural areas lack access to broadband. By
any measure, this number is too high.
For this reason, I agree that policymakers must be willing to look
at all options to achieve true universal service. As a result, I
believe the Commission should always be on the hunt for good ideas that
will extend the opportunities of broadband to rural communities at low
cost.
The use of unlicensed spectrum in the 600 MHz band--or TV White
Spaces--is one such opportunity. The use of TV White Spaces was first
approved by the Commission in 2010. At that time, it updated its Part
15 rules to allow for unlicensed fixed and portable devices to operate
in the broadcast television spectrum at locations where that spectrum
was not in use by licensed services. In order to prevent interference
to other services operating in the band--namely television--the
Commission relied on geolocation capabilities in white space devices as
well as databases to identify vacant channels.
In the aftermath of the 600 MHz band spectrum incentive auction
there will be new opportunities to explore the use of TV White Spaces
to expand broadband access. I believe the Commission can seek to
develop these opportunities while also protecting incumbent services
from harmful interference.
There also may be opportunities to expand the use of unlicensed
spectrum in the upper portion of the 5 GHz band. At present, the
Commission is working with the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration and Department of Transportation on a series
of tests to examine the compatibility of unlicensed devices and
dedicated short range communications systems in this band. I am hopeful
that this testing will result in new opportunities for unlicensed Wi-Fi
services in this band--while also ensuring that automotive safety
efforts using dedicated short range communications can continue.
In addition, the Commission has sought to increase the availability
of unlicensed spectrum in millimeter wave bands. To this end, last year
the agency established a new unlicensed band at 64-71 GHz, making a 14
gigahertz unlicensed band from 57-71 GHz. While the propagation
characteristics of these airwaves present real challenges, I am
confident there will be new developments in the use of millimeter wave
bands that may eventually have applications in rural communities.
I support these efforts because it is essential that the Commission
is, as you suggest, creative and open-minded with respect to policies
designed to improve universal service and bring broadband to our
Nation's most rural communities. If re-confirmed, I pledge to continue
to do so.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roy Blunt to
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
Question 1. AT&T's Twitter feed was mysteriously blocked when AT&T
announced that it would participate in the so-called Internet Day of
Action.
While the network neutrality debate has seemingly focused on ISPs,
large social media platforms such as Twitter serve as a gatekeeper for
information distributed to millions of Internet users.
Should large social media platforms such as Twitter be prohibited
from blocking access to content that Twitter or its employees may find
objectionable?
Answer. I share your concern that this content was not available.
This is not, however, a platform subject to the Communications Act.
Moreover, I believe that however well intended, a new, government-based
requirement on such platforms could result in an updated version of the
Fairness Doctrine. Because I believe that this policy had a chilling
effect on speech, I would not support such an approach.
Question 2. Does it seem intellectually inconsistent for ISPs to be
prohibited from blocking lawful content, but large social media
platforms should be permitted to do so?
Answer. To the extent there is incongruity here, it is largely a
function of law. Companies that do not provide telecommunications are
not offering services subject to the Communications Act nor the
jurisdiction of the Commission more generally.
Question 3. If confirmed, do you intend to vigorously enforce laws
prohibiting the broadcast of indecent material outside of the safe-
harbor, when children are likely to be in the viewing audience?
Answer. Yes.
Question 4. What will you do to ensure television ratings
accurately reflect the content on screen, and that there is greater
accountability to parents and families in the application and review of
TV ratings?
Answer. Television has the power to enlighten and entertain. But
not all programming is enriching or appropriate for children.
Recognizing this fact, in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 Congress
called on the entertainment industry to establish a voluntary
television rating system to help provide parents with the tools to
block programming that is inappropriate for younger viewers. As a
result of this effort, a voluntary ratings system, known as the TV
Parental Guidelines, was adopted by television broadcasters and
networks, cable networks and systems, and television programming
producers. To help implement these guidelines accurately and
consistently, an Oversight Monitoring Board was established. This board
includes up to 24 members, including industry leaders and public
interest representatives.
More than two decades hence, I believe it reasonable for the
Commission to review this program and if necessary, encourage
improvements. If re-confirmed, I would support such a re-assessment in
order to ensure that this approach remains consistent with the law and
ultimately useful for parents and families.
Question 5. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provides that
deaf and hearing-impaired individuals have access to telecommunications
services in the same way as those without hearing impairments.
If you are confirmed, will you pledge to honor this ADA requirement
and ensure access for those of all ages, including our growing senior
citizen population?
Answer. Yes. More than a quarter of a century ago, the Americans
with Disabilities Act paved the way for the meaningful inclusion of 54
million Americans with disabilities in modern civic and commercial
life. The direction in this law to ensure functionally equivalent
access to communications remains the cornerstone of Commission efforts
to ensure that individuals with hearing impairments have the ability to
pick up the phone; connect with family, friends, and business
associates; and participate fully in the world. It is especially
important for senior citizens, with nearly half of the population over
75 reporting hearing difficulties.
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, as updated by the
Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act, the
Commission has made strides in its policies to expand access to modern
communications to the hearing-impaired. These efforts include continued
support for telecommunications relay service, including Video Relay
Service and Internet Protocol Captioned Telephone Service. It also
includes the exploration of new forms of service, including Real-Time
Text. In addition, the Commission has expanded the number of wireless
handset models that are hearing-aid compatible, established the
National Deaf-Blind Equipment Distribution Program in order to increase
access to essential equipment for low-income individuals who are deaf-
blind, and promoted increased access to emergency communications
through the availability of texting-to-911. The Commission also has
updated its policies regarding closed captioning, in order to improve
the accuracy and completeness of captions.
I support these efforts because I believe they are essential for
functionally equivalent access to communications services. But I also
believe that as time and technology advance, it is incumbent on the
Commission to review these policies in order to ensure that they are up
to date. If re-confirmed, I pledge to work with my colleagues to do so.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ted Cruz to
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
Net Neutrality
So called ``net neutrality'' as implemented in former FCC Chairman
Tom Wheeler's Open Internet Order was a bureaucratic power grab that
took the Internet which has long been a transformational tool that has
allowed innovation and creativity and created new economic
opportunities for all Americans and turned the Internet into a
regulated public utility under Title II of the Communications Act.
Title II gives the government new authority over the Internet which
could be used to determine pricing and terms of service.
What's concerning about the Title II debate is the influence that
edge providers such as Google, Facebook and Netflix had with the Obama
White House. For example, The Intercept has reported that between
January 2009 and October 2015, Google staffers gathered at the White
House on 427 separate occasions. The Intercept further notes that the
frequency of the meetings increased from 32 in 2009 to 97 in 2014.
This is concerning given that President Obama released a video on
November 10, 2014 weighing into the net neutrality debate and advocated
that the FCC regulate the Internet as a public utility. Not only did
the Commission move forward and implement Title II but edge providers
like Google were exempted from Title II.
Question 1. As you know, last week tech companies were involved in
a so called, ``Internet Day of Action'' that was meant to support
keeping Title II reclassification. I found it interesting that AT&T's
Twitter feed was mysteriously blocked when AT&T announced that it would
participate in the Internet Day of Action. While the network neutrality
debate has seemingly focused on Internet Service Providers (ISPs),
large social media platforms such as Twitter serve as a gatekeeper for
information distributed to millions of Internet users. Should large
social media platforms such as Twitter be prohibited from blocking
access to content that Twitter or its employees may find objectionable?
Does it seem intellectually inconsistent for ISPs to be prohibited from
blocking lawful content, but large social media platforms should be
permitted to do so?
Answer. I share your concern that this content was not available.
However, to the extent there is incongruity here, it is largely a
function of law. Companies that do not provide telecommunications are
not offering services subject to the Communications Act nor the
jurisdiction of the Commission more generally.
Federal Spectrum
FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly stated in a 2015 blog post that,
``By some accounts, the Federal Government currently occupies-either
exclusively or on a primary basis-between 60 and 70 percent of all
spectrum in the commercially most valuable range between 225 megahertz
and 3.7 gigahertz, which comes to approximately 2,417 megahertz.''
Question 2. What steps can this Committee take to incentive Federal
users, especially the Department of Defense, to make more spectrum
available for commercial use? Should Congress consider allowing Federal
agencies to keep more of the proceeds from FCC incentive auctions?
Answer. I agree with the need to develop incentives to encourage
Federal authorities with substantial spectrum holdings to make more of
their spectrum available for new commercial use. In fact, I testified
on this subject before the Committee on Commerce, Science and
Transportation on July 29, 2015.
Today, Federal authorities have substantial spectrum assignments.
Many critical missions throughout the government are dependent on
wireless service. This includes systems that help defend us from
attack, manage our air traffic, and monitor our water supplies. We
should recognize that these are important tasks. However, we also
should be willing to re-assess the airwaves used in service of these
missions if there are opportunities to re-purpose them for new
commercial use without sacrificing important Federal objectives.
Under our current system, efforts to re-purpose these airwaves can
take years. These efforts typically involve a lot of legislative
pressure and regulatory coaxing because existing government users
rarely respond with enthusiasm when facing the reclamation of airwaves
they presently use. But when these efforts to reclaim spectrum are
successful, a three-part process follows. First, the government users
are cleared out of a portion of their airwaves. Second, the government
users are relocated. Third, the freed spectrum is auctioned for new
commercial use. This is a slow and cumbersome process. It's not the
steady spectrum pipeline the modern mobile economy needs.
A better system would be built on carrots rather than sticks. If we
want a robust and reliable spectrum pipeline, it is essential that
Federal authorities see gain--and not just loss--when their airwaves
are reallocated for new mobile broadband use.
The best way to do this is to develop a series of incentives to
serve as the catalyst for freeing more spectrum for commercial markets.
