    [House Hearing, 116 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                     EMPOWERING AND CONNECTING COMMUNITIES
                      THROUGH DIGITAL EQUITY AND INTERNET
                                 ADOPTION

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                         SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND
                                   TECHNOLOGY

                                     OF THE

                        COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                                JANUARY 29, 2020

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 116-94

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

          Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce

                       govinfo.gov/committee/house-energy
                            energycommerce.house.gov

                                   __________

                       U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    50-299                  WASHINGTON: 2023
    ___________________________________________________________________________

                        COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

                         FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
                                     Chairman
    BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois              GREG WALDEN, Oregon
    ANNA G. ESHOO, California              Ranking Member
    ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York             FRED UPTON, Michigan
    DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado              JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
    MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania             MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas
    JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois             STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana
    G. K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina    ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio
    DORIS O. MATSUI, California          CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington
    KATHY CASTOR, Florida                BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
    JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland           PETE OLSON, Texas
    JERRY McNERNEY, California           DAVID B. McKINLEY, West Virginia
    PETER WELCH, Vermont                 ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
    BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico            H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia
    PAUL TONKO, New York                 GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
    YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York, Vice     BILL JOHNSON, Ohio
        Chair                            BILLY LONG, Missouri
    DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa                 LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana
    KURT SCHRADER, Oregon                BILL FLORES, Texas
    JOSEPH P. KENNEDY III,               SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana
        Massachusetts                    MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
    TONY CARDENAS, California            RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina
    RAUL RUIZ, California                TIM WALBERG, Michigan
    SCOTT H. PETERS, California          EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia
    DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan             JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
    MARC A. VEASEY, Texas                GREG GIANFORTE, Montana
    ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
    ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
    NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGAN, California
    A. DONALD McEACHIN, Virginia
    LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
    DARREN SOTO, Florida
    TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona
                                     ------

                               Professional Staff

                       JEFFREY C. CARROLL, Staff Director
                    TIFFANY GUARASCIO, Deputy Staff Director
                    MIKE BLOOMQUIST, Minority Staff Director
                 Subcommittee on Communications and Technology

                            MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania
                                     Chairman
    JERRY McNERNEY, California           ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio
    YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York             Ranking Member
    DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa                 JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
    MARC A. VEASEY, Texas                STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana
    A. DONALD McEACHIN, Virginia         PETE OLSON, Texas
    DARREN SOTO, Florida                 ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
    TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona              GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
    ANNA G. ESHOO, California            BILL JOHNSON, Ohio
    DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado              BILLY LONG, Missouri
    G. K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina    BILL FLORES, Texas
    DORIS O. MATSUI, California, Vice    SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana
        Chair                            TIM WALBERG, Michigan
    PETER WELCH, Vermont                 GREG GIANFORTE, Montana
    BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico            GREG WALDEN, Oregon (ex officio)
    KURT SCHRADER, Oregon
    TONY CARDENAS, California
    DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
    FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey (ex
        officio)
                                 C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Hon. Mike Doyle, a Representative in Congress from the
      Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, opening statement................     1
        Prepared statement...........................................     3
    Hon. Robert E. Latta, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Ohio, opening statement.....................................     4
        Prepared statement...........................................     5
    Hon. Greg Walden, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Oregon, opening statement......................................     7
        Prepared statement...........................................     9

                                   Witnesses

    Angela Siefer, Executive Director, National Digital Inclusion
      Alliance.......................................................    11
    Prepared statement                                                   13
        Answers to submitted questions...............................    95
    Joshua Edmonds, Director of Digital Inclusion, City of Detroit,
      MI.............................................................    16
    Prepared statement...............................................    18
    Rosalyn Layton, Visiting Scholar, American Enterprise Institute..    26
    Prepared statement...............................................    28
    Gigi Sohn, Distinguished Fellow, Georgetown Law Institute for
      Technology Law and Policy......................................    36
    Prepared statement...............................................    38
    Jeffrey R. Sural, Director, Broadband Infrastructure Office,
      North Carolina Department of Information Technology............    52
    Prepared statement...............................................    54

                               Submitted Material

    Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the
      State of New Jersey, prepared statement........................    85
    Letter of January 29, 2020, by Clayton Banks, CEO, Silicon
      Harlem, to Mr. Pallon and Mr. Walden, submitted by Mr. Doyle...    86
    Letter of January 29, 2020, by Jenny A. Durkan, Mayor of Seattle,
      to Mr. Pallon and Mr. Walden, submitted by Mr. Doyle...........    87
    Letter of January 29, 2020, by Andy Berke, Mayor of Chattanooga
      City, to Mr. Pallon and Mr. Walden, submitted by Mr. Doyle.....    90
    Letter of January 27, 2020, by Executive Director, Digital
      Liberty Federal Affairs Manager, Americans for Tax Reform, to
      Mr. Doyle and Mr. Latta, submitted by Mr. Doyle................    92

       EMPOWERING AND CONNECTING COMMUNITIES THROUGH DIGITAL EQUITY AND
                               INTERNET ADOPTION

                                  ----------

                          WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 29, 2020

                       House of Representatives
          Subcommittee on Communications and Technology
                              Committee on Energy and Commerce,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:30 a.m., in
    the John D. Dingell Room 2123, Rayburn House Office Building,
    Hon. Mike Doyle (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
        Members present: Representatives Doyle, McNerney, Loebsack,
    Veasey, Soto, O'Halleran, Matsui, Cardenas,, Dingell, Latta,
    Shimkus, Olson, Long, Brooks, Walberg, and Walden (ex officio).
        Staff present: A. J. Brown, Counsel; Parul Desai, FCC
    Detailee; Jennifer Epperson, Counsel; Waverly Gordon, Deputy
    Chief Counsel; Alex Hoehn-Saric, Chief Counsel, Communications
    and Technology; Jerry Leverich, Senior Counsel; Dan Miller,
    Senior Policy Analyst; Phil Murphy, Policy Coordinator; Alivia
    Roberts, Press Assistant; Jennifer Barblan, Minority Chief
    Counsel, Oversight and Investigation; William Clutterbuck,
    Minority Staff Assistant; Michael Engel, Minority Detailee,
    Communications and Technology; Peter Kielty, Minority General
    Counsel; Kate O'Connor, Minority Chief Counsel, Communications
    and Technology; Brannon Rains, Minority Legislative Clerk; and
    Evan Viau, Minority Professional Staff, Communications and
    Technology.
        Mr. Doyle. Well, good morning, everyone.
        The Chair now recognizes himself for 5 minutes.

       OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE DOYLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
             CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

        Yes, you bang that gavel and everybody gets quiet. That's
    pretty neat. The Chair will now recognize himself for 5 minutes
    for an opening statement.
        Good morning, and welcome to the Subcommittee on
    Communication and Technology's hearing on ``Empowering and
    Connecting Communities Through Digital Equity and Internet
    Adoption.''
        I want to thank our witnesses for appearing before us today
    to discuss this very important topic. Today, we will hear about
    the challenges of internet adoption that go beyond the lack of
    access.
        All too often, we talk about how many Americans don't have
    access to broadband and discuss the resources necessary to
    close that gap.
        But the far more insidious threats are those who have
    broadband available to them but don't sign up or those that
    don't have the basic skills to use digital technologies.
        Our witnesses today will discuss the range of challenges
    these folks face, the risks we face by leaving millions of
    people behind, and a range of potential solutions.
        Among the principal barriers faced by these communities are
    affordability, digital literacy, and access to devices.
        First off, internet access is expensive, and when cost-
    constrained consumers are forced to choose between mobile and
    home internet, they often go mobile only. Millions of them,
    though, forgo both.
        Internet and mobile service can cost hundreds of dollars a
    month. That is the equivalent of a car payment. In effect, many
    of us are essentially buying our ISP a new car every five
    years.
        This a very serious challenge to adoption, particularly in
    households making less than $35,000 a year. Adoption numbers
    are even lower in low-income rural communities. So finding ways
    to close the affordability gap is just one part of closing the
    digital divide.
        Another key piece to this puzzle is digital literacy and
    training, and ensuring that people have the skills,
    understanding, and confidence to use technology and get
    connected.
        Organizations like the National Digital Inclusion Alliance
    and their partners like Computer Reach, based in Pittsburgh,
    have long worked to provide digital literacy training and
    provide access to low cost-devices and technology.
        These programs help engage communities and provide folks
    with pathways not just to get connected but to leverage that
    connectivity to educate and empower themselves and their family
    members.
        So whether it's being able to apply for jobs, enabling kids
    to do homework, connecting seniors to telehealth services, or
    veterans to support communities, these digital inclusion
    programs are often essential for opening people's eyes to the
    importance of, and the opportunities presented by, getting
    online.
        Increasingly, digital literacy isn't just the ability to
    use a computer, but it's a fluency in technology, and as we
    look at manufacturing sectors, jobs that used to be based
    entirely on manual tasks are being supplanted by interacting
    with digital tools and systems.
        And employment in those sectors requires a level of basic
    fluency just to get your foot in the door. The same is true for
    many other industries that are evolving as technology changes
    the way people work.
        In rural communities, where the adoption is low, these
    programs are particularly important. They can help up-skill the
    workforce with the basic tools to use digital technologies.
        We see this in factories in Pittsburgh with robotics, but
    we also see it in rural America with precision agriculture.
        While the nature of these industries hasn't changed, the
    tools people are using have, and we need to ensure that folks
    in our communities have the basic skills to use them.
        I am not talking about high schooners. I am talking about
    people who have done these jobs most of their lives but haven't
    needed to use or interact with these new technologies.
        The same is true with telehealth services. For seniors who
    are homebound or who want to remain in their homes, these
    services are a lifeline.
        But, for many of them, digital literacy and access to
    affordable devices remain a barrier to adoption of these new
    technologies.
        We also see this problem manifest itself in schools with
    the homework gap. Our educators are working to integrate
    technology into the curriculum. But many students lack access
    to home internet.
        When your teacher is assigning you homework that you--and
    you need to go online just to see what the assignment is or to
    complete it, lack of internet access is a cruel stumbling
    block.
        We have all heard stories about children sitting in cars
    outside of fast food restaurants and libraries to get on wifi
    or parked in overlooks that can get a trickle of broadband.
        We can't afford to let this generation fall behind. These
    children are our nation's future and we need to find ways to
    close the homework gap for them and for ourselves.
        It is my hope that we can have a productive discussion
    about the challenges faced by all of our communities and come
    to some consensus on solutions that can help close the digital
    divide.
        As I have said before, I stand ready to work with my
    colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come up with real
    solutions to address these challenges.
        I thank you all for being here today. I really look forward
    to the testimony of our witnesses.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Doyle follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Hon. Mike Doyle

        Good morning and welcome to the Subcommittee on
    Communication and Technology's hearing on "Empowering and
    Connecting Communities Through Digital Equity and Internet
    Adoption." I'd like to thank our witnesses for appearing before
    us today to discuss this important topic.
        Today, we will hear about the challenges of internet
    adoption that go beyond a lack of access. All too often, we
    talk about how many Americans don't have access to broadband
    and discuss the resources necessary to close that gap, but the
    far more insidious threats are those who have broadband
    available to them but don't signup--and those that don't have
    the basic skills to use digital technologies.
        Our witnesses today will discuss the range of challenges
    that these folks face, the risks we face by leaving millions of
    people behind, and a range of potential solutions.
        Among the principal barriers faced by these communities are
    affordability, digital literacy, and access to devices.
        First off, internet access is expensive, and when cost-
    constrained consumers are forced to choose between mobile and
    home internet, they often go mobile-only. Millions though,
    forgo both.
        Internet and mobile service can cost hundreds of dollars a
    month. That's the equivalent of a car payment. In effect, many
    of us are essentially buying our ISP a new car every five
    years.
        This a very serious challenge to adoption, particularly in
    households making less than thirty-five thousand dollars a
    year. Adoption numbers are even lower in low-income rural
    communities.
        Finding ways to close the affordability gap is just one
    part of closing the digital divide. Another key piece to this
    puzzle is digital literacy and training--and, ensuring that
    people have the skills, understanding, and confidence to use
    technology and get connected.
        Organizations like the National Digital Inclusion Alliance
    and their partners like Computer Reach, based in Pittsburgh,
    have long worked to provide digital literacy training and
    provide access to low-cost devices and technology.
        These programs help engage communities and provide folks
    with pathways--not just to get connected, but to leverage that
    connectivity to educate and empower themselves and their family
    members.
        Whether it's being able to apply for jobs, enabling kids to
    do homework, connecting seniors to telehealth services or
    veterans to support communities, these digital inclusion
    programs are often essential for opening people's eyes to the
    importance of, and opportunities presented by, getting online.
        Increasingly digital literacy isn't just the ability to use
    a computer, but it's fluency in technology. As we look at the
    manufacturing sector, jobs that used to be based entirely on
    manual tasks are being supplanted by interacting with digital
    tools and systems.
        And employment in these sectors requires a level of base
    fluency just to get your foot in the door.
        The same is true for so many other industries that are
    evolving as technology changes the way people work.
        In rural communities, or where adoption is low, these
    programs are particularly important. They can help upskill the
    workforce with the basic tools to use digital technologies. We
    see this in factories in Pittsburgh with robotics, but we also
    see it in rural America with precision agriculture.
        While the nature of these industries hasn't changed, the
    tools people are using have--and we need to ensure that folks
    in our communities have the basic skills to use them.
        I'm not talking about high schoolers, I'm talking about the
    people who have done these jobs most of their lives but haven't
    needed to use or interact with these newer technologies.
        The same is true for telehealth services. For seniors who
    are homebound, or who want to remain in their homes, these
    services are a lifeline. But for many of them, digital literacy
    and access to affordable devices remain a barrier to adoption
    of these new technologies.
        We also see this problem manifest itself in schools--with
    the homework gap. Our educators are working to integrate
    technology into the curriculum, but many students lack access
    to home internet. When your teacher is assigning you homework
    that you need to go online just to see what the assignment is
    or to complete it, the lack of internet access is a cruel
    stumbling block.
        We have all heard stories of children sitting in cars
    outside of fast food restaurants and libraries to get on wi-fi
    or parked in overlooks that can get a trickle of broadband. We
    can't afford to let this generation fall behind. These children
    are our nation's future, and we need to find ways to close the
    homework gap for them and for ourselves.
        It is my hope that we can have a productive discussion
    about the challenges faced by all of our communities and come
    to some consensus on solutions that can help close the digital
    divide.
        And as I have said before, I stand ready to work with my
    colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come up with real
    solutions to address these challenges.
        Thank you and I look forward to the testimony of our
    witnesses.