This could include, as you suggest, expanding incentive auctions to
Federal spectrum users. Such auctions could be modeled on the recent
incentive auction in the 600 MHz band. Participating Federal
authorities could receive a cut of the revenue from the commercial
auction of the airwaves they clear--and could then use these funds to
support relocation or other initiatives approved by Congress, including
some that may have been lost to sequestration. This is a complex
undertaking, because Federal authorities are subject to annual budget
allocations and therefore do not operate in a strictly market
environment.
Nonetheless, I believe it is an idea worth pursuing with discrete
spectrum bands or agencies.
In addition, Congress could choose to update the Spectrum
Relocation Fund. Today this fund assists Federal authorities with
relocating their wireless functions when their spectrum is being
repurposed for commercial use. But this fund also could be structured
to provide incentives for government sharing by rewarding Federal users
when they share their spectrum with agencies that are being relocated.
There are also laws that create perverse incentives that need
review. This includes the Miscellaneous Receipts Act. This law can
prevent negotiations between Federal agencies and winning bidders in
wireless auctions. But with changes, it could lead to the auction of
imperfect rights that would permit winning bidders to negotiate
directly with Federal authorities remaining in the band in order to
help meet their wireless needs. This could speed repurposing of our
airwaves and also provide commercial carriers with incentives to help
update Federal systems that are past their prime.
On the flip side, a slightly different approach to incentivizing
the relinquishment of underutilized Federal spectrum would be the
enactment of spectrum fees. Brent Skorup at the Mercatus Center has
written that, ``Some countries have applied spectrum fees to government
users, which generally attempt to approximate the opportunity cost of
the spectrum so that users internalize the social value of the spectrum
they occupy. If the opportunity cost fees are high, a user will be
induced to use less spectrum to reduce its fees or leave the space
completely and sell the cleared spectrum for higher-valued uses.''
Question 3. Should Congress implement a spectrum fee to incentive
Federal users to consider relinquishing underutilized spectrum?
Answer. I am concerned that Federal users are not required to
internalize the cost of their spectrum holdings. There is no budgetary
system to account for these holdings, nor uniform method to enumerate
the value of these assets. One way to ensure that government use is
efficient involves the introduction of spectrum fees, as has been done
by some countries to approximate the opportunity cost of continued
noncommercial use of certain airwaves. However, in the near term I
believe Congress should focus on the intermediate step of having the
Office of Management and Budget develop a uniform system of valuation
of Federal spectrum assignments. Such a system could eventually be used
to develop incentives to promote the efficient use of airwaves and
assist with the repurposing of Federal airwaves for new commercial use.
5G Wireless Technology Deployment
We are on the cusp of the wireless industry introducing the next
generation of technology--5G. That upgrade to our existing networks is
expected to bring us higher data speeds, lower latency, and the ability
to support breakthrough innovations in transportation, healthcare,
energy and other sectors. And as recent studies have shown, 5G is
expected to provide significant benefits to state and local
governments, allowing them to become smart cities. However, those
networks will also require many more antenna sites than we have today--
they will increasingly rely on small cell technologies. To recognize
these benefits, a study performed by Deloitte shows that several steps
are necessary to remove impediments to antenna siting. Texas is leading
the way, as evidenced by recent legislation (Texas Senate Bill 1004)
signed into law just last month that streamlines the deployment of
next-generation 5G networks. It's also my understanding that the
Commission has initiated a proceeding designed to evaluate whether some
of those obstacles can be removed.
Question 4. Do you support the Commission's efforts in this area?
Do you think that the Commission's proposals are achievable,
particularly considering state and local government interests in this
area?
Answer. Yes. I am optimistic that the Broadband Deployment Advisory
Committee, recently established by Chairman Pai, can be a useful forum
for discussing these matters and improving the prospects for deployment
of next-generation 5G infrastructure. In particular, I am hopeful that
this group will be able to develop a streamlined, model code for state
and local authorities to use for facilities siting. Then I believe the
Commission should study its own policies to identify ways to
incentivize officials to implement this code in order to expedite
deployment further.
I also believe it is important for the Federal Government to lead
by example. By some measures nearly one-third of all property in the
United States is Federal land. The Commission should work with the
Federal authorities with facilities on this land--including the
Department of Interior, Department of Agriculture, and Department of
Transportation--to develop a Memorandum of Understanding that would
streamline the siting of network infrastructure.
FCC Priorities
Question 5. My top priority is regulatory reform. Please identify
three meaningful regulations that you are interested in repealing
during your tenure at the FCC.
Answer. I believe the Commission should eliminate the reporting
obligation associated with the Open-Market Reorganization for the
Betterment of International Telecommunications Act. The analysis in
this report provides little to no benefit to the satellite industry, in
light of the fact that the essential purposes of this law were
fulfilled by the privatization of INTELSAT and Inmarsat more than a
decade ago. To the extent that the Commission is unable to do this
under existing law, it should seek assistance from Congress to
eliminate this obligation.
I believe the Commission should reduce the filing obligations that
remain on carriers completing payphone calls. There has been a sharp
decline the number of payphones and the volume of calls completed on
these facilities. It is time for the Commission to update its policies
to reflect this reality--and it can begin by removing the costly
requirement for providers to file an annual audit of their payphone
call tracking systems.
I believe the Commission should eliminate the requirement that
providers of international telecommunications services report annually
on their traffic and revenue for international voice services,
international miscellaneous services, and international common carrier
lines. These requirements were put in place to help the Commission
monitor settlement rates as part of its international benchmark policy.
But with the growth in competition and liberalization of international
services, this set of filings is no longer necessary nor useful.
ICANN
Question 6. Last year the previous administration allowed the
Federal Government's contract with ICANN to expire. Do you think that
was a wise and prudent decision?
Answer. During my prior tenure at the Commission I did not
participate in domestic or international meetings concerning the
expiration of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
(ICANN) contract. I also did not write or publish any material relating
to this subject. Nonetheless, I am aware that the Department of
Commerce chose to allow its contract with ICANN concerning the Internet
Assigned Numbers Authority to expire on September 30, 2016.
I do not, however, believe that it is prudent or wise for the
United States to sit back and disengage from this process. Too much is
at stake. The United States must remain vigilant in order to ensure
that essential ICANN functions are not at risk of transfer to another
government or intergovernmental organization. To this end, I believe
the Department of Commerce must periodically re-assess this transition
in order to ensure that the principles of accountability, transparency,
security, and stability of the Internet that informed the transition
continue with management of ICANN duties today. I believe the Federal
Communications Commission, to the extent useful for the Department of
Commerce, could contribute to this review.
Question 7. Microsoft and Facebook and YouTube, which is owned by
Google, all of whom supported President Obama's Internet transition,
have signed a code of conduct with the European Union to remove so-
called hate speech from European countries in less than 24 hours. Do
you think these global technology companies have a good record of
protecting free speech? And what can be done to protect the First
Amendment rights of American citizens?
Answer. On June 1, 2016, the European Commission and four large
technology companies--Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Microsoft--
announced a code of conduct designed to counter online hate speech in
Europe. These companies pledged to review the majority of requests for
removal of certain hate speech in less than 24 hours. They also
committed to remove or disable access to the content if necessary and
to promote counter narratives to hate speech.
I appreciate the efforts by these private companies to reduce
hateful conduct online. I also am aware that this code was put into
place just months after terror attacks in Paris and Brussels.
Nonetheless, I am concerned when United States companies with global
presence operate in a manner at odds with our domestic free speech
tradition. I believe it is appropriate to ask if commitment to this
code implicates the First Amendment rights of American citizens. To
answer this question in a comprehensive fashion, I believe a report
reviewing this issue, and the implications of this code for American
citizens, could be both timely and useful.
There is precedent for this approach. In 1993 the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration at the Department of
Commerce produced a report entitled ``The Role of Telecommunications in
Hate Crimes.'' This report, which was directed by Congress, described
the relationship between electronic communications media and hate
speech. It included a discussion of First Amendment principles--and
their application to expressions of hate or bigotry. However, this
report is dated. With so many communications platforms that have their
origins in the United States now capable of global reach, the efforts
of other jurisdictions to control and even dictate speech on these
platforms is an issue that deserves careful attention and review.
Should Congress direct the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration to produce an updated version of its prior report, the
Federal Communications Commission and Department of Justice should
stand ready to assist.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
I want to thank you and the current FCC Commissioners for working
with my staff to help alleviate some of the burden that the reduction
in reimbursement from the Rural Health Care program placed on Alaskan
health care providers.
In my state, the price of telecommunications services is so
expensive that many rural health care providers cannot afford them
without support from the Rural Health Care program. Telemedicine
services in Alaska are essential for many of our villages, and they are
only possible if a health facility has connectivity.
In enacting the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Congress
specifically directed the FCC to ensure that rural health care
providers have access to telecommunications services at rates that are
reasonably comparable to those for similar services in urban areas of
the State. As you are aware, for the first time the demand for funding
from the Rural Health Care program exceeded the $400 million cap.
Question 1. Will you work to ensure the sustainability of the Rural
Health Care Program as the FCC moves forward to review further reforms
to universal service programs?
Answer. Yes.
Question 2. If confirmed, what steps would you take to address this
funding issue?
Answer. I have seen first-hand village clinics in Alaska that use
broadband to provide first-class care to patients in some our most
remote communities. So I know that telemedicine has a transformative
power in rural areas. Moreover, I know that the provision of this kind
of care is often dependent on support from the Commission's rural
health care program.
The Commission's rural health care program was last substantially
updated in 2012. In critical part, this modernization expanded the
program from supporting rural health care providers with communications
costs that exceed comparable service in urban areas to supporting
broadband connectivity through health care networks. As a result of
this effort, demand for the program has grown. To date, the Commission
has managed this growth by pro-rating support, so that all applicants
are subject to a uniform cut. I am not sure this is a sustainable
approach.
Consequently, if re-confirmed, I would support a rulemaking to
reconsider prioritization in this program, which could, among other
things, take into account how rural the area is where support is
provided.