        And with that, it gives me great pleasure to recognize my
    good friend, Mr. Latta, the ranking member of the subcommittee,
    for his 5 minute opening statement.

    OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT E. LATTA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                    CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

        Mr. Latta. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and
    thank you very much for holding today's hearing and thanks to
    our witnesses for appearing before us today. We really
    appreciate your time for being here.
        One of the great stories that are a success out there that
    has provided a building block for internet adoption and its
    widespread deployment is the success of wifi.
        As co-chair of the Wifi Caucus, I understand the role wifi
    has played in bringing internet connectivity into millions of
    homes across the country.
        Under a light touch approach, the first set of flexible
    rules put in place in the early 2000s paved the way for an
    explosion of broadband expansion. This deregulatory framework
    helped democratize the internet so that millions can enjoy the
    benefit it brings.
        Since then, hundreds of billions of dollars of investment
    have poured in and new networks have been built across the
    country. Many companies have made great strides over the last
    decade to connect millions of low-income households to high-
    speed broadband.
        While this committee's efforts have, largely, focused on
    promoting broadband deployment, the private sector has
    recognized that there is a great value in connecting the
    unconnected not only for its own business interests but for the
    communities they serve.
        Yet, some Americans remain unconnected. Over the last
    decade, we have focused on closing the remaining gaps in
    broadband deployment so that every American, no matter where
    they live, can have access to the internet.
        While, unfortunately, too many remain without an option at
    all, some who have access to the internet still do not
    subscribe.
        As I am sure we will hear today, there are a variety of
    reasons why some people choose not to adopt broadband service.
    We can debate these reasons and my hope is that the data and
    research can shed some light on that today.
        But as we consider the potential for new federal programs
    and legislation, I urge caution that we are not focusing on a
    one-size-fits-all solution with the heavy hand from Washington.
        Our focus should be on putting consumers first by allowing
    them the flexibility to choose an internet plan that meets
    their needs, if any plan at all.
        I also asks that we carefully consider whether there is a
    need for an expanded federal role at a time when state and
    local governments continue to make strides in providing willing
    consumers with the tools to connect to the internet.
        As we will hear today, many states are working hard to
    serve their communities in ways that the federal government
    could never do from Washington.
        To the extent more action is needed, it would be helpful to
    hear what state programs have been successful providing options
    to consumers.
        While everyone operates in a resource-constrained
    environment; we should better understand the existing problems
    and solutions operating today before simply throwing more money
    at a problem that we might not fully understand.
        And with that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back the balance
    of my time.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Latta follow:]

                   Prepared Statement of Hon. Robert E. Latta

        Good morning, and welcome to today's hearing on broadband
    adoption. Thank you to our witnesses for being here today.
        One of the great success stories that has provided a
    building block for Internet adoption and its widespread
    deployment is the success of Wi-Fi. As Co-Chair of the Wi-Fi
    caucus, I understand the role Wi-Fi has played in bringing
    internet connectivity into millions of homes across the
    country. Under a light-touch approach, the first set of
    flexible rules put in place in the early 2000s paved the way
    for an explosion of broadband expansion. This deregulatory
    framework helped democratize the internet so that millions can
    enjoy the benefit it brings. Since then, hundreds of billions
    of dollars of investment have poured in, and new networks have
    been built across the country.
        Many companies have made great strides over the last decade
    to connect millions of low-income households to high-speed
    broadband. While this Committee's efforts have largely focused
    on promoting broadband deployment, the private sector has
    recognized that there is great value in connecting the
    unconnected: not only for its own business interest, but for
    the communities they serve.
        Yet, some Americans remain unconnected. Over the last
    decade, we have focused on closing the remaining gaps in
    broadband deployment so that every American--no matter where
    they live--can have access to the internet. While,
    unfortunately, too many remain without an option at all, some
    who have access to the internet still do not subscribe. As I am
    sure we will hear today, there are a variety of reasons why
    some people choose not to adopt broadband service.
        We can debate these reasons--and; my hope is that the data
    and research can shed some light on that today--but as we
    consider the potential for new Federal programs or legislation,
    I urge caution that we are not forcing a one-size-fits-all
    solution with a heavy hand from Washington. Our focus should be
    on putting consumers first by allowing them the flexibility to
    choose an Internet plan that meets their needs--if any plan at
    all.
        I also ask that we carefully consider whether there is a
    need for an expanded Federal role at a time when State and
    local governments continue to make strides in providing willing
    consumers with the tools to connect to the internet. As we will
    hear today, many States are working hard to serve their
    communities in ways that the Federal Government could never do
    from Washington. To the extent more action is needed, it would
    be helpful to hear what state programs have been successful at
    providing options to consumers. While everyone operates in a
    resource-constrained environment, we should better understand
    the existing problems and solutions operating today before
    simply throwing more money at a problem we may not fully
    understand.
        I look forward to learning more about those efforts
    currently underway and what the data can show us. Thank you
    again to our witnesses, and I yield back the remainder of my
    time.

        Mr. Doyle. The gentleman yields back.
        The Chair is now going to recognize Mr. McNerney before Mr.
    Pallone's 5 minutes. We will yield to you.
        Mr. McNerney. I thank the Chair for this.
        This is truly a bipartisan issue, and I am looking forward
    to working with members on both sides of the aisle to make some
    progress here.
        My district is close to Silicon Valley. But the economic
    opportunities are starkly different between my district and
    Silicon Valley, which is 40 miles away.
        However, the seeds of opportunity are already being
    planted. For example, I recently visited a coding school and
    the startup incubator to see adults learning skills that are
    going to be able to provide them with tremendous economic
    opportunity.
        It was truly amazing to see a darkened classroom with
    people working hard. The big shots walked in and they didn't
    even notice us. They didn't care we were there. They were
    interested in learning their coding skills. So that was
    impressive.
        Also, the largest city in my district--Stockton,
    California--has, developed an AI strategy. So there are the
    seeds for improvement.
        But the reality is that many of my constituents still lack
    the digital skills to get ahead or even to get by in today's
    economy.
        Many don't even have broadband at home, even though they
    often live in an area that has broadband deployed nearby. As a
    result, there is a wealth of opportunity for my constituents
    that remains largely, untapped.
        And this is the case for many communities across the
    country, rural and urban. That is why I introduced H.R. 4486,
    the Digital Equity Act--legislation that would create a federal
    grant program to close gaps in broadband adoption and digital
    literacy. We are long overdue for closing these gaps.
        So I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, both
    rural and urban districts, do you have constituents that are
    being left behind the digital divide?
         If so, work with me to pass this legislation and open up
    economic opportunity and prosperity for every American.
        With that, I am going to yield to the gentleman from New
    Mexico, Mr. Lujan.
        Mr. Lujan. Thank you, Mr. McNerney, and I want to thank the
    witnesses for testifying to Chairman Pallone and Doyle, Ranking
    Members Walden and Latta, for today's hearing on digital
    equity.
        I want to focus on what FCC Commissioner Jessica
    Rosenworcel has called the cruelest part of the digital
    divide--the homework gap.
        We know that seven in ten teachers assign homework that
    requires access to broadband. Unfortunately, we also know that
    millions of students lack access at home or in their
    communities.
        As Mr. McNerney laid out, even if broadband is able to be
    connected to, it's unaffordable. It's unaffordable. It's out of
    reach. More students, though, who don't have any connectivity
    they find themselves in parking lots, at fast food restaurants,
    or high schools across the country, sometimes sitting on the
    sidewalk in the dark of night because that's the only place
    they can get access to free internet. Keep up with the
    homework.
        If air travelers can have internet access at 30,000 feet
    flying across the world, why in the hell can't we connect on
    the ground to these rural communities? Nobody's been able to
    answer that question.
        Let's close the gap. Let's find some answers and let's find
    a way to work together in a bipartisan way.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Doyle. The gentleman yields back.
        It's now my pleasure to recognize Mr. Walden, the ranking
    member of the full committee, for 5 minutes for his opening
    statement.

      OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GREG WALDEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                   CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON

        Mr. Walden. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for doing
    this hearing. I think it's really an important one. We are
    going to hear some interesting testimony from our witnesses. We
    all appreciate you being here and sharing your wisdom with us,
    how we can connect America better.
        We all know that the internet has truly transformed the
    lives of people throughout the world. It plays a central role
    in how Americans conduct business, how we interact, and how we
    make daily decisions. Under a light-touch regulatory framework,
    the internet has really thrived, providing Americans access to
    numerous services, and serving as the single most important
    driver of economic growth and job creation.
        While the internet has been, largely, adopted in a
    relatively short span of time if you think about human history
    and the enormous revolution the internet has brought; there are
    still millions of Americans who do not have access to the
    internet in their homes, as you're hearing from all of us, and
    especially those of us who represent these big sweeping wide
    open rural districts. But it's also an issue in urban cities as
    well.
        In some cases, it's because high-speed broadband had not
    been deployed, an issue this Committee has focused on in a
    bipartisan way for many years.
        And while we have made progress in promoting broadband
    deployment, particularly in rural areas, we all know there are
    many Americans who remain unconnected, even if they do have
    access to broadband service options.
        Recognizing this issue, some companies have made important
    strides over the last decade to connect millions of low-income
    households to high-speed broadband.
        For example, the Internet Essentials Program, developed by
    one service provider, offers high-speed broadband at an
    affordable price and they've seen great success. It has
    connected eight million people in over two million households;
    more than, I dare say, a federal program would likely achieve
    in the same period of time. It provides opportunity and access
    for low-income individuals.
        We must make sure that our policies allow for continued
    experimentation in the marketplace with ways to promote
    broadband adoption as well.
        It should be noted that where there are gaps in adoption,
    state and local governments have also been a big part of the
    team and have provided good work to support and reach out to
    their communities.
        They have firsthand knowledge of the challenges that their
    communities face, and we work with their resources. They have
    to find creative solutions.
        I am excited to have witnesses here today that can talk
    about some of the innovative work that's being done at the
    local level to address the adoption issue. I think it's an
    important one.
        Let us not put the cart before the horse. In many parts of
    the country, especially frontier communities like those in
    eastern Oregon, broadband availability remains elusive.
        Recently, we were in John Day, my staff and I, doing some
    meetings and it's in the really central part of my district in
    a pretty isolated area. I think the nearest stoplight is five
    hours away or something.
        I am not making that up, by the way. They had really
    limited internet service and intermittent internet service, and
    just to put it in perspective, when we finished our meetings,
    we decided we better gas up before we left town, and we had to
    pay with cash because the internet was down and they wouldn't
    process credit cards.
        More of an inconvenience, yes. Good thing we had cash. But
    it's no way to do business, and we have been working with USDA
    and others to get some money in there and figure out various
    problems.
         It's only been a decade since broadband deployment has
    exploded into an everyday necessity, and without first
    addressing the lack of broadband availability, any federal
    resources put forward for broadband adoption could further
    enlarge the digital divide if not done carefully.
        Obviously, we still have issues with mapping that various
    FCCs have wrangled with for decades and we are all trying to
    get it right.
        To be sure, today's hearing will hopefully bring data to
    the discussion so we can get a better understanding of barriers
    to broadband adoption. I am happy we are following regular
    order and holding a hearing to examine the breadth of the
    issues on such an important topic.
        So with that, Mr. Chairman, thanks for doing this. We look
    forward to working with you on this and other communications
    issues, going forward, and again, thanks to our witnesses and I
    yield back a full minute.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Walden follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Hon. Greg Walden