Question 3. Will you consider beginning a rulemaking proceeding to
evaluate the changes necessary to ensure that the program budget is
sufficient to fulfill the purposes of the program?
Answer. Yes.
It is my understanding that environmental assessments (EAs), when
required under the FCC's rules, are currently not subject to any
processing timelines or dispute resolution procedures. As a result,
environmental assessments for new facilities can languish for an
extended period of time--sometimes years. This is an unfortunate
barrier to feeding our Nation's hunger for expanded wireless broadband.
Given my seat on this committee and on EPW, I have a particular
interest in finding ways to streamline these procedures.
Question 4. Will you commit to finding ways to streamline the FCC's
review of environmental assessments, including through the adoption of
``shot clocks'' to resolve environmental delays and disputes, in
addition to working on additional infrastructure reforms?
Answer. Yes. In light of the changing nature of wireless
infrastructure, I think the Commission should streamline its siting
policies, to the extent feasible under the National Environmental
Policy Act. This law requires Federal Government agencies, including
the Commission, to identify and evaluate the environmental impact of
actions ``significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment.'' The Commission has an outstanding rulemaking concerning
wireless infrastructure that, among other things, seeks comment on the
policies it has adopted under this law. If re-confirmed, I pledge to
carefully review the law and the record in order to update and
modernize these policies.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Deb Fischer to
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
Question. In recent years, there have been incredible technological
advancements in telecommunication services that aid the deaf and
hearing disabled. With respect to any future rulemaking--do you commit
to ensuring that these technologies continue to be made available
unencumbered by heavy handed regulation that could stifle innovation
and impede access to these services?
Answer. Yes. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, functional
equivalency has long been the foundation of Commission policies
designed to provide access to modern communications services for the
deaf and hearing disabled. While this may sound like regulatory lingo,
for individuals with these disabilities it means the right and ability
to pick up the phone, reach out and connect, and participate more fully
in the world.
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Commission has
adopted telecommunications relay service policies that support a
variety of technologies designed for the deaf and hearing disabled,
including Video Relay Service and Internet Protocol Captioned Service.
I believe the continued success of these programs depends on the
Commission both ensuring fair compensation for providers of these
services and taking action to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse.
Moreover, I believe that as communication technologies advance, it is
incumbent on the Commission to periodically reassess these programs in
order to continue to honor both the spirit and substance of functional
equivalency. If re-confirmed, I pledge to do so mindful of the need to
prevent policies that stifle innovation and impede access to new
services
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ron Johnson to
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
Question 1. If confirmed, will you commit to looking at the costs
and benefits of regulations and consider all of the economic data in
the record?
Answer. Yes.
Question 2. Are you aware that DHS is the sector specific agency
for communications critical infrastructure and works with other
agencies to enhance resiliency?
Answer. Yes.
Question 3. Given the role of DHS, I am concerned that any further
FCC action would be duplicative and overlapping. As Chairman of the
Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, I have
highlighted duplicative cyber regulations across the government and am
working with my colleague to harmonize these regulations. If confirmed,
will you commit to work with me on cyber harmonization and defer to
assigned sector specific agencies when it comes to cybersecurity?
Answer. Yes. I agree that effective efforts to manage cybersecurity
risk require harmonization across government authorities.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
Question. As Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary's
Antitrust Subcommittee, Senator Lee and I have developed a strong
bipartisan working relationship to promote competition, including in
the cable and broadcast industries. Ms. Rosenworcel, you expressed
concerns that unconditional most favored nation provisions ``can make
it tough for new and independent programming to get on the channel
line-up of satellite and cable systems and online, as well.'' Ms.
Rosenworcel, is this an issue that the Federal Communications
Commission should continue to consider?
Answer. Yes. Today we have a dizzying array of channels available
to consumers. We expect programming to be available at anytime,
anywhere--and on any screen. On top of that, novel platforms for
content are cropping up here, there, and everywhere. But despite all of
this change, some old problems linger. This is clear from the record in
response to the Commission's February 18, 2016 Notice of Inquiry and
September 29, 2016 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in MB Docket No. 16-
41, Promoting the Availability of Diverse and Independent Sources of
Video Programming, which suggests that independent programmers continue
to have a difficult time securing carriage on multichannel video
programming distributors. Moreover, commenters in these proceedings
describe how restrictive contract provisions can limit consumer access
to new programming and slow the development of innovative ways to view
content on non-traditional video platforms. As a result, I believe this
issue merits continued Commission attention.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Cory Booker to
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
Question 1. WJLP, northern New Jersey's only VHF television
broadcast station, has been ordered by the FCC to identify itself as
channel 33 instead of its real channel, channel 3. Applications for
review of numerous rulings related to this issue have been submitted
with no action for up to three years. It is my understanding that
contested cases can take up to seven years to reach a determination.
What actions have you taken, and what actions will you take if re-
confirmed, to reach a final determination on this case?
Answer. I believe that the timely disposition of matters before the
Commission is critical. As a Commissioner, however, I did not
participate in the decisions involved in this dispute because the
resolution of substantive issues took place in the agency's Media
Bureau. Nonetheless, if re-confirmed, I pledge to carefully review the
facts and law involved in this situation and work expeditiously with my
colleagues to resolve any matter before my office.
Question 2. E-Rate is an important Universal Service Fund program
that helps underserved schools and libraries connect to high-speed
Internet. I cannot overstate the value of broadband access for these
learning centers. To remain competitive in the 21st century, our
children must learn how to interact with the digital world.
In 2016, my home state of New Jersey received $90 million for E-
Rate, which it used to connect 181,652 students to high-speed Internet
in underserved schools.\1\ For these students, especially those who do
not have access to broadband at home, this a potentially life-changing
advance in educational opportunity. This program is critical to closing
the digital divide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Education Superhighway, July 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nationally, since the E-Rate Modernization Order in 2014, 30.9
million unserved students have been connected to the high-speed
broadband that they need to build our Nation's future.
Will you commit to support the E-rate modernization order in its
current form with need-based prioritized funding for underserved
schools and libraries?
Answer. Yes. Absolutely.
Question 3. The New Jersey Division of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
(DDHH) estimates that there are approximately 850,000 New Jersey
residents who experience hearing loss. Many of these individuals rely
on Video Relay Service (VRS) and Internet Protocol Captioned Telephone
Service (IP CTS) to communicate with family, friends, emergency
services, and other important people. How will you ensure that the FCC
continues to administer these programs consistent with the requirements
of the Americans with Disabilities Act?
Answer. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, functional
equivalency has been the foundation of telecommunications relay service
policies for more than a quarter of a century. While functional
equivalency may sound like regulatory lingo, for the 850,000 New Jersey
residents you reference and millions of others across the country it
means that they have the right and ability to pick up the phone, reach
out and connect, and participate more fully in the world.
The Commission's telecommunications relay service policies, adopted
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, support a variety of
programs, including Video Relay Service and Internet Protocol Captioned
Service. I believe the continued success of these programs depends on
the Commission both ensuring fair compensation for providers of these
services and taking action to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse.
Moreover, I believe that as communication technologies advance, it is
incumbent on the Commission to periodically reassess these programs in
order to continue to honor both the spirit and substance of functional
equivalency.
Question 4. Expanding access to broadband connectivity is an
incredibly important part of investing in the future of our Nation and
closing the digital divide. This is especially true in rural areas. How
do you view the role of TV White Spaces in expanding connectivity to
hard-to-reach rural areas?
Answer. Broadband is more than a technology--it is a platform for
opportunity. No matter who you are or where you live, you need access
to broadband communications for a fair shot at 21st century success.
This is true in urban America, rural America, and everything in
between.
However, access in rural communities can present a real challenge.
Often the cost of financing, constructing, and operating broadband
networks in remote areas is high while the number of households and
businesses over which that cost is spread is low. As a result, the
Commission has had a series of policies designed to boost deployment in
the Nation's most difficult to serve rural areas. The most prominent of
these is the high-cost universal service fund, which provides roughly
$4.5 billion in annual support to wired and wireless providers serving
some of our most remote communities. Other policies, however, also
assist with universal service, including build-out requirements for
spectrum licensees that help ensure deployment covers both urban and
rural populations.
Nonetheless, the data suggests that despite these efforts too many
rural areas are still at risk of being consigned to the wrong side of
the digital divide. In fact, in 2016 the Commission found that more
than 23 million Americans in rural areas lack access to broadband. By
any measure, this number is too high.
For this reason, I believe the Commission should always be on the
hunt for good ideas that will extend the opportunities of broadband to
rural communities at low cost. The use of unlicensed spectrum in the
600 MHz band--or TV White Spaces--is one such opportunity.
The use of TV White Spaces was first approved by the Commission in
2010. At that time, it updated its Part 15 rules to allow for
unlicensed fixed and portable devices to operate in the broadcast
television spectrum at locations where that spectrum was not in use by
licensed services. In order to prevent interference to other services
operating in the band--namely television--the Commission relied on
geolocation capabilities in white space devices as well as databases to
identify vacant channels.
In the aftermath of the 600 MHz band spectrum incentive auction
there will be new opportunities to explore the use of TV White Spaces
to expand broadband access. I believe the Commission can help develop
these opportunities while also protecting incumbent services from
harmful interference. Moreover, I believe that if the Commission is
successful in doing so it will be able to make real progress in closing
the digital divide and bringing broadband to our Nation's most rural
communities.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tom Udall to
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
Question 1. As a commissioner of the Federal Communications
Commission, you have direct authority over the Nation's broadcast and
media marketplace. The FCC as an independent agency controls whether
broadcast stations are allowed access to the U.S. airwaves, oversees
elements of the contractual relationships between media outlets and
their distribution partners, renders judgements on mergers and
acquisitions of media properties, and issues regulations that can
affect the financial future of major media companies. And ultimately,
the decisions that you, your fellow commissioners, and the agency staff
make affect the viability and sustainability of news media.
Accordingly, please respond directly, fully, and individually to
the questions below, which will inform my ongoing consideration of your
nomination to serve on the FCC Commission.
Do you believe the media is the ``enemy'' of the American people?
Answer. No. I believe a free and independent press is essential in
a fully-functioning democracy.
Question 2. Can you assure us that you will exercise your authority
as an FCC Commissioner to regulate the media in an impartial manner?
Answer. Yes.
Question 3. Will you commit to us that the FCC will not act in a
manner that violates the First Amendment and stifles or penalizes free
speech by electronic media, directly or indirectly, even if requested
by the administration?
Answer. Yes.
Question 4. Did you commit to the administration, as a condition of
your nomination, to take any action against a specific media entity or
generally against broadcast entities, cable network owners or other
media outlets?
Answer. No.
Question 5. Will you commit to us that you will exercise your
authority as an FCC Commissioner in a manner that fully respects the
absolute independence of the agency from the Executive Branch?
Answer. Yes.
Question 6. Finally, will you commit to inform us and the public of
any attempt by the White House or by any Executive Branch official to
influence your decision-making or direct you to take or not take any
action with respect to media interests within your jurisdiction,
including the license renewal applications for broadcasters (whether or
not such contacts fall under the ex parte rules or other legal or
ethical rules applicable to the FCC)?
Answer. Yes.
Question 7. The FCC and this Committee have been talking about the
need to build out rural broadband for many years. Progress is
happening, but much too slowly. The free market did not deliver rural
electricity--FDR, the New Deal, and the rural electric coops did it
with major USDA support. The free market will not deliver rural
broadband on its own either. We need the government to act. If there is
going to be an infrastructure package, rural broadband must be in it in
a very big way. Will you work with both parties in Congress, and the
White House, to advance a consensus, bipartisan proposal to provide
rural broadband to every part of America that is bold--and provides the
necessary funding to achieve this goal?
Answer. Yes.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Maggie Hassan to
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
Question. As you know, pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities
Act, the FCC has an important mandate to ensure that deaf and hearing-
impaired individuals have ``functionally equivalent'' access to telecom
services. How will you work to ensure that the commission fulfills its
obligation to individuals with hearing impairments under the ADA?
Answer. More than a quarter of a century ago, the Americans with
Disabilities Act paved the way for the meaningful inclusion of 54
million Americans with disabilities in modern civic and commercial
life. The direction in this law to ensure functionally equivalent
access to communications remains the cornerstone of Commission efforts
to ensure that individuals with hearing impairments have the ability to
pick up the phone; connect with family, friends, and business
associates; and participate fully in the world.
Pursuant to this law, as updated by the Twenty-First Century
Communications and Video Accessibility Act, the Commission has made
strides in its policies to expand access to modern communications to
the hearing-impaired. These efforts include continued support for
telecommunications relay service, including Video Relay Service and
Internet Protocol Captioned Telephone Service. It also includes the
exploration of new forms of service, including Real-Time Text. In
addition, the Commission has expanded the number of wireless handset
models that are hearing-aid compatible, established the National Deaf-
Blind Equipment Distribution Program in order to increase access to
essential equipment for low-income individuals who are deaf-blind, and
promoted increased access to emergency communications through the
availability of texting-to-911. The Commission also has updated its
policies regarding closed captioning, in order to improve the accuracy
and completeness of captions.
I support these efforts because I believe they are essential for
functionally equivalent access to communications services. But I also
believe that as time and technology advance, it is incumbent on the
Commission to review these policies in order to ensure that they are up
to date. If re-confirmed, I pledge to work with my colleagues to do so.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto
to Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
Question 1. Diversity in Telecom: In reviewing the Federal Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC) 2016 report on ``Diversity
in High Tech,'' and it contains some frustrating and concerning
observations regarding minority and female employment and leadership
representation. Namely:
``Compared to overall private industry, the high tech sector
employed a smaller share of African Americans (14.4 percent to
7.4 percent), Hispanics (13.9 percent to 8 percent), and women
(48 percent to 36 percent).''
``Of those in the Executives category in high tech, about 80
percent are men and 20 percent are women. Within the overall
private sector, 71 percent of Executive positions are men and
about 29 percent are women.''
2014 data of the labor force participation rate at select
leading ``Silicon Valley tech firms,'' with similarly upsetting
trends: ``Among Executives, 1.6 percent were Hispanic and less
than 1 percent were African American.''
If you were to be confirmed to the FCC, what do you think we could
do to establish a more inviting sector to diversity of staff and
leadership at the FCC, and the tech sector more broadly?
Answer. I know personally that the lack of diversity in the
technology sector in this country is a tough and persistent problem.
During my prior tenure at the Commission, I traveled across the country
to discuss everything from spectrum policy to broadband networking and
no matter where I went I encountered too few women and minorities in
technical and leadership roles. This is a problem. It needs to be
addressed.
I believe that talent is equally distributed, but opportunity is
not. That is why I think the Commission should set up an honors
engineering program to encourage a diverse group of people to work in
government service in technical roles early in their careers. It would
help diversify the ranks of the agency's own engineering workforce and
provide a boost for recent engineering school graduates interested in
working on communications technology as they launch their professional
lives. This program could easily be modeled on the Commission's
existing honors attorney program, which has helped recruit a wide range
of talented, young, legal professionals to Federal service. Moreover,
it would help the agency set a much-needed example for the technology
sector. Over time it also could help multiply the pathways to
leadership for those who are underrepresented in technical fields
today.
Question 2. Chairman Pai has expressed that there is authority the
FCC has to address this issue with broadcasters and cable operators, so
is there additional authority you could use to aid in this pursuit of
more diversity in the overall tech sector?
Answer. There are several key sections in the Communications Act
that address diversity matters.
As you indicate that Chairman Pai has suggested, Sections 334 and
634 of the Communications Act specifically authorize the Commission to
take steps to promote equality of employment opportunity with respect
to broadcast stations and cable operators. The Commission should
periodically review these policies to ensure that they are effective
and that they reflect current law.
In addition, Section 309(j) of the Communications Act grants the
Commission the authority to distribute spectrum licenses through a
competitive bidding process. As part of this directive, Congress tasked
the agency with both ``avoiding excessive concentration of licenses''
and ``disseminating licenses among a wide variety of applicants,
including small businesses owned by members of minority groups and
women.'' To do so, Congress encouraged the agency to ``consider the use
of tax certificates, bidding preference, and other procedures.'' To
this end, in 2015, the Commission updated its designated entity
policies, which are designed to encourage a diverse range of small
businesses to participate in its spectrum auctions. These updated
policies were used in the forward portion of the recent 600 MHz
auction. In the aftermath of a major wireless auction like this the
Commission should review its designated entity policies to ensure both
that they were effective and that they did not inadvertently benefit
entities for whom they were not intended.
As a related matter, Section 257 of the Communications Act requires
the Commission to periodically report on market entry barriers for
entrepreneurs and other small businesses in the provision of
telecommunications services and information services and in the
provision of parts or services to providers of telecommunications
services and information services. The Commission should consider
including in this report a review of data regarding diversity in the
communications sector, in order to gauge changes over time. By doing
so, the agency could help increase transparency by encouraging
companies, institutions, and organizations to account for their
demographics and measure year over year gains, failures, and trends.
Finally, it is important to note that the single most effective
tool that the Commission had for increasing diversity was the Minority
Tax Certificate policy. This policy permitted sellers of certain media
properties to defer capital gains taxes if the properties were sold to
entities that increased ownership diversity in the sector. Over the
course of its 17-year existence, it resulted in a five-fold increase in
the number of broadcast licenses held by minority owners. In 1995,
however, Congress repealed this policy, largely due to the restoration
of an unrelated tax deduction. However, Congress may wish to revisit
and reinstate this policy in updated form, with additional protections
to prevent misuse of the deduction.
Question 3. Broadband Internet Speed Honesty: I asked Chairman Pai
about a reported FCC filing from USTelecom and NCTA that is asking the
FCC for a ruling confirming that ISPs are following Federal
transparency rules by posting online their average performance during
times of peak usage. But I know a bipartisan group of Attorneys General
are concerned such an industry petition to the FCC on cost transparency
``represents nothing more than the industry's effort to shield itself
from state law enforcement.''
Do you believe that an FCC ruling would circumvent the ability of
the states to protect consumers?
Answer. I am concerned that an overbroad Commission ruling could
circumvent the ability of the states to protect consumers. There is a
long history of concurrent Federal and state authority regarding
consumer protection matters. I believe the Commission has a duty to
respect this history and the authority of its state counterparts.
Question 4. How can you best ensure that ISPs are truthful with
consumers, given that prices and advertised speeds often influence
consumer decisions about the service that is right for them?
Answer. In order to ensure that advertised speeds are truly
accurate, the Commission should review its Measuring Broadband America
program. This program was put in place several years ago to assess the
accuracy of speeds advertised and offered by broadband providers. For
wired services, the program uses special routers in thousands of
households in order to determine if there are any gaps between speeds
that are advertised by providers and those that are experienced by
their consumers. For wireless services, a similar test is accomplished
through a software application available for iOS and Android operating
systems. The agency releases annual reports summarizing both its wired
and wireless findings. In light of increased interest in the gap
between what is advertised by providers and what is experienced by
consumers, the agency should expand this report and offer more detail
regarding its findings. Then, in turn, it should use this detail to
inform its Form 477 broadband deployment data-gathering process, and
Broadband Progress Report pursuant to Section 706.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. John Thune to
Brendan Carr
Question. Millions of rural Americans lack access to broadband, and
bridging the digital divide is a priority for me and the Committee. As
traditional fiber, cable, and 4G broadband is deployed throughout the
country, policymakers must nevertheless be creative and open-minded
when exploring all options to achieving universal service. What role do
you see for unlicensed spectrum (Wi-Fi, TV White Spaces, millimeter
wave, etc.) in connecting unserved rural households with broadband
Internet access?