        Good morning, and welcome to today's hearing on broadband
    adoption and digital equity. I want to thank our witnesses for
    testifying before us today on this important issue.
        The internet has truly transformed the lives of people
    throughout the world. It plays a central role in how Americans
    conduct business, interact, and make daily decisions. Under a
    light-touch regulatory framework, the internet has thrived,
    providing Americans access to numerous services, and serving as
    the single most important driver of economic growth and job
    creation.
        While the internet has been largely adopted in a relatively
    short span of time, there are still millions of Americans who
    do not have access to the internet in their homes. In some
    cases, it is because high-speed broadband has not been
    deployed, an issue that this Committee has focused on for many
    years. And while we have made progress in promoting broadband
    deployment, particularly in rural areas, there are many
    Americans who remain unconnected, even if they do have access
    to broadband service options.
        Recognizing this issue, companies have made great strides
    over the last decade to connect millions of low-income
    households to high-speed broadband. For example, the Internet
    Essentials program--developed by one service provider--offers
    high-speed broadband at an affordable price and has seen great
    success. It has connected eight million people in over two
    million households, more than a federal program could likely
    achieve in the same period of time, and provides opportunity
    and access for low-income individuals. We must make sure that
    our policies allow for continued experimentation with ways to
    promote broadband adoption.
        It should be noted that where there are gaps in adoption,
    state and local governments have done a great job providing
    support and outreach to their communities. They have firsthand
    knowledge of the challenges their communities face and work
    with the resources they have to find creative solutions. I am
    excited to have witnesses here today that can talk about some
    of the innovative work that is being done at the local level to
    address the adoption issue.
        But let us not put the cart before the horse. In many parts
    of the country, but especially frontier communities like
    Eastern Oregon, broadband availability remains elusive. John
    Day, for example, is so limited in internet service that during
    one of my visits last year, the whole town had been
    experiencing internet outages intermittently for a couple of
    weeks, and we had to pay with cash at the gas station because
    they couldn't process cards, making it hard to do business.
        It's only been a decade since broadband deployment has
    exploded into an everyday necessity, and without first
    addressing the lack of broadband availability, any Federal
    resources put forward for broadband adoption could further
    enlarge the digital divide if not done carefully.
        To be sure, today's hearing will hopefully bring data to
    the discussion so we can get a better understanding of barriers
    to broadband adoption. I am happy that we are following regular
    orders and holding a hearing to examine the breadth of the
    issue on such an important topic.
        I would like to thank the witnesses for being here, and I
    yield back.

        Mr. Doyle. I thank the gentleman. The gentleman yields
    back.
        The Chair would like to remind Members that pursuant to
    committee rules, all members' written opening statements shall
    be made part of the record.
        Now it gives me great pleasure to introduce our witnesses
    for today's hearing.
        Ms. Angela Siefer, executive director, National Digital
    Inclusion Alliance--welcome.
        Mr. Joshua Edmonds, director of Digital Inclusion, city of
    Detroit, Michigan. Welcome, sir.
        Ms. Rosalyn Layton, visiting scholar, American Enterprise
    Institute--welcome.
        Ms. Gigi Sohn, a regular here on our panels. Gigi, it's
    good to have you here. She is a distinguished fellow with
    Georgetown Law Institute for technology, law, and policy.
    Welcome.
        And last but certainly not least, Mr. Jeffrey Sural,
    director of Broadband Infrastructure Office, North Carolina
    Department of Information Technology.
        We want to thank all of you for joining us here today. We
    look forward to your testimony. I will be recognizing each of
    you for 5 minutes to provide your opening statements.
        Before we begin, we have a--is the lighting system there to
    be seen. We have this lighting system that I want to tell you
    about. When you first start, you'll notice a green light and
    you can continue speaking, and you'll see the light turn
    yellow.
        That means you have one minute to wrap up your opening
    statement, and when that light turns red, your chair falls down
    through a chute.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Doyle. No, when your light turns red, you should--you
    should stop talking.
        Anyway, so we are going to get started. So thank you very
    much and Ms. Siefer, you are now recognized for 5 minutes for
    your opening statement.
        Your microphone.

       STATEMENTS OF ANGELA SIEFER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
    DIGITAL INCLUSION ALLIANCE; JOSHUA EDMONDS, DIRECTOR OF DIGITAL
       INCLUSION, CITY OF DETROIT, MI; ROSALYN LAYTON, VISITING
          SCHOLAR, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE; GIGI SOHN,
     DISTINGUISHED FELLOW, GEORGETOWN LAW INSTITUTE FOR TECHNOLOGY
         LAW AND POLICY; JEFFREY R. SURAL, DIRECTOR, BROADBAND
    INFRASTRUCTURE OFFICE, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION
                               TECHNOLOGY

                       STATEMENT OF ANGELA SIEFER

        Ms. Siefer. You have to press the button. That wasn't part
    of the instructions.
        [Laughter.]
        Ms. Siefer. Chairman Doyle, Ranking Member Latta, Ranking
    Member Walden, esteemed members of the committee, my name is
    Angela Siefer.
        I am the executive director of the National Digital
    Inclusion Alliance. I am here representing NDIA and our
    affiliates, and Computer Reach in Pittsburgh also thanks you
    for us being here.
        Twenty some years ago, I was in--I was a grad student in
    Toledo, Ohio, and we were--I was setting up computer labs. I
    was teaching people how to use Word. I was organizing meetings.
        We thought of our work as bridging the digital divide. Our
    focus was on computers and computer training. In 1996, we were
    not concerned with internet access. If we had just two
    computers in the lab that were connected to the internet, we
    thought we were cutting edge.
        Today, folks on the ground who are bridging the digital
    divide are facilitating access to home internet service,
    devices, and digital literacy training. They are nonprofit
    organizations, libraries, governments, housing authorities, and
    more. They are the heroes.
        NDIA represents over 400 of these affiliated organizations
    in 41 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin
    Islands.
        NDIA's positions are based on our affiliates' on-the-ground
    experience and research. I would like to address a few myths
    today.
        Myth number one--there's a misstatement that's often
    repeated that the digital divide would be bridged if we just
    filled the rural broadband infrastructure gaps in the U.S.
        According to the Census' latest American Community Survey,
    about 14 million urban households in major metro areas, as well
    as smaller cities and towns and four million rural households,
    still lack broadband subscriptions of any kind, including
    mobile data plans.
        What did 60 percent of the unconnected urban households,
    have in common with more than half of the unconnected rural
    households? They all had household incomes below $35,000.
    Households with incomes less than $35,000 make up 28 percent of
    U.S. households, but they account for 60 percent of those
    without any broadband internet service.
        We do need to address the lack of broadband infrastructure
    in rural areas. But it's just one barrier to individuals and
    communities being able to fully participate in society today.
        The other common barriers, no matter where one lives, are
    the cost of internet service and devices, plus digital literacy
    skills.
        Simplistically equating the digital divide with just one of
    these barriers increases the division in our country.
        Myth number two--no worries, the excitement around 5G says
    that we will just--it will solve the digital divide. 5G will
    not solve the digital divide.
        Current broadband technologies were not deployed to all
    neighborhoods unless local governments mandated such. There's
    no reason to think 5G will be any different.
        Additionally, 5G as a broadband service requires 5G-capable
    devices. Low-income households struggling to pay for internet
    service will certainly not rush out to purchase a 5G-enabled
    device.
        Myth number three--well-intentioned individuals have stated
    that if we can convince non-adopters of the value of the
    internet, they would certainly subscribe. Anyone who has
    resisted using the internet quickly realizes that the internet
    cannot be avoided when you apply for a job, register for
    classes, or even to find out what your Social Security benefits
    are.
        The greatest barrier to broadband adoption is not
    relevance. It is a cost in digital literacy. Residential
    internet service in the U.S. is expensive.
        On the low end; internet service generally runs $65 to $70
    per month. That's a lot of money. Unfortunately, I can't
    provide more detail as to the cost of internet service because
    the data doesn't exist.
        We need the FCC to begin collecting data on the cost of
    home internet service and make it publicly available.
        In the U.S., digital literacy training is undervalued and
    underfunded. One-third of manufacturing workers lack proficient
    digital skills.
        Half of all construction, transportation, and storage
    workers lack proficient digital skills. There is no funding
    dedicated to digital literacy training in the U.S.
        It has been left up to local governments, libraries, and
    nonprofits to piece together resources to address the basic
    digital skills training that millions of Americans need to
    cross that digital divide.
        Piecing together funding is the wrong strategy for a strong
    workforce. Now let me share some good news.
        Digital inclusion solutions in the U.S. have been crafted
    from the ground up. NDIA's affiliates are providing guidance to
    low-income parents, connecting to their children's teachers,
    teaching seniors how to use their electronic health records,
    helping veterans learn digital skills to acquire a job, and
    enabling disabled adults to participate more fully in their
    communities.
        We know that trust is an important factor. Technology can
    be quite intimidating. The most successful digital inclusion
    programs are rooted in the communities being served. What is
    missing?
        Digital equity planning at the state level and financial
    support for that planning plus the implementation. A good first
    start would be to pass the Digital Equity Act.
         We are also in need of increased awareness of the problem
    and the solutions. So thank you. This hearing is increasing
    awareness. You are increasing awareness.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Doyle. Thank you very much.
        We now recognize Mr. Edmonds for 5 minutes for your opening
    statement.

                      STATEMENT OF JOSHUA EDMONDS

        Mr. Edmonds. Honorable Chairman, Ranking Member, and
    committee members, my name is Joshua Edmonds and on behalf of
    the city of Detroit, I would like to express a sincere thanks
    for the opportunity to discuss digital equity and internet
    adoption, two issues that are critical for the residents that I
    serve.
        These issues transcend specific geographies and
    demographics and have a far-reaching impact on our great
    nations. Digital equity is a commitment for the least of us. It
    requires an honest assessment of what diverse populations need
    to achieve meaningful participation in a digital society.
        At the core of any digital equity initiative is the
    understanding of the plight of older adults, veterans, low-
    income families, disabled residents, small business owners, and
    unemployed Americans, all seeking to engage in an increasingly
    digital world.
        As the city of Detroit's director of digital inclusion and
    as a digital inclusion policy fellow within the Poverty
    Solutions Initiative at the University of Michigan, I am
    responsible for developing a digital equity strategy that will
    sustainably increase internet subscribers while placing
    emphasis on digital skill training and resident device
    acquisition.
        I plays a vital role in implementing digital equity
    initiatives for a city where one in four residents still does
    not have broadband access of any kind.
        Every American city has digital inequity of some type. Yet,
    none of us receive any federal funding beyond infrastructure to
    address the issue.
        On the topic of digital protection, over 200,000 residents
    utilize Detroit public libraries' wifi networks, oftentimes in
    parking lots and after hours.
        This example is not specific to Detroit. Many residents in
    underserved communities are unaware of how to protect
    themselves online. This is a problem with implications tied to
    our national security.
        For Americans with disabilities, this year marks the 30th
    anniversary of the passing of the Americans with Disabilities
    Act.
        Unfortunately, Americans with disabilities are less likely
    to have home broadband and technical devices. With more than 56
    million Americans living with a disability, investments in
    digital equity would ensure Americans with disabilities are
    afforded the same opportunity to digitally engage in today's
    economy regardless of their geographic location.
        On the topic of the census, due to our broadband
    challenges; the Associated Press listed Detroit as the toughest
    community to count in America. U.S. cities are at an increased
    risk of missing out on our share of the $1.5 trillion in
    federal resources.
        If the Federal Government is using the internet as a
    vehicle to determine population sizes to ultimately allocate
    funding, that same Federal Government should also provide
    resource for communities to boost broadband adoptions and to
    ensure an accurate count that's fair.
        Strategic partnerships can really help reduce the digital
    divide. At the city, I also work directly with directly with
    internet service providers in varying capacities.
        While my role can be very challenging, most of the
    providers have been great partners. When the city recognized
    digital inclusion week this past October, Comcast was one of
    our first sponsors, with additional support from Verizon and
    AT&T.
        This past holiday season, when working with Los Angeles-
    based social enterprise human IT and the Detroit Housing
    Commission, we were able to provide 75 families with three
    computers.
        I made one phone call to Comcast asking for them to provide
    those same 75 families with six months of free internet. They
    obliged.
        These are small examples of how local leadership has called
    on industry to fill in where the Federal Government is silent.
        In Detroit, we have developed public-private partnerships
    without any government funding. But it is an unsustainable
    model. We need federal resources to continue our work.
        If we were to receive federal funding, we could do more
    robust outreach and incentivize more localized funding from
    philanthropic organizations.
        In conclusion, the city of Detroit has stories that are
    familiar to thousands of cities and towns across the United
    States that are starving for digital opportunities.
        Thank you for the opportunity to be heard on a national
    level. I hope my testimony serves as a launch pad that will
    spur digital equity investment that gives American communities
    the footing needed to compete in the digital economy.
        The digital divide is an indiscriminate issue that,
    ironically, connects all of us. We need leaders at all levels
    within all sectors to really work together on this issue.
        I realize I have 40 seconds left so I can return that.
        [Laughter.]
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Edmonds follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Doyle. You're to be commended, Mr. Edmonds. That's
    going to get you a long way in this committee.
        [Laughter.]
        Dr. Layton, you're recognized for 5 minutes.