Answer. I agree that policymakers must be creative and open-minded
when it comes to achieving universal service. And I believe that
unlicensed spectrum should continue to play an important role in
connecting unserved rural households with broadband Internet access. If
confirmed, I would work to ensure that the FCC takes an all-of-the-
above approach to spectrum, including by opening up and enabling the
use of unlicensed spectrum.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ted Cruz to
Brendan Carr
Federal Spectrum
FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly stated in a 2015 blog post that,
``By some accounts, the Federal Government currently occupies-either
exclusively or on a primary basis-between 60 and 70 percent of all
spectrum in the commercially most valuable range between 225 megahertz
and 3.7 gigahertz, which comes to approximately 2,417 megahertz.''
Question 1. What steps can this Committee take to incentive Federal
users, especially the Department of Defense, to make more spectrum
available for commercial use? Should Congress consider allowing Federal
agencies to keep more of the proceeds from FCC incentive auctions?
Answer. There are a number of steps the Committee could take to
incentivize Federal users to make more spectrum available for
commercial use, while also ensuring that those users can continue to
carry out their important missions. I will highlight three steps here.
First, the Committee could facilitate, or consider legislation that
would require, the consolidation of various Federal use cases. Federal
radar systems may be one example. Federal users are known to operate
separate systems pursuant to separate spectrum allocations that perform
identical or similar functions. So it is worth exploring opportunities
to consolidate those systems and spectrum allocations, which could
create efficiencies, ensure that Federal users can continue to carry
out their missions, and free up additional spectrum for commercial use.
Second, the Committee could convene stakeholder meetings to help
identify candidate bands and map out the timeline and process for
freeing those bands up for commercial use, while continuing to protect
the interests of Federal users.
Third, the Committee could consider legislation that would require
Federal users to free up a certain amount of spectrum (or specific
spectrum bands) by a date certain, while ensuring that adequate
spectrum resources remain available to Federal users to carry out their
missions.
With respect to the second part of the question, I defer to
Congress' ultimate judgment on this issue, but I do believe that
Congress should consider allowing Federal agencies to keep some portion
of the proceeds of an FCC auction of Federal spectrum as a means of
incentivizing incumbents to free up spectrum.
On the flip side, a slightly different approach to incentivizing
the relinquishment of underutilized Federal spectrum would be the
enactment of spectrum fees. Brent Skorup at the Mercatus Center has
written that, ``Some countries have applied spectrum fees to government
users, which generally attempt to approximate the opportunity cost of
the spectrum so that users internalize the social value of the spectrum
they occupy. If the opportunity cost fees are high, a user will be
induced to use less spectrum to reduce its fees or leave the space
completely and sell the cleared spectrum for higher-valued uses.''
Question 2. Should Congress implement a spectrum fee to incentive
Federal users to consider relinquishing underutilized spectrum?
Answer. While I defer to Congress' ultimate judgment on whether to
implement spectrum fees, I believe that this type of incentive system
certainly merits consideration.
5G Wireless Technology Deployment
We are on the cusp of the wireless industry introducing the next
generation of technology--5G. That upgrade to our existing networks is
expected to bring us higher data speeds, lower latency, and the ability
to support breakthrough innovations in transportation, healthcare,
energy and other sectors. And as recent studies have shown, 5G is
expected to provide significant benefits to state and local
governments, allowing them to become smart cities. However, those
networks will also require many more antenna sites than we have today--
they will increasingly rely on small cell technologies. To recognize
these benefits, a study performed by Deloitte shows that several steps
are necessary to remove impediments to antenna siting. Texas is leading
the way, as evidenced by recent legislation (Texas Senate Bill 1004)
signed into law just last month that streamlines the deployment of
next-generation 5G networks. It's also my understanding that the
Commission has initiated a proceeding designed to evaluate whether some
of those obstacles can be removed.
Question 3. Do you support the Commission's efforts in this area?
Do you think that the Commission's proposals are achievable,
particularly considering state and local government interests in this
area?
Answer. As your question indicates, 5G is expected to support
breakthrough innovations. In doing so, it can create jobs, spur
investment, and grow the economy for the benefit of all Americans. 5G
deployments may look very different than traditional 4G deployments, as
your question notes, and this is due in part to the fact that 5G
deployments should involve a significantly greater number of small
cells.
In April 2017, the FCC released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and
Notice of Inquiry that seeks public comment on a number of ways that
the FCC could help streamline the deployment of 5G and other wireless
technologies. While I have an open mind about the FCC's proceeding, I
support the Commission's effort to seek comment on these issues, and I
believe that the agency can achieve results consistent with the long-
standing and important role that state and local governments play in
this area. Indeed, as your question notes, many state and local
governments are adopting ordinances that are designed to promote 5G and
small cell deployments.
FCC Priorities
Question 4. My top priority is regulatory reform. Please identify
three meaningful regulations that you are interested in repealing
during your tenure at the FCC.
Answer. I agree with you on the importance and need for regulatory
reform. If confirmed, I would work to repeal FCC regulations that are
unnecessarily limiting innovation, investment, and deployment.
First, the FCC must take action to ensure that Federal regulations
are not needlessly deterring the deployment of wireless infrastructure,
including infrastructure that can be used for 5G. In particular, the
FCC has asked for public comment on whether it should eliminate Federal
rules that could be slowing down small cell deployments. I support that
inquiry. If confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to examine the
record and eliminate any Federal regulations that are only serving to
slow the deployment of innovative and advanced wireless technologies.
Second, the FCC has opened a proceeding that aims to identify and
eliminate rules that might be slowing the deployment of wireline
infrastructure. In particular, the FCC's proceeding asks about
eliminating requirements in Part 51 of the FCC's rules. Stakeholders
have argued that these requirements are needlessly increasing the costs
of deploying next-generation networks and slowing the roll out of new
wireline services. If confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to
examine these requirements and eliminate any unnecessary ones.
Third, the FCC's Part 22 rules contain paperwork requirements that
apply solely to one set of wireless licensees. Commenters have argued
that these requirements impose burdensome and outdated regulations that
are ripe for elimination. If confirmed, I would welcome the chance to
examine the record and determine whether any such rules can be
repealed.
ICANN
Question 5. Last year the previous administration allowed the
Federal Government's contract with ICANN to expire. Do you think that
was a wise and prudent decision?
Answer. No, I do not think it was a wise and prudent decision.
Question 6. Microsoft and Facebook and YouTube, which is owned by
Google, all of whom supported President Obama's Internet transition,
have signed a code of conduct with the European Union to remove so-
called hate speech from European countries in less than 24 hours. Do
you think these global technology companies have a good record of
protecting free speech? And what can be done to protect the First
Amendment rights of American citizens?
Answer. The First Amendment operates to prevent the government from
abridging the freedom of speech, and Supreme Court case law is clear
that there is no exception for so-called hate speech. The First
Amendment thus embodies the idea that we should respond with more
speech--not less and certainly not government censorship--when
confronted with disfavored speech that is protected by the
Constitution. To the extent companies are cooperating with governmental
bodies to censor disfavored speech under a claim of removing so-called
hate speech, then that activity is not consistent with those First
Amendment principles. To protect the First Amendment rights of American
citizens, it is important that the government not engage in censoring
protected speech. I am committed to upholding and protecting the First
Amendment rights of all Americans.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to
Brendan Carr
I want to thank you and the current FCC Commissioners for working
with my staff to help alleviate some of the burden that the reduction
in reimbursement from the Rural Health Care program placed on Alaskan
health care providers.
In my state, the price of telecommunications services is so
expensive that many rural health care providers cannot afford them
without support from the Rural Health Care program. Telemedicine
services in Alaska are essential for many of our villages, and they are
only possible if a health facility has connectivity.
In enacting the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Congress
specifically directed the FCC to ensure that rural health care
providers have access to telecommunications services at rates that are
reasonably comparable to those for similar services in urban areas of
the State. As you are aware, for the first time the demand for funding
from the Rural Health Care program exceeded the $400 million cap.
Question 1. Will you work to ensure the sustainability of the Rural
Health Care Program as the FCC moves forward to review further reforms
to universal service programs?
Answer. As your question indicates, the Rural Health Care program
serves important purposes, particularly in Alaska where the state's
size, remote areas, and varied terrain can translate into high costs of
service, including for healthcare-related communications services. The
Rural Health Care program helps reduce the cost of those services. If
confirmed, I would look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure
the sustainability of the Rural Health Care program.
Question 2. If confirmed, what steps would you take to address this
funding issue?
Answer. If confirmed, I would look forward to working with all
stakeholders to help ensure the Rural Health Care program continues to
perform its important purposes. I can assure you that I would approach
the issue of funding with an open mind.
Question 3. Will you consider beginning a rulemaking proceeding to
evaluate the changes necessary to ensure that the program budget is
sufficient to fulfill the purposes of the program?
Answer. If confirmed to serve as a Commissioner, I would not set
the agenda at the agency--meaning, I would not have the authority to
begin a rulemaking proceeding by circulating a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking. Only the FCC's Chairman can circulate items for the
Commission's consideration. However, if confirmed, I would welcome the
opportunity to work with my colleagues to ensure that the program's
budget is sufficient to fulfill the purposes it serves.
Mr. Carr, you seem to have extensive knowledge of the FCC and an
idea of what you hope to focus on if confirmed. I agree with you that
the technology and communications space will significantly help grow
the economy, and working to grow the economy is an issue I am very
focused on in Congress.
In Alaska, many places do not have any connectivity, and those same
places many times are not connected by road. It is costly to deploy
telecommunications infrastructure, and while these communities are
extremely innovative, a lack of connectivity is a hindrance in growing
their businesses and increasing their economic activity.