                      STATEMENT OF ROSALYN LAYTON

        Ms. Layton. Thank you, Mr. Doyle.
        I wanted to say I am a native of Pittsburgh and I would
    like to make a shout-out to my friends and family in Da Burgh
    and I also want to say what I love seeing is a representative
    from Pittsburgh sitting next to the representative from Ohio.
        Normally, never the twain shall meet, but it's after
    football season and it's wonderful to be here and present to
    the committee.
        Mr. Doyle. I didn't know you were from Pittsburgh. You can
    take all the time you like.
        Ms. Layton. Thank you. Thank you.
        [Laughter.]
        Ms. Layton. Thank you. So let me begin by responding to
    some important points already made, and Mr. Edmonds, who--he
    highlights this problem of cyber crimes perpetuated against
    those he serves in Detroit and this demonstrates the danger of
    policy focusing solely on price and not other important factors
    such as security.
        Now, consider the predicament of the European Union today.
    To meet regulators' low price requirements, broadband providers
    had to cost cut so severely that they ended up buying cheap
    unsafe Huawei equipment, and this effort to deliver low prices
    had put Europeans' privacy and security at risk.
        Now, fortunately, in the U.S., the FCC recently adopted
    rules restricting subsidies for equipment that's deemed a
    security risk. Nevertheless, there's at least another $20
    billion annually in federal broadband funds, which are not
    scrutinized for security purposes, not to mention additional
    grants at the state and local levels.
        Now, it's not only our network equipment that is
    vulnerable. Our national vulnerability database lists such
    commonplace items such as Lexmark printers and Lenovo laptops,
    as products which can compromise a user's security.
        Now, that information may be listed in some federal
    database. But it's never communicated to the end retailer or
    consumer, which itself is a policy failure.
        Now, security is worth paying for and it matters to all of
    us. Another casualty of the European policy is network
    investment. In the last two decades, the level of private
    network investment in Europe has been cut in half. It was once
    one-third of the world's total. But today, it's 15 percent.
        Regulators have removed the incentive to invest, and
    unsurprisingly, the region is two years behind on 5G.
        Now, thankfully, the U.S. has maintained a high level of
    private investment, which has generally increased year over
    year. Americans are less than five percent of the world's
    population, but they enjoy more than 25 percent of the world's
    privately provisioned network resources.
        It's an amount that is approaching $90 billion annually,
    almost $2 trillion since 1996. This is a staggering success and
    it reflects a bipartisan consensus to focus on facilities-based
    competition.
        Now, a myopic focus on low prices is not only misguided,
    it's also unsafe. Moreover, it does not address complex
    problems we are talking about today, which require multi-
    disciplinary approaches.
        However, there is one maxim which can help us. People adopt
    services, not networks. The demand for broadband is what
    economists call derived demand.
        Consumers adopt broadband for the services they get from
    the networks, not from the networks themselves. This is
    important because you can't fix with supply solutions what are
    inherently demand problems.
        Now, in the testimony today, we are referencing many
    organizations such as NDIA, Pew, and John Horgan from the
    Technology Policy Institute, who note that the gaps in
    broadband adoption can be attributed to age, income, and
    education.
        Now, closing these gaps is largely about empowering
    individuals, not favoring any one firm or technology.
        Now, the single best thing we can do for internet adoption
    and inclusion is to support our current growing economy. It
    continues to deliver increased wages, employment, and
    opportunity.
        When people have more money in their pockets, they can buy
    more of all goods and services, including broadband. Now, I am
    thrilled that we are in the midst of a blue-collar boom where
    wages are rising fastest for the poorest and youngest among us.
        Moreover, we have a record level of employment for women
    and people of color. With historic tax cuts and deregulation,
    thousands of new opportunities have sprouted across the
    country. These empower people to seek new skills, better jobs,
    and ownership of a home, all of which are factors which
    increase the likelihood of adopting broadband.
        Now, I lament that six million households are not online
    today because of cost. But the good news is that things are
    changing quickly for the better and the FCC has taken actions
    which have increased the availability of broadband and reduced
    deployment costs under the fantastic work of Chairman Ajit Pai.
        These include $1.5 billion in Connect American funds to 700
    rural homes and businesses in 45 states, an additional $5
    billion for over 300,000 households, $1 billion to Puerto Rico
    and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and my favorite accomplishment of
    all is cutting $1 billion in costs by ending the reports that
    the FCC no longer uses.
        In closing, I encourage the committee to allow the
    flourishing of the exciting bottom-up solutions we've heard
    today and it's important that this committee would also focus
    on the issues of national importance, notably, spectrum and
    security, which are intertwined with our global race to 5G.
        And so I remind you to think about what needs to be done at
    the state and local level and not have an urge that every
    problem needs to be fixed by the Federal Government.
        Thank you for this time today.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Layton follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Doyle. The gentlelady yields back.
        It's now my pleasure to recognize Ms. Sohn for 5 minutes
    for your opening statement.

                         STATEMENT OF GIGI SOHN

        Ms. Sohn. Chairman Doyle, Ranking Member Latta, members of
    the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify on two
    crucial issues--digital equity and broadband adoption.
        It's indisputable that broadband internet is an essential
    tool for participation in our society, our economy, and our
    culture. Many job applications and government services are only
    available online.
        Seventy percent of teachers assign homework that must be
    submitted online. Numerous TV shows and movies are exclusively
    online.
        Broadband internet access has fundamentally changed the
    nature of commerce, education, and health care. It enables
    unprecedented flexibility for Americans to choose where they
    live, how they work, and how they care for their families.
        However, 141 million people in the U.S. don't have fixed
    home internet at the FCC's outdated 25 down three up broadband
    definition. That's nearly 43 percent of Americans.
        What's more alarming is that home broadband adoption rates
    aren't increasing. It's remained stable for the past three
    years. That makes this hearing even more important.
        The digital divide affects every region of our country,
    although communities of color and low-income Americans are far
    more likely not to have broadband.
        A recent study by the Pew Research Center showed 79 percent
    of white U.S. adults have home broadband, while the same is
    true of only 66 percent of black adults and 61 percent of
    Hispanics.
        The study showed that 92 percent of Americans making
    $75,000 or more annually have home broadband. Only 56 percent
    making less than $30,000 annually do.
        The racial component of the digital divide is a byproduct
    not only of income inequality but of structural inequality like
    discriminatory housing and lending practices.
        This divide persists because of the high cost of broadband
    and computers in the U.S. Study after study shows this.
        Current research suggests that low-income people can only
    afford to pay about $10 monthly for broadband. Anything more
    competes with other utility bills and the cost of food.
        Meeting the goal of universal connectivity and providing
    fixed broadband about $10 per month requires a multi-pronged
    strategy, what my Benton colleague Jonathan Sallet calls and
    affordability agenda.
        It includes, one, price transparency. Carriers should be
    required to submit nonpromotional pricing information,
    including equipment and other fees, to the FCC, which should
    make that information public.
        The FCC or Congress should also restore the fixed broadband
    consumer disclosure label. Both will help consumers make
    informed choices about the price, quality, and value of their
    broadband service.
        Two, more competition. More competition means lower
    broadband prices. Even under the FCC's overly optimistic data,
    nearly 30 percent of the country has access to no more than two
    providers at 25/3 speeds and 95 percent has access to no more
    than two at speeds of 110.
        If we really want communities to lead, Congress should
    prohibit states from blocking communities that wish to build
    their own broadband networks and also give a bidding preference
    to open access networks when allocating deployment subsidies.
        These networks allow any broadband provider to provide
    last-mile service. An open access network in Utah gives
    residents of 15 cities a choice of 10 ISPs. Most Americans
    can't imagine that.
        Three, is a strong Lifeline program. Congress should
    strengthen Lifeline and make it easier for the most vulnerable
    in society to access the program.
        It should make clear that Lifeline can support broadband
    service, restore the broadband provider designation to bring
    new competition to the program, and give USAC the resources it
    needs to expedite the hard launch of the national eligibility
    verifier. It will make eligibility determinations automatic for
    many applicants.
        Policymakers should also consider providing additional
    subsidies so Lifeline recipients can purchase fixed broadband.
    The $9.25 subsidy doesn't go very far for broadband needed to
    do research papers, apply for jobs, and access telehealth
    services.
        Four, low-cost broadband for federally subsidized networks.
    The FCC disburses billions of dollars annually to mobile and
    fixed providers to build out their networks. It should require
    those carriers to provide a $10 a month high-speed broadband
    plan to low-income Americans.
        Five, support for access to and through community anchor
    institutions. Some community anchor institutions have adopted
    programs that extend learning beyond their walls. Libraries
    have been experimenting with mobile wireless hotspot programs
    which allow people to check out broadband hotspots for home
    use.
        Schools have been providing buses equipped with wifi for
    students to use after hours. Congress or the FCC should clarify
    that these programs are eligible for e-rate funds.
        Finally, last but not least, Congress and the FCC should
    assist local communities' digital inclusion efforts. Local
    advocates are doing the hard work of educating residents about
    low-cost broadband options, providing digital literacy and job
    skills training, and distributing low-cost computers. Congress
    should pass the Digital Equity Act, which establishes grant
    programs to support state and local digital equity efforts.
        These funds will incentivize more states and localities to
    develop digital inclusion plans and will provide sorely needed
    funds to the small nonprofits doing the hard work of connecting
    their communities.
        Thank you. I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Sohn follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Doyle. Thank you.
        Mr. Sural, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