The carriers in my state are doing great work to bring
telecommunications to communities that don't have it, as well has to
upgrade existing networks to increase speeds to their urban
counterparts. Much of this is due to the great dialogue that has
occurred between the FCC, Alaskan carriers, and our Alaska delegation.
Question 4. Will you work with my office to continue exploring ways
to improve broadband access in Alaska?
Answer. Yes, I would welcome the chance to work with your office on
ways to improve broadband access in Alaska.
It is my understanding that environmental assessments (EAs), when
required under the FCC's rules, are currently not subject to any
processing timelines or dispute resolution procedures. As a result,
environmental assessments for new facilities can languish for an
extended period of time--sometimes years. This is an unfortunate
barrier to feeding our Nation's hunger for expanded wireless broadband.
Given my seat on this committee and on EPW, I have a particular
interest in finding ways to streamline these procedures.
Question 5. Will you commit to finding ways to streamline the FCC's
review of environmental assessments, including through the adoption of
``shot clocks'' to resolve environmental delays and disputes, in
addition to working on additional infrastructure reforms?
Answer. Yes, I am committed to identifying ways to streamline these
procedures and working on additional infrastructure reforms. I would
welcome the chance to work with your office on these issues.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Mike Lee to
Brendan Carr
Question 1. My understanding is that as of today almost 200
carriers still receive over $500 million annually in USF funds under
the legacy high-cost support program in order to provide voice service
in areas where multiple wireless carriers already offer mobile voice
and broadband services without USF funding. Of this $500 million, what
percentage actually goes to an area where the USF funding recipient is
the only wireless provider in that area?
Answer. In 2011, the FCC established an annual budget for Mobility
Fund Phase II (MF-II) of up to $500 million for ongoing support for
mobile services, with up to $100 million reserved for support to Tribal
lands. In the MF-II Order the FCC released in March 2017, the FCC
stated that ``a conservative estimate is that three-quarters of support
currently distributed to mobile providers is being directed to areas
where it is not needed. In other words, carriers are receiving
approximately $300 million or more each year in subsidies to provide
service even though such subsidies are unnecessary and may deter
investment by unsubsidized competitors from increasing competition in
those areas.''
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Bill Nelson to
Brendan Carr
Question 1. The evolution of our 9-1-1 infrastructure to Next
Generation 9-1-1 is a national imperative. That is why Senator
Klobuchar and I have developed our Next Generation 9-1-1 Act of 2017,
which is designed to give states and localities the Federal resources
and support they need to upgrade their existing 9-1-1 systems to
benefit our citizens and first responders who put their lives on the
line every day.
Do you agree that the Nation's transition to Next Generation 9-1-1
systems is a national imperative, and that additional Federal support
would help speed up that transition?
Answer. Yes, I agree that the Nation's transition to Next
Generation 9-1-1 systems is a national imperative, and I agree that
additional Federal support could help speed up that transition.
Question 2. Do I have your commitment, if you are confirmed, that
you will work with Senator Klobuchar and me to make sure that we can
make Next Generation 9-1-1 a reality?
Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to work
with you and Senator Klobuchar to make sure that we can make Next
Generation 9-1-1 a reality.
Question 3. I want to follow up on my question to you about E-Rate.
Your response did not give me confidence that you would fully protect
this program and the success of these recent reforms. Again, will you
commit, if confirmed, to wait--as the FCC previously concluded that it
would wait until at least next year--before attempting to make changes
to this critical program?
Answer. The E-Rate program plays a critical role in the lives of
students and communities across the country, including in Florida. If
confirmed, I would welcome the chance to work with you, my colleagues
at the FCC, and all stakeholders to ensure that the program continues
to serve its important purposes and has the funding necessary to do so.
In terms of the timing of any FCC action, if confirmed to serve as
a Commissioner, I would not set the agenda at the agency--meaning, I
would not decide whether or when a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking or
other item is circulated for the Commission's consideration. Only the
FCC's Chairman can circulate items for the Commission's consideration.
If confirmed, and if any item relating to E-Rate is put before the
Commission for consideration, I would approach the issue with an open
mind and cast any vote based on the facts, the record, and the public
interest.
Question 4. An independent and free press is what distinguishes the
United States from so much of the rest of the world. It is a cherished
tenant of our democracy--and remains critical in holding power
accountable. If confirmed, will you commit that you will exercise your
authority as an FCC Commissioner in a manner that fully respects the
absolute independence of the media?
Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I would exercise any authority in a
manner that fully respects the First Amendment rights and independence
of the media.
Question 5. Will you commit, if confirmed, to inform this committee
of any attempt by the White House or Executive Branch to influence your
decision-making or direct you to take or not take any action with
respect to media outlets in the United States or abroad, including the
license renewal applications for broadcasters?
Answer. Yes.
Question 6. Will you commit, if confirmed, that you will not act in
a manner that violates the First Amendment and stifles or penalizes
speech by electronic media, directly or indirectly (through the
``raised eyebrow'' or negative action on transactions affecting
licensees), even if requested by the administration?
Answer. Yes.
Question 7. I serve as ranking member on the Armed Services
Committee's Subcommittee on Cybersecurity. We live in a nation, in a
world, where so much of what we do relies on connections to IP-based
communications networks--and that means bad actors, anywhere in the
world--with a keyboard--can potentially hack into those networks and
exploit the underlying data. And it happens all day, every day.
The FCC is the expert agency overseeing our Nation's communications
networks. Yet Chairman Pai apparently does not believe the FCC has a
role in our cyber defenses. Everyone agrees that we need to be doing
more, not less, to protect our Nation's communications networks against
cyberattack. Frankly, in my mind, if you are keeping the FCC from being
part of the solution, you are making it part of the problem.
During your confirmation hearing, you were asked about the FCC's
role in protecting the Nation's networks from cyberattacks, and you
indicated that the FCC has network expertise, but that DHS are the
experts in this area and that the FCC's authority is circumscribed.
However, Congress gave the FCC the authority in Section 1 of the
Communications Act specifically to ensure that nation-wide
communications services are available, for the purpose of national
defense and for the purpose of promoting safety of life and property.
Is it tenable for the FCC, as the expert agency over our
communications networks, to sit on the sidelines in the battle to
protect our Nation from cyberattack?
Answer. No, it is not. The FCC has an important role to play when
it comes to protecting our Nation from cyberattacks.
Question 8. If confirmed as a Commissioner, would you have the FCC
sit idly by and do nothing while foreign adversaries repeatedly attack
our country's communications networks based on a narrow reading of the
Communications Act?
Answer. No, I would not. The FCC has an important role to play with
respect to cybersecurity.
Question 9. As the FCC General Counsel, you are the ultimate
arbiter of what is an official Federal record for the agency. Earlier
this year, the House Oversight Committee sent a bipartisan request to
all agencies, including the FCC, about their information practices.
Have you ever worked on FCC business on a personal or other non-
governmental e-mail account?
Answer. The March 2017 bipartisan letter asked the Commission to
identify any senior agency officials that have used an alias e-mail
account to conduct official business since January 1, 2016. I do not
have and I have never used an alias e-mail account. I conduct official
business and create Federal records through the official e-mail account
that the FCC provided me when I joined the agency in 2012.
Question 10. Did you, Chairman Pai and other members of his staff
during your tenure working at the commission discuss FCC matters or
business using your personal or other non-governmental e-mail?
Answer. As indicated in response to question 9 above, I conduct
official business and create Federal records through my official e-mail
account that the FCC provided me when I joined the agency in 2012.
Question 11. Have you ever used any other form of personal or other
non-governmental digital communication--including text messages, social
media platforms, or similar services--to discuss FCC matters or
business?
Answer. I have a Twitter account that I set up in July 2014, which
is @BrendanCarrFCC, that I have used to tweet publicly about FCC
matters or business. I also have a LinkedIn profile that identifies my
position and work at the FCC.
Question 12. Past members of the FCC have sought out the guidance
of state and local elected officials on matters pending before the
agency. If you are confirmed, what role will consultation with state
and local governments play in your decision making?
Answer. If confirmed, I would welcome the chance to receive
guidance from state and local governments and elected officials on
matters pending before the agency. Getting the opportunity to hear
their perspectives and learn from their experiences can only improve
the FCC's decision-making.
Question 13. I appreciate the information you provided regarding
your use of ``alias'' e-mails utilizing the FCC.gov domain and the
creation of Federal records. The questions posed to you, however,
addressed separate, broader questions about the use of non-governmental
e-mail or other digital communications to discuss FCC business or
discuss FCC matters. Your responses did not appear to address the
broader questions. Nor did your responses indicate whether you had used
other forms of digital communications, other than Twitter and LinkedIn,
to discuss FCC matters or business.
As a result, I ask that you provide additional clarifying responses
regarding the following specific questions posed to you:
Have you ever worked on FCC business on a personal or other
non-governmental e-mail account [not including alias e-mail
accounts utilizing the FCC.gov domain]?
Did you, Chairman Pai and other members of his staff during
your tenure working at the commission discuss FCC matters or
business using your personal or other non-governmental e-mail
[not including alias e-mail accounts utilizing the FCC.gov
domain]?
Have you ever used any other form of personal or other non-
governmental digital communication--including text messages,
social media platforms, or similar services--to discuss FCC
matters or business?
Answer. With respect to whether I have discussed ``FCC matters'' on
non-governmental e-mail or other digital forms of communications, it is
not clear to me how ``FCC matters'' is defined in this context, but I
do believe I can provide some additional information.
For instance, as disclosed in the Senate questionnaire that I
submitted, I have held various positions with the Federal
Communications Bar Association (FCBA). I have used my personal e-mail
for communications relating to my FCBA activities, and in that context
those e-mails would include discussions about FCC-related events, such
as lunches that the FCBA hosted that would feature FCC staffers talking
about FCC matters. So in that context, I have e-mails relating to the
FCBA putting on those events and other e-mails relating to FCBA
activities in this space.