                     STATEMENT OF JEFFREY R. SURAL

        Mr. Sural. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, and thank
    you to Ranking Member Latta and the subcommittee members for
    holding this hearing.
        My name is Jeff Sural. I am the director of the Broadband
    Infrastructure Office at the North Carolina Department of
    Information Technology.
        Our office leads state initiatives to ensure all North
    Carolinians can access affordable, reliable high-speed internet
    service.
        On behalf of Governor Roy Cooper and State Chief
    Information Officer Eric Boyette, I would like to thank you for
    the opportunity to share North Carolina's approach to ensure
    all individuals and communities have the capacity and tools
    needed to fully participate in a 21st-century society and
    economy. The governor has made closing the digital divide one
    of his top priorities.
        My oral statement will focus on four key points.
        One, this is a problem. Two, its root causes have been
    identified. Three, it is solvable. And four, governments at all
    levels can and should lead.
        Policy, better data, grants, subsidies, and partnerships
    all work. In North Carolina, much like the rest of the country,
    not having the internet in your home makes it harder to see a
    doctor or nurse without leaving your house, harder to do
    homework outside the classroom, harder to start a small
    business, and in many cases harder to interact with your state
    and local government.
        In North Carolina, we recognize that adoption was a problem
    several years ago. In 2015, before writing the state's
    broadband plan, we surveyed 3,500 local leaders.
        When asked what their concerns were regarding the lack of
    broadband in their communities; the number-one response was the
    homework app.
        We wrote our state plan with equal attention paid to
    availability and adoption, focussing on the homework app. Our
    findings are validated by data collected nationally. The FCC
    estimates that 94.8 percent of North Carolina's households have
    access to broadband. Alarmingly, only 59 percent of those with
    access are adopting.
        The most recent report from the American Community Survey
    put North Carolina's household adoption rate for all internet
    speeds at 78 percent.
        The survey also found that more than 726,000 North Carolina
    households do not have access to a meaningful device, meaning a
    laptop, a desktop, or a tablet.
        Based on our own research, we estimate that between one-
    quarter to half a million students fall into the homework gap.
    We recognized there was a problem and so we first worked to
    identify the root causes.
        We found that broadband coverage is a key determinant of
    adoption. Of course, individuals can only adopt broadband in
    areas where it is available.
        But subscription costs are the main barrier to adoption for
    those with access, followed by digital literacy, access to
    devices, and relevancy.
        But, why this is a serious problem, is still misunderstood
    or underappreciated. Research shows that sheer availability of
    or access to broadband isn't enough to positively impact a
    local economy.
        Rather, it is the adoption of it. When people have it in
    their homes and use it in ways that positively impact their
    economic outlook, we begin to see a positive relationship
    between broadband and a community's economic health.
        In North Carolina, we are focused on tackling the barriers
    to adoption even as we invest in expansion of broadband
    infrastructure.
        In 2017, we formed the Digital Equity and Inclusion
    Collaborative to gather and learn from nonprofit, universities,
    and state agencies who are working to close the digital divide.
        Our office in the State Library of North Carolina won a
    $250,00 two-year grant from the Institute of Museum and Library
    Services to launch a pilot program at local libraries that
    provides equipment and digital literacy training to families of
    K through 12 students in need.
        We also partner with the state librarian and nine library
    systems to make equipment such as wifi hot spots or computers
    available to students.
        In early 2019, our office partnered with the North Carolina
    Department of Human and Health Services Office of Rural Health
    to secure a grant from the Appalachian Regional Commission to
    identify the broadband and telehealth challenges and
    opportunities in 20 western counties.
        This partnership also funded an expansion of East Carolina
    University's successful telepsychiatry program to four rural
    counties in eastern North Carolina.
        Our larger municipalities have been leading the effort to
    close the digital divide for many years. For example, in
    Durham, a group of volunteers from various nonprofits and city
    agencies formed Digital Durham to close the homework gap in
    east Durham.
        And, of course, in Charlotte, the nationally-recognized
    Charlotte Digital Inclusion Alliance is working aggressively
    and innovatively to close the region's digital divide.
        North Carolina also boasts several nonprofits such as
    Cramden and RTP and E2D in Charlotte, both of whom refurbish
    used computers and distribute them to those in need, as well as
    provide digital literacy training.
        Governments, particularly state governments, can play
    important leadership roles while pursuing evidence-based
    policymaking, convening stakeholders and educating the public.
        Competition drives affordability and innovation. We should
    continue to work on policies that incentivize competition. But
    where market forces are not working, successful evidence-based
    solutions include grants, subsidies, partnerships between local
    governments, nonprofits, and internet service providers.
        Thank you for the opportunity to speak today about North
    Carolina's comprehensive approach to closing the digital divide
    and I look forward to answering any questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Sural follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Doyle. Thank you.
        So we have now concluded our openings and we are going to
    move to member questions. Each Member will have 5 minutes to
    ask questions of our witnesses. I will start by recognizing
    myself for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Sural and Mr. Edmonds, when we talk about the
    challenges that our nation faces in deploying broadband
    nationally, I think everyone here can acknowledge that there
    are not sufficient private sector incentives to bring broadband
    to everyone and that the federal government has a necessary
    role to play.
        But when it comes to digital equity, your respective
    governments are working to close the digital divide. But do you
    see those efforts succeeding in the long term if the federal
    government doesn't play any role in that to help you address
    that challenge and what kinds of long-term harms do you see if
    we continue to let this problem fester?
        I will maybe start with Mr. Sural and then Mr. Edmonds, you
    can go next.
        Mr. Sural. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Great question, and, you know, I think the way that we
    incentivize the internet service providers and incentivize good
    corporate citizenship is through the purse strings, frankly.
        I mean, we have federal programs that fund deployment and
    those are--and we like those. We like money at the state level.
        But if they were tied or conducted in concert with some
    adoption programs, I think that would be the way to really
    drive this issue home and make sure that there are digital
    literacy or other programs that would be available to those
    where these deployment dollars are going.
        For example, in North Carolina we do have a state rural
    broadband grant program and we have advocated that we tie in a
    scoring for those applicants and they can increase their score
    if they create some sort of adoption program.
        And it could be partnering with a nonprofit. Doesn't
    necessarily mean they have to run it. But something, and I
    think that's probably the first thing that we need to do.
        Mr. Doyle. Mr. Edmonds?
        Mr. Edmonds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the question.
        And locally, I would say that while we are able to
    essentially galvanize people around this issue, namely, the
    internet service providers and the private sector.
        One thing that we have to be cognizant of--really what we
    are actually partnering on, so while Comcast and, you know, our
    local internet service providers have really stepped up in a
    major way. We don't want to get into the position to exhaust
    their generosity and I don't think that's actually a
    sustainable play.
        When I had mentioned earlier in my testimony that we want
    to be able to be in the position to further incentivize. If we
    actually had some funding outside of goodwill I think that we
    would actually be able to do much more.
        So I don't believe in the long term, what we are doing is
    sustainable. I think that it's commendable for all the partners
    at the table, and I do think that we will have an immediate
    impact, as we already are.
        However, from a sustainable way, as technology continues to
    evolve, we need to have something that we can look to from a
    long-term strategy that's actually going to make sense.
        Mr. Doyle. Thank you.
        Ms. Siefer, you talked about the skills gap for digital
    literacy in our workforce in your testimony, and for industries
    like manufacturing and agriculture, tell us what are the risks
    to employees that lack these skills as these industries change
    and are older workers missing out on opportunities?
        How is this dynamic playing out in urban and rural
    communities?
        Ms. Siefer. Right. So we know that the jobs are out there.
    We know there are IT jobs or even the jobs that aren't
    necessarily defined as technical.
        They are called, like, middle skill tech jobs where you
    need to understand how to use spreadsheets. You can flip back
    and forth between applications. You can feel confident that if
    you don't understand one app, it is oK, because you will figure
    it out.
        So that's what we are missing. So those are the--it is a
    basic digital literacy skills but it's a continuum of skills.
    And so in order to help people be ready for those other jobs,
    which are out there, we know the jobs are there.
        That is one of the things that is so frustrating. We have
    the jobs. But our folks don't have the skills, is that we have
    to help them where they are because it is intimidating.
        Mr. Doyle. Thank you.
        Ms. Sohn, you have said that deployment or some people have
    said that the deployment of 5G services will reduce the price
    of broadband and that it will connect rural communities and
    help close the digital divide in low-income communities.
        Do you really think those things are going to happen and,
    if not, why?
        Ms. Sohn. I certainly didn't say that. I think it's really
    important to emphasize that there is so much that is still
    unknown and untested about 5G.
        You know, the companies are not sure whether there is even
    a case for consumers to really benefit or whether this is an
    enterprise technology that allows for drones and self-driving
    cars and smart cities.
        So we don't know that. What we also don't know is what the
    price is going to be. You know, Angela Siefer talked about the
    price of devices, which we do know are going to be expensive.
    Samsung just introduced a $1,300 5G phone. But we have no idea
    what the monthly cost is going to be.
        But what we absolutely do know and what the executives--
    what both Verizon and T-Mobile executives have admitted is that
    in rural areas, 5G is probably not going to be a whole lot
    better than 4G. That's about the best they are going to get.
        Mr. Doyle. Thank you.
        I would note to my colleagues that I am stopped with three
    seconds left and I hope that sets an example for the rest of
    you.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Doyle. I will now recognize my good friend, Mr. Latta.
        Mr. Latta. Well, thank you. I hope you're not talking to me
    about that.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Latta. But thank you, Mr. Chairman, and again, thanks
    to our witnesses.
        Dr. Layton, if I could start my questions with you? This
    committee has spent much time focussing on how to connect all
    Americans to accept broadband speeds.
        In my district of northwest west central Ohio, we still
    have areas that are completely unserved. So encouraging
    broadband deployment in rural America is one of my top
    priorities.
        In your testimony, you mentioned that regulatory
    discrimination costs our economy about $30 to $40 billion
    annually, money that could otherwise be spent on deploying
    broadband to our rural areas.
        Will you expand on this particularly, about how money alone
    won't solve this issue and what actions should Congress be
    taking?
        Ms. Layton. Thank you for that question.
        I would like to follow up quickly on the 5G issue as it
    relates to rural areas.
        What we can see with 5G now that which is in cities is it's
    largely what's called broadband substitution. People are
    cutting the cord. They cancelled their cable subscription and
    are getting their broadband connection now through wireless.
        So this is going on in cities today, and when we look at
    rural areas, one of the fastest ways that we can bring high-
    speed broadband to the rural area is through the mid-band
    spectrum and there's an issue in front of the FCC right now on
    a C band auction, which will be the fastest way to bring high-
    speed broadband to rural areas.
        With regard to this issue of regulatory discrimination, as
    an economist, what, I like to encourage policymakers to think
    about broadband as a multi-sited market and ensure that all of
    the participants are able to be involved in the broadband
    market.
        So, historically, we've had a policy which would minimize
    the participation of the large content providers.
        So, for example, Netflix, which accounts for a large share
    of the traffic, they're not participating in the last mile
    infrastructure cost. So that's quite significant because that
    means the cost has to be recovered in another way.
        So it falls on the end consumer and part of the challenge
    today is, you know, when we talked about if it's too high,
    well, we are forcing end consumers to pay too much when large
    content providers are not participating.
        So in a free market, you would have more participation of
    the largest content providers, and that would help defray some
    of the costs for the poorest users.
        Mr. Latta. Thank you.
        Mr. Sural, if I could ask you the next question here? I
    also found in your testimony when you were talking about the
    adoption problem out there that you said that, you know, it's
    two sides of a coin--the access side and then the adoption
    side--and, then also about, you know, the pros and cons out
    there about why we really have to be out there talking about
    broadband and getting it there.
        On the pro side, you're talking about those who adopt the
    broadband are more likely to find jobs, learn new skills, and
    successfully navigate social services, and those who do not--
    than those who do not adopt them.
        Then on the con side, low adoption results in loss of
    opportunity, education, or economic income, civic, and
    cultural.
        And then when you summed up your testimony at the very end,
    you, also--I thought it was interesting you had said that, you
    know, competition drives that affordability and innovation.
        And so, looking at the--your state and what you have done
    on leveraging existing resources and creating partnerships, how
    does North Carolina State Broadband Office connect with
    communities that need internet access?
        Mr. Sural. Well, we have a technical assistance team. So I
    have four members in our office that actually live in the areas
    where they work, and they work, and they work closely with
    local leaders to develop--planning all sorts of aspects of
    broadband on the deployment side and on the adoption side.
        And our office has really just started to tackle this
    adoption issue. We rely a lot on the research that's done
    nationally and the studies that have been published nationally.
    We did our own study, however, a few years ago called NC Light
    Up, that's on our website and we did a controlled study with
    179 families.
        At the end and the conclusion of that study showed that
    even three months afterward the families that were receiving a
    subsidy for the service, 89 percent of them kept the internet
    service.
        And so we are still looking at diving into the benefits for
    those types of families. But we--but our outreach is mostly
    with the local levels through either our technical assistance
    team or our homework gap report that we published.
        Mr. Latta. In my last 25 seconds, now, do you also have
    workshops then for folks out there?
        Mr. Sural. We just completed a round of workshops we called
    Broadband 101 and we went to all areas of the state, and we had
    our councils of governments coordinate the local leaders, and
    we taught about what they can do to enhance deployment and some
    adoption issues, and we have a collaborative, too.
        Mr. Latta. Well, thank you very much.
        Mr. Chairman, I am ending in three seconds, so I yield
    back.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Doyle. Good job.
        The Chair now recognizes Mr. McNerney for 5 minutes.
        Mr. McNerney. I thank the Chair.
        Mr. Sural, do you believe more people should wear bow ties?
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Sural. Yes.
        Mr. McNerney. Thank you. Thank you.
        So I really appreciate your testimony concerning adoption
    as well as deployment. I think that's a key issue, along with
    the cost of equipment, and that's been raised several times. Is
    there any more you want to add to that--the adoption issue?
        Mr. Sural. On the issue of whether we--competition helps.
        Mr. McNerney. Well, whether deployment should precede
    adoption.
        Mr. Sural. I think that they can be done in concert. I
    mean, in our state, at least, we've been doing a lot on the
    deployment side of things.
        We even have, for example, in one county they received BTOP
    money. They have 90 percent of the households connected to
    fiber but only 59 percent subscription rate. So, obviously,
    there's something there, and it depends. We are finding county
    by county, it's different.
        Mr. McNerney. Well, thank you.
        In your written testimony, you discussed the economic
    impact of gaps in the broadband adoption and digital literacy.
    Can you expand on that and discuss the economic impacts that
    you have seen on the ground?
        Mr. Sural. So we have seen primarily, especially in our
    rural communities, more entrepreneurship. For example, the city
    of Wilson has done a lot, and it's allowed them to say, hey, we
    are a connected city. They've attracted some smaller companies.
        So what we are seeing is on the individual level,
    particularly an opportunity for income enhancement, and then we
    have some small businesses that are really starting to connect.
        There's a woman in southern Beaufort County who runs an
    agro-tourism business. Seventy-five percent of her marketing
    and ticket sales are over the internet. So when the internet is
    down, you know, she struggles. But it gives her an opportunity
    to run a business in a very, very rural area of North Carolina.
        Mr. McNerney. Thank you for that.
        Ms. Siefer, would you like to comment about the returns
    that we are likely to see from targeted federal investment in
    broadband adoption and digital literacy?
        Ms. Siefer. So the returns we are going to see are in every
    industry and in every aspect of our lives because I think one
    can think about how you use the internet, and that impacts then
    everything you do, right?
        So education and health, work. It is in everything. So the
    impacts are going to just be astounding if we had everybody
    participating and think it's also important for us to think
    about how--that the internet is more valuable because so many
    people are on it, right?
        So that thing that you're using is more valuable if there's
    more people there. So if we have more of our low-income
    citizens participating and the disabled and the seniors and the
    youth, then what does that do to how the rest of us then
    interact online?
        Mr. McNerney. Yes. Well, in my district, there's about
    64,000 individuals employed in the construction and
    transportation, and storage workers. Why would federal
    investments in digital training help that group, or how would
    it help that group?
        Ms. Siefer. It gives them more opportunities for jobs,
    right, because then they're not limited to that field. Yes, if
    they'd like to stay there, awesome. But their possibilities for
    advancement go up when they have more digital skills.
        Mr. McNerney. Yes, Ms. Sohn?
        Ms. Sohn. Could I just add thank you for the opportunity? A
    lot of skills that we, you know, consider to be sort of, you
    know, technical skills or some more mid-level skills, service
    skills, require internet skills.
        So, for example, when I take my car to Midas in Bethesda,
    they're constantly complaining because they can't get enough
    people to work as auto workers to repair cars and those folks
    need digital skills.
        OK. It's not just a matter of, you know, fixing the engine
    anymore. You have to be able to use computers.
        Mr. McNerney. Thank you.
        Mr. Edmonds, why do you think that the model of public
    partner--private partnerships is unsustainable in Detroit?
        Mr. Edmonds. I don't think it's sustainable because I think
    we might be motivated by different things. You know, when--the
    public sector we, obviously, aren't necessarily looking every
    single time at our residents as commodities, if you will.
        And I am not saying that that's what the private sector is
    doing but what I am saying is we have different
    responsibilities.
        And so when I am talking to my residents and wanting to get
    them online, I am not necessarily doing that about in a profit-
    driven way.
        I am looking at this because these residents essentially
    matter to the future of our city and, ultimately, our country.
    And when we are engaging with the private sector, it might be
    they have a--they have different objectives.
        We might fall in line under, you know, maybe someone wants
    to essentially highlight a partnership model that might be
    deemed innovative. But I am not really looking for innovation.
    I am looking for what's effective.
        Mr. McNerney. Thank you.
        Mr. Chairman, I am going to ask for another 5 minutes.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Doyle. I have great affection for the gentleman, but
    that request is denied.
        The Chair now recognizes Mr. Shimkus for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Shimkus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you for being here. It's a great debate. We have been
    struggling with broadband deployment, especially in the areas
    that have been mentioned, for years.
        I think we are having a lot of success in the broadband
    portion through a couple of different agencies. We've got the
    USDA rural development program, which has been--I mean, I have
    just gotten an announcement this morning of coming to Hamilton
    County to help roll out more.
        We have the FCC in the last cycle with legislation to help.
    The state of Illinois has gotten on board now to talk about
    connecting. So all that is--you know, so this is kind of a
    natural extension to, oK, if you connect will they come, or are
    they trained to come, or do they have the connectivity?
        We do accept the premise that some people who get fiber run
    to their house will not want to be online, do we? I mean, I am
    from rural America, and I am just here to tell you there are
    some people who don't want to be on the worldwide web.
        They don't want to be connected. They're worried about
    their privacy. They're worried about all this other stuff. So
    it's kind of like, in the economist's point of view, 3.5
    percent unemployment is de facto full employment if you take in
    economics and--because there are people always in transition.
        So we are never going to get 100 percent and we are not
    going to get 100 percent full deployment.
        But I was interested in this debate about with all these
    grant programs that we have, maybe--and I think, Mr. Sural, you
    mentioned it--why, not in the application process kind of make
    a determination of well, tell us what you have done in the past
    to help this portion or tell us what your plan is to help
    educate and connect people as part of these application
    processes. That way, you have another variable by which the
    decision-makers can use to see how effective it was.
        When we did the stimulus bill years ago, one of the
    problems was it gave money, but it just overlayed pipes without
    a business model. So this is kind of the other flip side. This
    is giving money without really a business plan for connecting
    or educating.
        Mr. Sural, back to you, too. I wrote down you're doing
    Broadband 101. We could probably use that class even though
    we've been on the committee for a long time.
        Mr. Sural. Happy to. Happy to.
        Mr. Shimkus. Yes. Because it is curious, and I am going to
    a little--Ms. Sohn, I saw you roll your eyes. I love watching
    people's faces during testimony.
        I am a recent--I am getting ready to retire. This is my
    last year here, and as a member of Congress, I've been able to
    survive on my iPhone and my iPad without a laptop.
        So now I got to go to the real world, and I am thinking,
    well, that might not be enough, you know, if I have to start
    doing spreadsheets and connecting. I might need--actually need
    to figure out how to turn a laptop on and do stuff.
        But that brings up this 4G/5G debate and whether 5G does
    actually represent some competition. Dr. Layton says yes. You
    rolled your eyes, saying, oh, I don't think so.
        So, why the eye roll?
        Ms. Sohn. So my concern is that we don't make policy
    prematurely. OK. 5G is a marathon and not a sprint. I know
    there's a lot of talk about the race to 5G.
        But if you even ask the companies themselves, they will say
    we are not 100 percent sure what the business model is for
    this. So that is my concern.
        I am not anti-5G. 5G is coming. But I think it would be
    unwise to make policy--broadband adoption equity policy based
    on what 5G might be.
        Mr. Shimkus. Yes, thank you. And I certainly want to give
    Dr. Layton a chance. But I do know that--and I caveated the
    question with--I mean, I am not on my laptop, right? I am on
    email, texting, and searching the web to get information. So I
    am not full bore into the issue.
        But I do know that sometimes I have bad wifi connection or
    a slow wifi connection, and I will go to 4G and get and I will
    turn off my wifi signal.
        So Dr. Layton?
        Mic.
        Ms. Layton. Well, this whole hearing was worth it for me
    today to hear Gigi say she doesn't want to make policy
    prematurely. I think that's great.
        [Laughter.]
        Ms. Layton. So I think to your whole point here, this is
    the whole point of view of why it's great that people should
    have more money in their own pockets, why we should allow
    enterprises to keep more of their own profits. Because every
    community has different needs, and the more that you have your
    own resources you can decide how you want to spend it. You can
    decide how you want to invest it.
        So when you talk about, as you opened your question on the
    big question of the federal funding, there's money sprinkled
    across the whole place. If we looked at the whole thing, we
    could probably do it a lot more efficiently and a lot more
    effectively by the different agencies--USTA, Department of
    Transportation, FCC--working together in a more cooperative
    way.
        Mr. Doyle. Thank you. Time has expired.
        The Chair now recognizes Mr. Loebsack for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Loebsack. Thank you, Chairman Doyle and Ranking Member
    Latta, for convening this hearing this today, and I thank all
    of our witnesses for their attendance as well.
        I do appreciate that we are having this hearing today. I've
    worked throughout my time on this committee to advance internet
    adoption and connect Iowa communities. I also have a rural
    district, as you might imagine, in southeast Iowa.
        I partnered with my friend, Bob Latta, and that we got this
    very, very bipartisan bill through the Broadband Data Act last
    year, and it passed the committee pretty overwhelmingly, as you
    know.
        But, clearly, there still are many challenges to ensure
    that all Americans are able to access and use the internet
    because in today's economy, as already has been mentioned if
    you don't have reliable internet access, you're probably going
    to be shut out of the digital economy.
        Whether your child is trying to do his or her homework, or
    you're searching for a job or accessing telemedicine, or trying
    to operate a small business, it's truly never been more
    important--I think we can all agree on that--to be able to
    connect to the internet and the outside world.
        I just had a couple of quick questions. Both of these are
    for Ms. Siefer and Ms. Sohn. The FCC doesn't currently collect
    data about the costs of broadband service.
        The Broadband Data Act included some qualify of service
    metrics to be collected. But I would like to ask you how you
    think the collection of additional quality of service metrics
    like price data would impact, if at all, access to broadband.
        Let's start with Ms. Siefer at this time.
        Ms. Siefer. Having data on the cost of home broadband would
    draw attention and be able to create solutions specifically
    around those geographic areas that don't have affordable
    broadband.
        Right now, if you try to go figure out how much broadband
    costs in any area, it actually takes quite a bit of research.
    It seems crazy. It seems like we could just look it up on the
    internet.
        But you can't just look it up on the internet. What you
    will find are the introductory rates. You won't find what it
    actually costs. And so solutions that can then be created for
    particular neighborhoods, for particular regions, for
    particular counties that are struggling with the cost in that
    area.
        Mr. Loebsack. And I am going to get to that in my second
    question, too.
        Yes, Ms. Sohn?
        Ms. Sohn. So we've actually seen in the e-rate context the
    group Education Superhighway did a study that showed that once
    the FCC required price transparency, prices for building
    networks to schools and libraries went down.
        So it would cause competitive pressure, plus consumers
    should know what they're paying for when they buy broadband,
    and if they do--if, they're lucky enough to have competitive
    choices, they can compare and contrast.
        Mr. Loebsack. So, my second question has to do with an
    article that was in the Wall Street Journal in December. It
    found that, quote, ``Americans in low-income neighborhoods and
    rural areas get slower broadband speeds even though they
    generally pay similar monthly prices as their counterparts in
    wealthy and urban areas.''
        And to both of you, again, the question is, do you think
    that rural and low-income areas are receiving a different
    quality of service as a result of technical challenges, or do
    you think there are other factors at play?
        And let's start with you this time, Ms. Sohn.
        Ms. Sohn. Look, those are not attractive communities to
    serve. So you get one provider. There's no competitive
    pressure. They can higher prices. I mean, you know, basically,
    if you're low-income or middle-class or live in a community of
    color, you get screwed.
        Mr. Loebsack. Yes?
        Ms. Siefer. I think the other important point to always
    keep in mind is that in the U.S., internet service is a
    commodity, right? You're going to get the highest price for it
    as you can and none of us should be surprised. We are, like,
    yes, of course. This is a free market.
        But if that result is that we don't have enough competition
    and then we end up with particular individuals and families who
    can't afford it because the only option is an expensive option,
    and we as a society have to say that's not OK.
        Mr. Loebsack. And I might add that this actually happens
    not just in rural areas versus urban areas, but even in Iowa
    City, where I live; if you're in a new subdivision, for
    example, you have limited options because not everybody wants
    to go into that subdivision until there are enough homes
    actually created and that's actually, you know, a fairly
    wealthy area, too.
        Ms. Sohn. That raises another question, if you don't mind,
    and that's the problem of exclusives in multi-tenant
    environments or condominium environments where a cable operator
    or a tel-co will basically have an exclusive, and you're at the
    mercy of those providers.
        And I know the FCC is looking at this, but they can't get
    rid--they can't ban those exclusives fast enough for me.
        Mr. Loebsack. Right. OK.
        Well, I was going to yield the rest of my time to Mr.
    McNerney, but there's not enough time for a question and
    answer. But thanks, everybody. I really appreciate it.
        And I yield back. Thank you.
        Mr. Doyle. The gentleman yields back his time.
        The Chair now recognizes my buddy, Mr. Olson, 5 minutes.
    Not a second more.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Olson. I thank the chair, and welcome to our five
    witnesses.
        Mr. Sural, I have to start out with an apology. My wife is
    a Duke Blue Devil, and that means that I have to inform you
    that on February 8th of this year, her Devils will go down to