Similarly, as you note in your e-mail, I have a LinkedIn profile.
That profile sends updates to my personal e-mail when connections,
including those that work in telecom or on FCC matters, change jobs or
view my profile.
With respect to the use of non-governmental e-mail for the creation
of Federal records, FCC policy, which is consistent with the Federal
Records Act, provides that any such communications should be captured
in an FCC record keeping system (such as my work account on the fcc.gov
domain) within 20 days. The e-mail should then be removed from the non-
official e-mail account. So, for instance, when I received an e-mail on
my personal account that relates to official FCC business, I forwarded
it to my fcc.gov e-mail account and deleted it from my personal e-mail.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
Brendan Carr
Question 1. Do you agree that the FCC has a statutory mandate to
make sure networks are safe and resilient?
Answer. The FCC has a statutorily-mandated role to play in helping
to ensure that networks are safe and resilient. This is especially true
in the context of 911 networks. In this context, in particular, the FCC
must work to improve the resilience and reliability of the
communications networks.
Question 2. The FCC's 2018 budget states that the mission of the
FCC includes ``promoting safety of life and property through the use of
wire and radio communication.''
Does ensuring that our communications networks are hardened against
cyber-attacks, fall into the definition of ``promoting safety of life
and property through the use of wire and radio communication''.
If not why not?
Answer. Yes, I believe it does.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to
Brendan Carr
Question 1. In 2014, when President Obama expressed his support for
strong net neutrality rules, the Department of Commerce submitted an ex
parte notice with the FCC officially putting the President's statement
in the record. Did the White House file an ex parte with the FCC when
it announced its support for the current proceeding to unravel the Open
Internet Order?
Answer. During the July 19, 2017 hearing, you asked whether the
FCC's ex parte rules require the filing of a letter concerning the
Administration's July 18, 2017 statement regarding net neutrality.
I believe that the relevant statement was issued by the Principal
Deputy Press Secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, during a press briefing
with reporters. That statement is as follows:
[Y]esterday Sean [Spicer] was asked about the administration's
position on the concept of net neutrality, and he said we'd get
back to you. The administration believes that rules of the road
are important for everyone--website providers, Internet service
providers, and consumers alike.
With that said, the previous administration went about this the
wrong way by imposing rules on ISPs through the FCC's Title II
rulemaking power. We support the FCC chair's efforts to review
and consider rolling back these rules, and believe that the
best way to get fair rules for everyone is for Congress to take
action and create regulatory and economic certainty.
This does not constitute an ex parte presentation within the
meaning of the FCC's rules. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. Sec. 1.1200 et seq.
The FCC's ex parte rules govern presentations to or from Commission
decision-making personnel. This statement, which was made in the course
of a press conference at which no FCC decision-makers were present, is
not such a presentation. Thus, the FCC's rules do not require the
submission of any ex parte notice with the FCC, and to the best of my
knowledge no such filing has been made.
As your question notes, the Obama Administration, through the
Department of Commerce, filed an ex parte letter on November 10, 2014.
As stated in that letter, and in contrast to the circumstances
discussed above, that filing disclosed that Jeff Zients, Director of
the National Economic Council and Assistant to the President for
Economic Policy, met privately with FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and FCC
General Counsel Jonathan Sallet to convey President Obama's ask that
the FCC classify broadband under Title II and adopt four specific rules
outlined in detail in the ex parte submission.
Question 2. Have there been any communications between you, your
office, and the White House about net neutrality?
Answer. No.
Question 3. Have you or the White House filed the required ex parte
notices for any communications you would have had about net neutrality?
Answer. I have not had any discussions with the White House about
net neutrality or any other topic that have required the filing of an
ex parte notice.
Question 4. Mr. Carr, in your role as general counsel, you are the
chief legal officer responsible for determining what the FCC considers
as part of the record in its proceedings. On your watch, how has the
FCC considered President Trump's tweets on issues and pending matters
under your jurisdiction?
Answer. I am not aware of any tweets from the President that the
FCC should treat as part of the record in any of its proceedings.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to
Brendan Carr
Question. Earlier this year, the majority of the Commission
indicated that a market is competitive where only one provider has
service, and potentially a second provider may enter the market. Do you
take the position that the agency should not regulate when there is a
monopoly? What is your view on duopoloy and what actions should the
agency take? What is your plan to evaluate, on an ongoing basis,
conditions in business data services?
Answer. In April 2017, the Commission adopted an order concerning
the regulatory framework that should apply to business data services.
That decision is now on appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Eighth Circuit.
The FCC has many options available when determining the appropriate
method of regulating any particular market. The degree and type of
regulation depends on the specific facts and circumstances of that
market, as well as any relevant statutory provisions. So it is not
possible to provide a definitive answer as to the appropriate
regulatory framework that the FCC should apply without the benefit of a
developed record and knowing the particular features of the relevant
market and applicable statutory provisions. But in general, the
Commission can choose from, inter alia, ex ante regulation, ex post
regulation, or other methods of promoting competition, investment, and
innovation. I would always look to apply the regulatory method that
reflects the facts, the law, and the public interest.
In terms of my plans for evaluating the conditions in the business
data services market in particular, if confirmed, I would welcome the
chance to work with my colleagues on this issue.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Cory Booker to
Brendan Carr
Question 1. Mr. Carr, you say in your written testimony, ``When
there are marketplace failures that harm consumers, the agency [the
FCC] must take action consistent with the scope of our authority and
the direction provided by Congress.'' I'd like to ask you about a
marketplace failure that was described in a comment submitted to the
Commission in regard to Chairman Pai's proposal to roll back Net
Neutrality. The comment was submitted by Level 3 Communications, a
global communications provider.
According to Level 3, before the 2015 Open Internet Order, large
consumer ISPs ``refused to augment'' Level 3's interconnection capacity
unless Level 3 agreed to new, recurring charges. The ISPs did not
justify these charges in terms of cost, and the charges frequently
exceeded the price that Level 3 charges its own customers for global
connectivity. Until the Open Internet Order, Level 3's customers paid
the price in congestion and consumer experience. Then, after the Open
Internet Order was adopted, the ISPs came to the table and renegotiated
interconnection agreements.
These were not disputes between reasonable parties over how to
share the cost of doing business--the ISPs were gatekeeping.
This is a clear example of ISPs charging tolls for capacity not
because they need to meet their own costs, but just because they can.
Why should the FCC relinquish its authority to protect the many
consumers and businesses who benefit and rely upon a free and open
internet?
Answer. In the 2015 Open Internet Order, the Commission discussed
interconnection and it specifically noted the perspective on
interconnection disputes raised by Level 3. The Commission stated that
``the causes of past disruption and--just as importantly--the potential
for future degradation through interconnection disputes--are reflected
in very different narratives in the record'' and that ``[t]he record
reflects competing narratives.'' Based on that, and other
considerations, the Commission stated in the 2015 Open Internet Order
that ``this Order does not apply the open Internet rules to
interconnection.'' The Commission then noted in the Order that its ``
`light touch' approach does not directly regulate interconnection
practices.''
Right now, the FCC has a pending proceeding that is examining the
appropriate regulatory framework for interconnection. If confirmed, I
would examine this issue in light of the facts, the law, and the public
interest.
Question 2. Chairman Pai has defended his rollback of Net
Neutrality by claiming that we have not seen evidence of harm to
consumers from ISPs restricting access to broadband capacity. This
claim contradicts numerous findings by the FCC, the Department of
Justice, and the D.C. Circuit Court that large ISPs have acted and will
act on the incentive and the ability to discriminate against
competitors, especially Online Video Distributors or O-V-Ds, who rely
on them for broadband capacity.
The Department of Justice could not have made this point clearer in
the Charter/Time Warner Cable complaint:
``Some MVPDs have sought to restrain nascent OVD competition
directly by exercising their leverage over video programmers to
restrict the programmers' ability to license content to OVDs.''
\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ DOJ, quoted in Incompas public comment to Restoring Internet
Freedom NPRM, July 17, 2017. See Pp. 13-16.
DOJ has declined or imposed conditions on multiple mergers now to
alleviate this concern. The Commission made similar findings in its
recent Open Internet proceedings, and the D.C. Circuit confirmed these
findings twice.
Do you agree with the Department of Justice, the D.C. Circuit
Court, and the Federal Communications Commission in their previous
findings that ISPs can and do use their market power to discriminate
against competitors?
Based on the record I have outlined, how can Congress, OVD
competitors, and consumers be expected to believe that large ISPs will
enter any voluntary framework that forfeits their clear incentive and
ability to undermine market competition?
Answer. In the 2015 Open Internet Order, the Commission stated that
``[c]onsistent with the [D.C. Circuit] Verizon court's analysis, this
Order need not conclude that any specific market power exists in the
hands of one or more broadband providers in order to create and enforce
these rules. Thus, these rules do not address, and are not designed to
deal with, the acquisition or maintenance of market power or its abuse,
real or potential.'' Similarly, the Commission stated in the 2015 Open
Internet Order that ``our reclassification of broadband Internet access
service as a `telecommunications service' subject to Title II below
likewise does not rely on such a test or any measure of market power.''
On appeal, the D.C. Circuit stated that ``the partial dissent
disagrees with our conclusion that the Commission had `good reasons' to
reclassify because, according to the partial dissent, it failed to make
`a finding of market power or at least a consideration of competitive
conditions.' Concurring & Dissenting Op. at 10. But nothing in the
statute requires the Commission to make such a finding.'' The
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion similarly stated that ``[t]he [2015
Open Internet] Order made no finding on market power.''
So it is not clear to me that the Department of Justice, the D.C.
Circuit, and the FCC have all made the finding of market power
indicated in your question. With respect to the second part of your
question, the FCC has a pending proceeding that seeks comment on the
regulatory framework that should apply to broadband Internet access
services and, if confirmed, I would make any decision in that
proceeding based on the record, the law, and the public interest.