    your Dean Dome and put a whooping on your Tarheels, to be
    repeated next month on March 7th at Duke Cameron Stadium.
        Sorry.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Olson. Just the way it is.
        Mr. Sural. Willing to wager a barbecue.
        Mr. Olson. And that's why I'm in my twenty-seventh year of
    marriage and my sixth term in Congress; Texas 22 is a booming
    suburb of Houston, Texas. We are the most diverse county in
    America ethnically.
        We have the richest population per capita of 254 counties
    in Texas. That means you would think we are preparing for 5G,
    and looking forward to 10G in the future. Access to the
    internet is for everybody in Fort Bend County. if you thought
    that, you'd be wrong.
        This past Thursday, I was out in Deanville, Texas.
    Deanville is all about cotton, milo, livestock, and Deanville
    High School Blue Jays. I went by to see the Chamber of
    Commerce's small business awardee, a place that's called All We
    Need Farm.
        It's run by a woman--small business--named, Stacy Roussel.
    She makes ice cream popsicles with goat milk from Nubian and
    Angora goats. She quit her job as a CPA in 2000 to pursue her
    dream of making these popsicles. She bought her first herd
    eight years later, in 2008.
        She and her husband were so good in 2017 they won the
    American Dairy Goat Association product competition. The best
    goat milk popsicles in the entire country came from Deanville,
    Texas.
        Stacy's problem is she has no real access to the internet.
    On her street, her neighbors were there a long time before she
    was. They have cable access to the internet.
        She has none of that cable. She can't convince somebody to
    come out and put that cable down. Satellites are too expensive,
    and maybe there's a problem with latency issues.
        So my question, Dr. Layton, is how can Stacy break through
    and have internet access so she can thrive and grow her
    business? Any thoughts? Ideas? Barricades D.C.?
        Ms. Layton. This is in her location where she's in this
    part of----
        Mr. Olson. Yes. Yes. Yes. On a rural road. There, again,
    the neighbors have--because they were there, like, 10 years, 20
    years before her. They got cables laid. She can't get somebody
    to help her out. Again, satellites are too expensive for right
    now. She has to grow her business. She can't do that until she
    gets that access.
        Ms. Layton. Right. Well, I am not familiar with the
    requirements for deployment in this particular part of Texas. I
    would have to look into it.
        What I am encouraged to see is that, for example, I am very
    excited about the new high through-put satellites, which are
    100 megabits per second. They are online--to come online, I
    think, in less than a year.
        The FCC has approved over a dozen new satellite programs in
    low earth orbit. These should not be laughed at. They are very
    serious. They are being used around the world. I think that's a
    big deal. I would just come back to what regulatory barriers
    there are. I mean, and hats off to this woman for pursuing her
    dream.
        Mr. Olson. Yes, ma'am? Ms. Sohn, do you want to add to
    that?
        Ms. Sohn. Yes. This would be the perfect place for
    communities to build their own broadband, and, unfortunately,
    in Texas is one of 19 states that prohibits their local
    communities from building broadband.
        I have cousins who live in Dallas. I often visit Austin,
    and I get similar complaints about the lack of broadband in
    places where you think it would be, and that's why community
    builds are so critically important and why Congress should
    prohibit those kinds of--prohibit states from stopping
    communities from deciding whether or not to serve people like
    your friend.
        Mr. Olson. Mr. Sural?
        Mr. Sural. And small business adoption and programs and
    also grants to small businesses. We had a program in North
    Carolina that allowed some manufacturing facilities to hook up
    to fiber. Provided a grant, and they've expanded their
    operations and communicate with customers in China. So we need
    that, too.
        Mr. Olson. Final question for you, Dr. Layton. This is on
    NFL neutrality. January 6th of 1980, Houston Oiler Mike Renfro
    scored a touchdown in Three Rivers Stadium that was denied.
        Would you break from Chairman Doyle and admit the refs blew
    the call?
        Ms. Layton. On this one, I am forever a Pittsburgh Steelers
    fan. So I am sorry, I am not going to come over to that side on
    that question.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Olson. It was a touchdown.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Doyle. I thank the gentleman. I would just like to say,
    Mr. Sural, it was mighty kind of you not to mention the Houston
    Astros in retaliation for his Duke statements.
        But the gentleman's time has expired.
        The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr.
    Veasey, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Veasey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for recognizing me for
    a magic 5 minutes.
        Mr. Olson, thank you. Roger Williams and I appreciate you
    mentioning Mike Renfro, who's a fellow Arlington Heights High
    School graduate out of Fort Worth, Texas. So thank you very
    much.
        Mr. Olson. Touchdown.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Veasey. It definitely was. Every time I see Mike out
    and about in Fort Worth, we joke around about that, about how
    it definitely was a touchdown.
        Mr. Edmonds, in your testimony, you discuss the difference
    between the availability of broadband and usage. You set out in
    a table in your testimony displaying in the district that I
    represent that there is 100 percent availability of broadband
    which, according to your table, is higher than 27 of my fellow
    subcommittee members. But usage is 35 percent, which is
    twentieth out of 31 members.
        Can you explain how availability is so high, but usage is
    so low?
        Mr. Edmonds. So, really, what--and to explain the context
    of that data as well, so that data was gathered by Microsoft
    where they actually began looking at the software updates.
        So anyone who was having a software update by way of
    Microsoft, the area would have determined the speed. So it
    wasn't a survey. It was actually automatically pulling that
    data.
        The one thing that they did not include in that data piece
    was mobile broadband, so anyone who was doing updates over
    cellular networks.
        Now, the good thing is we have the data by way of the
    American Community Survey where we can--where we can reference
    that. But the disparity is still going to be pronounced.
        And so when we began looking at the availability, and the
    usage, like, to summarize the sentiment that, you know, some
    other people have already covered today, just because you build
    a network doesn't mean people will come.
        And so when you begin looking at the availability we can
    have that all day. But, however, if we don't have the necessary
    means to get people online and to keep them online, I think
    that's what we are seeing in that.
        And so, for example, in the city of Detroit, if we were to
    look at poverty rates, and Detroit has, obviously, a pronounced
    poverty rate, we are seeing the role that cost plays and people
    having perpetual meaningful broadband adoption. You having it
    for one month is fine.
        But, again, for a year, day in and day out costs, some can
    afford that monthly. That's something where we are still
    struggling to get, especially when we begin looking at
    broadband packages in America.
        Now, cost being a big barrier, but, again, we don't really
    have the necessary digital skills training as well. You know,
    one thing that I am going to echo is Angela's sentiment, where
    she expresses that people aren't willing to pay for things that
    they might not necessarily fully grasp. And so when we don't
    have any funding for digital literacy training, I don't see
    ways that we can essentially insulate people and put them into
    a pipeline of meaningful broadband adoption as well.
        So there's really an amalgamation of issues that are
    keeping people from getting online. But, again, there's not
    really any funding for us to address this.
        Mr. Veasey. Yes. That's really interesting, which brings me
    to my next question that I wanted to ask you. Have you--have
    you had a chance to look very closely at texting and calling
    versus actual internet usage in urban areas?
        And the reason why I say that is, like, if you were to
    drive through certain areas in my district, you know, most of--
    most major retail concepts--new retail concepts--will skip over
    lower-income areas like some of the places that I represent in
    Fort Worth and Dallas. But the one new store that you will
    always see if you can drive through the community outside of a
    fast food place will be a cell phone place. The cell phone
    companies are well-represented in these areas because they see
    them as opportunities for big business.
        Do you think that it makes sense to start looking at
    whether it's unlimited data plans or what have you as a more
    viable way for communities to be connected--to be able to do
    things like homework and what have you if it can be offered at
    a more affordable price?
        Mr. Edmonds. No. I always caution people about the tales of
    smartphones. You know, when I tell people that, you know,
    children just having smartphones, they're missing out on the
    ability to type.
        Typing is a workforce skill. And so I see the value in cell
    phones, and I really do. I think that's something that's great
    to be able to communicate. It's great for emergency response.
        But at the end of the day, we don't want to stymie our
    workforce by going with the solution that I think is, in many
    cases, misguided. When we begin also looking at cell phones,
    while, yes, there are a lot of cell phone stores, we also have
    the data that nearly 40 percent of Detroit residents are
    actually struggling with affording a perpetual data plan cost.
        And so, while people might procure a cell phone device
    that's useful, wifi is where they are essentially going. So
    applications that allow people to be able to send texts or send
    messages over wifi are becoming much more popular. So someone
    can procure a device.
        But at the end of the day, those wifi networks are--that is
    where the real value is. So you see, people get those devices
    at those cell phone stores. But then they'll go to where they
    find those free wifi locations such as McDonald's or a library.
        Mr. Veasey. Thank you. I have a lot more, actually, but my
    magic 5 minutes have elapsed.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Doyle. The gentleman's time has expired. The chair now
    recognizes Mr. Long for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Long. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and if I start asking
    healthcare questions? you will know that I am in the wrong
    committee because we've got two committees going on here today.
    Running back and forth between them.
        But, Dr. Layton, in your testimony, you talk about consumer
    choice and how a flexible market can allow consumers to adopt
    the services they need.
        While America may have slightly higher broadband prices
    than other countries, what has this approach done for the
    quality of the networks that we do have?
        Ms. Layton. So I think the main reason is that we have a
    higher quality. I mean, we are--we have many ways we are
    leading in a lot of network technologies of all kinds, wireless
    and wireline, and part of that relates to the investment
    incentives and the ability to have broadband at different
    prices. That's an important thing if you want next-generation
    networks.
        Mr. Long. OK. Thank you.
        And do you--again, for you, Dr. Layton--do voluntary
    efforts to promote broadband adoption strike the right balance
    between preventing over-regulation and bridging the
    affordability gap?
        Ms. Layton. So, I, personally, would like to see more
    flexibility in the marketplace. I think that hitherto we,
    have--the regulators have defined the parameters. We haven't
    focused enough on security, and that's very important to
    consumers.
        The regulators have overfocused on speed. I think the point
    was made today that, you know, you may--your house may have a--
    be passed by a gigabit network, but you don't use the full the
    speed on that network.
        That was the Wall Street Journal article that was
    referenced before. Because depending on the application, you
    may not need the fastest speed.
        So there are different applications, different needs, and
    different prices. So that's why one single price doesn't
    reflect--it doesn't address the actual needs in the
    marketplace.
        Mr. Long. OK. And do they also help promote broadband
    deployment?
        Ms. Layton. Absolutely, because when a--when an operator is
    thinking about deploying, they are going to try to serve
    different needs. There may be enterprise needs. There's
    individual needs, families, and single persons.
        They're not all going to have the same needs, and they have
    to have different price points to meet those different needs.
    They need different packages. And so that part is why the
    flexibility needs to be there.
        We have overly relied on the FCC to define what the
    features should be. But that limits the ability of the
    consumers to define what's important for them.
        Mr. Long. OK. Thank you.
        I was an auctioneer for 30 years before I came to Congress,
    so I talk faster than most people. So I am going to yield back
    two and a half minutes of my five.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Doyle. Well done, Mr. Long.
        The Chair now recognizes Mr. O'Halleran for 5 minutes.
        Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you, Chairman Doyle and Ranking
    Member Latta.
        I am part of our recent work to secure funds for broadband
    development and ensure the FCC's maps are accurate. The digital
    divide is more than just accurate maps and laying fiber in the
    ground.
        It's about access, affordability, and Americans feeling
    empowered online with computer skills. And in my district and
    in rural America, I believe that the competition of speeds in
    rural areas to be able to compete with the rest of the nation
    and the rest of the world should not be at the FCC's minimum.
    We shouldn't just be happy with getting some internet to
    people. It has to be competitive internet to people.
        According to a recent Pew Research Survey, 10 percent of
    the U.S.'s adults do not use the internet. The survey found
    that the majority of these adults were either seniors--27
    percent--I have a very large population of seniors in the
    district--had less than a high school education, 29 percent.
        I believe that higher speeds would help with that, being
    able to have people stay in high school and get a better
    education in rural areas. And were low-income earners, $33,000
    or less--18 percent--and lived in rural areas, 22 percent. And
    I also happen to have the largest Native American population in
    the lower 48 states.
        Closing the digital divide is a complex problem that
    impacts many constituents in my district. I look forward to
    finding bipartisan solutions to address these problems.
        The Arizona students recycling used technology program is a
    great example of increasing access to internet capability
    devices. Industry partners donate used hardware to local
    universities for students to refurbish their laptops and
    computers.
        Local libraries will then pair this equipment up with wifi
    hot spots to help connect their communities. Hopefully, we can
    stop them from having to go to McDonald's to do that in the
    parking lot.
        One testimonial from the Page Public Library describes this
    program as a fantastic service for the community and helps many
    compete in online job applications.
        Mr. Edmonds, you discussed the importance of public-private
    partnerships in the community to increase broadband access. Can
    FCC or NDIA programs do more with states to develop similar
    inclusion programs?
        Mr. Edmonds. Short answer, yes. I believe all----
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. O'Halleran. Give me your long answer.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Edmonds. I believe all of us can do more, and one thing
    that I always want to I guess keep at the forefront, is the
    value of local leadership but also recognizing how diverse we
    are as America.
        So, you know, within your respective district, you have
    different cities that maybe some of the solutions that I would
    propose in Detroit would be different and, you know, that's oK.
        But at the end of the day, we see that there is, you know,
    the private sector has a role. The public sector has a role.
    The federal government has a role.
        We all have different roles here, and I think that what we
    are seeing locally is that, you know, we are in our capacity