Question 3. WJLP, northern New Jersey's only VHF television
broadcast station, has been ordered by the FCC to identify itself as
channel 33 instead of its real channel, channel 3. Applications for
review of numerous rulings related to this issue have been submitted
with no action for up to three years. It is my understanding that
contested cases can take up to seven years to reach a determination.
What actions have you taken, and what actions will you take if re-
confirmed, to reach a final determination on this case?
Answer. If confirmed, I can commit to you that I would act quickly
to cast a vote on any decision that is presented to the Commission
concerning this matter.
Question 4. E-Rate is an important Universal Service Fund program
that helps underserved schools and libraries connect to high-speed
Internet. I cannot overstate the value of broadband access for these
learning centers. To remain competitive in the 21st century, our
children must learn how to interact with the digital world.
In 2016, my home state of New Jersey received $90 million for E-
Rate, which it used to connect 181,652 students to high-speed Internet
in underserved schools.\2\ For these students, especially those who do
not have access to broadband at home, this a potentially life-changing
advance in educational opportunity. This program is critical to closing
the digital divide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Education Superhighway, July 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nationally, since the E-Rate Modernization Order in 2014, 30.9
million unserved students have been connected to the high-speed
broadband that they need to build our Nation's future.
Will you commit to support the E-rate modernization order in its
current form with need-based prioritized funding for underserved
schools and libraries?
Answer. The E-Rate program plays a critical role in the lives of
students and communities across the country, including in New Jersey,
as your question notes. I support a strong and effective E-Rate
program, and I can commit to you that I approach this issue with an
open mind. If confirmed, I would welcome the chance to work with all
stakeholders to ensure that the program continues to serve its
important purposes and has the funding necessary to do so.
Question 5. The New Jersey Division of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
(DDHH) estimates that there are approximately 850,000 New Jersey
residents who experience hearing loss. Many of these individuals rely
on Video Relay Service (VRS) and Internet Protocol Captioned Telephone
Service (IP CTS) to communicate with family, friends, emergency
services, and other important people. How will you ensure that the FCC
continues to administer these programs consistent with the requirements
of the Americans with Disabilities Act?
Answer. VRS and IP CTS are serving important purposes and helping
to ensure that those with hearing loss can communicate with family,
friends, and emergency services, as your question notes. The FCC has
taken important steps this year to improve VRS services and, if
confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to work with all
stakeholders to ensure that the FCC administers these programs
consistent with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Question 6. Expanding access to broadband connectivity is an
incredibly important part of investing in the future of our Nation and
closing the digital divide. This is especially true in rural areas. How
do you view the role of TV White Spaces in expanding connectivity to
hard-to-reach rural areas?
Answer. I agree that expanding access to broadband connectivity is
incredibly important. And I agree that this is especially true in rural
areas. The FCC must take an all-of-the-above approach to expanding
connectivity and that includes consideration of the role that TV White
Spaces can play in reaching rural areas.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tom Udall to
Brendan Carr
Question 1. As a commissioner of the Federal Communications
Commission, you have direct authority over the Nation's broadcast and
media marketplace. The FCC as an independent agency controls whether
broadcast stations are allowed access to the U.S. airwaves, oversees
elements of the contractual relationships between media outlets and
their distribution partners, renders judgements on mergers and
acquisitions of media properties, and issues regulations that can
affect the financial future of major media companies. And ultimately,
the decisions that you, your fellow commissioners, and the agency staff
make affect the viability and sustainability of news media.
Accordingly, please respond directly, fully, and individually to
the questions below, which will inform my ongoing consideration of your
nomination to serve on the FCC Commission.
Do you believe the media is the ``enemy'' of the American people?
Answer. No.
Question 2. Can you assure us that you will exercise your authority
as an FCC Commissioner to regulate the media in an impartial manner?
Answer. Yes.
Question 3. Will you commit to us that the FCC will not act in a
manner that violates the First Amendment and stifles or penalizes free
speech by electronic media, directly or indirectly, even if requested
by the administration?
Answer. Yes.
Question 4. Did you commit to the administration, as a condition of
your nomination, to take any action against a specific media entity or
generally against broadcast entities, cable network owners or other
media outlets?
Answer. No.
Question 5. Will you commit to us that you will exercise your
authority as an FCC Commissioner in a manner that fully respects the
absolute independence of the agency from the executive branch?
Answer. Yes.
Question 6. Finally, will you commit to inform us and the public of
any attempt by the White House or by any Executive Branch official to
influence your decision-making or direct you to take or not take any
action with respect to media interests within your jurisdiction,
including the license renewal applications for broadcasters (whether or
not such contacts fall under the ex parte rules or other legal or
ethical rules applicable to the FCC)?
Answer. Yes.
Question 7. The FCC and this Committee have been talking about the
need to build out rural broadband for many years. Progress is
happening, but much too slowly. The free market did not deliver rural
electricity--FDR, the New Deal, and the rural electric coops did it
with major USDA support. The free market will not deliver rural
broadband on its own either. We need the government to act. If there is
going to be an infrastructure package, rural broadband must be in it in
a very big way. Will you work with both parties in Congress, and the
White House, to advance a consensus, bipartisan proposal to provide
rural broadband to every part of America that is bold--and provides the
necessary funding to achieve this goal?
Answer. Yes.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Maggie Hassan to
Brendan Carr
Question. To the Panel: As you know, pursuant to the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the FCC has an important mandate to ensure that deaf
and hearing-impaired individuals have ``functionally equivalent''
access to telecom services. How will you work to ensure that the
commission fulfils its obligation to individuals with hearing
impairments under the ADA?
Answer. I agree that the FCC has a mandate to ensure that deaf and
hearing-impaired individuals have ``functionally equivalent'' access to
telecom services. At the FCC, I have had the chance to work on efforts
to help improve the quality of the agency's VRS and other programs and,
if confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to work with all
stakeholders to make sure the FCC is fulfilling its obligations in this
area.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto
to Brendan Carr
Question 1. Diversity in Telecom: In reviewing the Federal Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC) 2016 report on ``Diversity
in High Tech,'' and it contains some frustrating and concerning
observations regarding minority and female employment and leadership
representation. Namely:
``Compared to overall private industry, the high tech sector
employed a smaller share of African Americans (14.4 percent to
7.4 percent), Hispanics (13.9 percent to 8 percent), and women
(48 percent to 36 percent).''
``Of those in the Executives category in high tech, about 80
percent are men and 20 percent are women. Within the overall
private sector, 71 percent of Executive positions are men and
about 29 percent are women.''
2014 data of the labor force participation rate at select
leading ``Silicon Valley tech firms,'' with similarly upsetting
trends: ``Among Executives, 1.6 percent were Hispanic and less
than 1 percent were African American.''
If you were to be confirmed to the FCC, what do you think we could
do to establish a more inviting sector to diversity of staff and
leadership at the FCC and the tech sector more broadly?
Chairman Pai has expressed that there is authority the FCC has to
address this issue with broadcasters and cable operators, so is there
additional authority you could use to aid in this pursuit of more
diversity in the overall tech sector?
Answer. Diversity at the FCC is important, and I am pleased that
the agency has promoted a diverse group of individuals to leadership
positions at the Commission.
With respect to the agency's efforts more broadly, the FCC is in
the process of forming a new Federal advisory committee on Diversity
and Digital Empowerment. The Commission has stated that ``[t]his
Committee will provide advice and recommendations to the Commission
regarding how to empower disadvantaged communities and accelerate the
entry of small businesses, including those owned by women and
minorities into the media, digital news and information, and audio and
video programming industries.'' If confirmed, I would welcome the
opportunity to work with this group, and other stakeholders, on the
important issue of diversity in the technology and telecom sectors.
With respect to the FCC's statutory authority, I am not aware of a
provision that grants the FCC broad authority with respect to promoting
diversity in the overall tech sector. I defer to Congress' ultimate
judgment on whether to provide such authority to the FCC, but I would
work to implement any such legislation.
Question 2. Broadband Internet Speed Honesty: I asked Chairman Pai
about a reported FCC filing from USTelecom and NCTA that is asking the
FCC for a ruling confirming that ISPs are following Federal
transparency rules by posting online their average performance during
times of peak usage. But I know a bipartisan group of Attorneys General
are concerned such an industry petition to the FCC on cost transparency
``represents nothing more than the industry's effort to shield itself
from state law enforcement.''
Do you believe that an FCC ruling would circumvent the ability of
the states to protect consumers?
How can you best ensure that ISPs are truthful with consumers,
given that prices and advertised speeds often influence consumer
decisions about the service that is right for them?
Answer. As your question indicates, on May 15, 2017, USTelecom and
NCTA filed a petition for declaratory ruling asking the Commission to
clarify certain aspects of the Commission's regulations governing
broadband speed disclosures. On May 17, 2017, the FCC released a public
notice that sought comment on that petition. Comments were due June 16,
2017, and reply comments were due July 3, 2017. If confirmed, I would
reach any decision in that proceeding only after considering the
record, the law, and the public interest.
With respect to ISPs, the FCC currently has an open proceeding that
considers the regulatory classification of broadband Internet access
service and the rules regulating ISPs' conduct. If confirmed, I would
approach that proceeding with an open mind.
Question 3. E-Rate: I'm deeply concerned about your noncommittal
stance towards e-rate and any future plans you have for the program.
Are you considering reducing funding for E-rate?
And, are you considering major changes to E-rate?
Answer. The E-Rate program plays a critical role in the lives of
students and communities across the country, including in Nevada. If
confirmed, I would welcome the chance to work with you, my colleagues
at the FCC, and all stakeholders to ensure that the program continues
to serve its important purposes. I commit to you that I would approach
this issue with an open mind. I am not considering any changes at this
time.
[all]