    doing the best that we can, but we really aren't getting that
    leadership oversight that we need to say that it would,
    essentially, legitimize our cause more than what we are already
    doing.
        Mr. O'Halleran. So, what can we do?
        Mr. Edmonds. Well, I would say at the onset, one, I think
    that it's great to recognize this issue. Whenever we look at
    the digital inclusion three-legged stool, advocacy and
    awareness is oftentimes left out of that equation. And so just
    being great advocates, for one.
        But two, even making, like, digital readiness
    recommendations and kind of attaching funding to that. I think
    that's where we are a little anaemic on. Again, we could come
    to the--if we were able to come to the table and essentially go
    to the private sector and say hey, these are the resources that
    are made available to us; what would you be interested in
    supporting as well?
        That doesn't happen at this point. Right now, we are just
    going to them directly and saying, hey, glad that you're here.
    We don't have any money, but this is our issue. And so if there
    was any type of funding that was attached to this, we could
    actually do some real damage here.
        Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you.
        Ms. Siefer, Arizona, has a plan, and a broadband office
    focused on digital inclusion efforts statewide. However, some
    states still do not have this type of plan.
        Would you discuss the importance of every state appointing
    a trusted official or a program to support broadband expansion
    in digital literacy in 10 seconds?
        [Laughter.]
        Ms. Siefer. In 10 seconds.
        So most states don't have a plan. Everything that Jeff has
    described to you today, everyone should know that is not the
    norm. Jeff gets asked to speak; his staff gets asked to speak
    because they are leading--they are leading it all, right? And
    yes, Arizona has--they have a staff member at the state library
    whose title includes the term digital inclusion.
        Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you, and I yield.
        Ms. Siefer. So runs around the country, runs around Arizona
    helping folks. We should have that everywhere.
        Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you.
        Mr. Doyle. Gentleman's time has expired.
        The chair now recognizes Mrs. Brooks for 5 minutes.
        Mrs. Brooks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        This hearing is incredibly timely. I just recently, when we
    were in the district last week, we visited a number of
    communities because we had a mayor's election in November, and
    so I have a number of new mayors in small communities and
    visited both large cities like the city of Indianapolis that I
    represent up to smaller communities, little communities like
    Gas City, Hartford City--very small, under 5,000 people, and
    actually the issue of availability of broadband and
    availability of connection to the internet is something that is
    critically important to every community regardless of its size
    because it will determine--and I want to thank each of you for
    your testimony.
        It was all very, very helpful to learn, and I hope that the
    mayors that I have recently visited with, you know, have
    learned that we do have, you know, positions like yours, Mr.
    Edmonds, in Detroit, positions like yours, Mr. Sural, in North
    Carolina, because I do think the leadership--and while Indiana
    is investing in--our Governor Holcomb is investing $100 million
    in next-level broadband to try to help communities, some of
    these new mayors weren't aware of that and weren't aware that
    our state legislature has decided to invest in trying to make
    it available.
        But I think one--we called--one of my staffers called a
    small telecom to talk about a small internet provider and to
    get to the second. He actually said, and this is something
    we've all heard, you can offer the horse all the water you
    want, but if he ain't thirsty, he's not going to drink it. I
    happen to ride, and I know what he's talking about.
        And so the challenge that we do have as a country is trying
    to educate in many ways people, I think, particularly senior
    citizens, more so than the younger people. They are growing up
    with it. It is something they are so accustomed to.
        But I want to, you know, spend a little bit more time on
    how we can focus on including the seniors. I went into one of
    the mayor's offices, and there was a senior citizen sitting at
    a public access computer outside of his office, and I thought
    that was great.
        I have been to my public libraries and have seen a number
    of people going. But yet, I was also at our state's community
    college system when people were getting laid off from their
    jobs.
        We were teaching them during the recession what a mouse was
    and how to use a computer, and I think people don't appreciate
    that that divide still exists in our country.
        So I want to focus with my limited time left how we can
    educate and do a better job of educating people. I really think
    it is more of an age issue than we all want to admit. For our
    young kids, it's second nature to them, more so than maybe it
    is to use a pencil or a pen.
        And so how can we reach--what would be your one idea to
    help us? And I want to do kind of a lightning round. What would
    be your idea? I am sorry we are going to get to you last, Mr.
    Sural, but I want to get everyone's quick idea of how do we
    expand literacy.
        Ms. Siefer. So the digital inclusion programs that are out
    there now are on the ground, created locally. They know what
    works, right?
        They work with those senior centers. They work with
    seniors, and they know that it's whatever matters to that
    senior. What matters to that senior? Is it talking to their
    kids via Facebook? Then that's--then that's what you do it.
        Mrs. Brooks. Right. That's when my mother got on Facebook.
    Right.
        Ms. Siefer. That's right.
        Mrs. Brooks. And to Dr. Layton's point, it was what is
    the--what is the service they're trying to access, not the
    network.
        Ms. Siefer. Right. Well, in the state of Indiana--and I
    want to applaud you because you have been--Indiana has been
    really amazing around the supply side of things, making the way
    for the 5G networks and so on and understanding all of that.
        But you could also look at the state government digitizing
    the state services. In some respects the government itself
    becoming more efficient can provide a pull to the industries
    and consumers that they have to just become digital as a
    result.
        Mrs. Brooks. I agree.
        Ms. Siefer. That has--that has one outcome side of it.
        Mrs. Brooks. Thank you.
        Mr. Edmonds?
        Mr. Edmonds. So I actually engage seniors semi-regularly
    and we actually had a group of seniors where their library
    closed in their community, and they found my phone number and
    called me and said, hey, you know, our library closed--what can
    we do to connect.
        You know, we can't compete with the other kids who are just
    there all day. They take all the stuff. But what can we do, and
    I think so place-based recommendations are going to be huge
    here.
        Mrs. Brooks. OK.
        Mr. Edmonds. Finding a place where seniors really feel
    comfortable.
        Mrs. Brooks. Thank you. Thanks. I want to keep--Mr. Sural?
        Mr. Sural. So my father is 78. He does not consider himself
    a senior citizen but he takes computer classes up at the
    library. So community anchor institutions are key.
        Mrs. Brooks. That's excellent.
        Ms. Sohn?
        Ms. Sohn. Community anchor institutions are excellent and
    passage of the Digital Equity Act so that the folks that Angela
    represents have the resources to educate everybody including
    seniors.
        Mrs. Brooks. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you all for
    your work.
        Mr. Doyle. Gentlelady yields back.
        The Chair recognizes Ms. Clarke for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Clarke. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank our
    Ranking Member Latta. I thank our panellists for lending their
    expertise to us today. The American people deserve access to
    broadband devices and the internet. They deserve affordable
    services and they deserve today's hearing.
        Congressman McNerney, Lujan, and I recently introduced H.R.
    4486, the Digital Equity Act, to ensure every person is
    provided access to digital literacy they deserve in 2020 and
    beyond.
        Information is power and someone's income level or zip code
    should have zero impact on their access to broadband internet.
        They should not have to depend on smart phones as their
    only means to participate in today's economy. And so I thank
    you once again for being here to address the critical issue of
    the digital divide.
        I wanted to start with the issue of the census, because
    we've talked about access and everything else, and I see
    everyone nodding. Being a member of the Congressional Black
    Caucus's 2020 Census Task Force, I believe that every person
    should be counted. I also represent a historically hard-to-
    count district.
        Let me start with you, Ms. Siefer. In your testimony, you
    discussed the U.S. Census Bureau's online data collection and
    digital inequity across the United States.
        Can you please expand on your suggestion that the federal
    government should do--should boost broadband adoption to ensure
    an accurate count?
        Ms. Siefer. Right. So we know that the census is going to
    be conducted it online. We know that they are going to be
    encouraging folks to fill it out online. And so how does that
    actually play out? It means that libraries are going to end up
    places that folks go.
        It means that those who don't have digital skills might
    just decide not to fill it out at all, right, that the--there's
    lots of ways that the community itself can respond but if they
    don't have the resources to respond then those individuals just
    won't--they won't get counted.
        Mr. Edmonds. Yes, and I would like to follow up with that a
    bit and just--kind of how I've been summarizing it and telling
    to people, well, if you don't essentially have the internet
    then essentially you don't count, and if you don't count then
    you don't matter.
        And we don't want to, obviously, send that message and it's
    a really, really bleak and hardhitting message. But that's what
    needs to be said.
        And so when--even locally on the ground we are looking to
    galvanize every resource possible. It's working with rappers
    just as much as we are working with our local grocery stores,
    actually putting in kiosks any and everywhere. But one thing
    that--it's a bit bleak as well but maybe morbid optimism--
    America has two options with the census.
        Either you prioritize digital equity at the onset and you
    do a good job in the census, or you don't, and then you're
    penalized for it. So, therefore, you would have to prioritize
    digital equity, moving forward.
        Ms. Clarke. OK. Did you want to respond, Dr. Layton?
        OK. Ms. Sohn?
        Ms. Sohn. Yes. I would just say, look, the reason that
    racial minorities are already way behind in broadband adoption
    is because of structural discrimination, because of
    discriminatory lending practices and housing practices. We
    don't want to exacerbate that by having them not be counted.
        Ms. Clarke. Mr. Sural?
        Mr. Sural. So a lot of scrutiny has been applied to the
    FCC's data collection and their mapping. But one of the things
    that's overlooked is that they rely on the 2010 census numbers
    to determine the number of households that are either served or
    unserved in the census bloc. So having accurate census numbers
    are key to determining where that funding from the FCC will go.
        Ms. Clarke. So we may be creating even--digging an even
    deeper hole in terms of mapping if those who don't have access
    right now are unable to participate in the 2020 census.
        Mr. Sural. Correct.
        Ms. Clarke. Very well.
        My final question is to you, Mr. Edmonds. A lot of the
    conversation about bridging the digital divide is focused on
    rural areas. But I am curious about how this conversation plays
    out in low-income urban areas.
        Can you share more information about how many people in
    Detroit lack access to broadband and how--and share why they
    are unconnected?
        Mr. Edmonds. Sure. So over 40 percent of our residents
    don't have broadband. Twenty-seven percent of our residents
    don't have broadband of any kind and approximately 20 percent
    of our residents are only cell phone only households.
        And, really, you're seeing just--people are essentially
    getting in where they fit in and when you're looking at why
    people essentially aren't adopting, you know, cost is,
    obviously, the biggest barrier.
        Again, I am going to keep going back to how perpetual
    billing really disenfranchises people. Across America from 2012
    to 2017 approximately 1,600 banks closed in rural and urban
    areas. Oftentimes those areas were low income, the residents
    had less years of education and they were predominantly African
    American.
        And when we begin looking at the role that banking
    institutions have played and for them to be going to online
    banking what role does that have to play with financial
    literacy and what role does that have to play pairing it with
    digital literacy training?
        I think that when we begin unpacking these issues and
    looking at it from a very, very nuanced perspective, we are
    seeing, again, there are so many factors that are keeping
    people online and they're essentially tied to other industries
    where we might not necessarily have the focus on at the moment.
        Mr. Doyle. Gentlelady's time has expired.
        Ms. Clarke. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Mr. Doyle. The chair recognizes Mr. Walberg for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Walberg. I thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Also, my colleague, Mrs. Brooks, wanted me to make sure
    that we do understand that the census can be done on paper,
    too. I don't want to--don't want to forget that. We want to use
    it all sorts of ways as best as possible and I thank the panel
    for being here. I think it's an outstanding panel because of Go
    Blue involvement.
        Mr. Edmonds--Mr. Edmonds, you are a--you're doing a great
    job. I think--I think you will help a lot of people come to
    understand and use it just because of the smile on your face
    and your energy that's there.
        Mr. Edmonds. Well, thank you.
        Mr. Walberg. Mr. Sural, am I understand you have some Go
    Blue background as well?
        Mr. Sural. I do. Go Blue. I was born in Ann Arbor.
        Mr. Walberg. And western Michigan, too?
        Mr. Sural. Western Michigan? In law school. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Walberg. Yes. Well, we can see the value of this panel
    here.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Walberg. Like many others on this dais, my district is
    very rural, a lot of it, and including myself. I have a smart
    TV. It tells me that every time I turned it on. But I can't use
    it as a smart TV.
        You can imagine the excitement of last week when I had
    Chairman Pai in my district with me and talking about key
    issues and then going out to the field and seeing broadband
    being stretched right near my Harley Davidson dealership and
    out in the country as well and a matter of a few miles from my
    house.
        So I am hopeful that soon I will be part of the real world
    and my hot spot and my myfi won't be the only options that I
    have to connect.
        And those are issues we've been talking about, but another
    bipartisan issue that I want to address here and take note of
    is something that I've worked with Representative Clarke. I see
    she's not there right now.
        But a key issue called a tower act and I think it goes to
    the issue of being able now to see more broadband and fiber
    being stretched and pulled because of the good economy, because
    of good policies I think we are developing together and moving
    forward.
        But we need to have people who will be a high-skilled
    workforce able to put up the internet for us and understand
    that these can be excellent jobs--lifetime jobs--that have
    expandable opportunities to deploy fiber, 5G, et cetera, and
    that our HBCU and minority populations need to understand that
    clearly.
        Mr. Edmonds, you can help us with that extensively because
    we are talking about jobs that will be high paying but require
    in many cases less than a four-year education and allows for
    expanded four-year education if you want to do that by putting
    up those resources--those towers, et cetera.
        Dr. Layton, as you noted in your testimony, some research
    has shown that low-income Americans or Americans with lower
    education levels who had access to the internet thanks to a
    temporary subsidy often choose to remain connected at its
    conclusion. I think, Mr. Sural, you pointed that out as well.
        Dr. Layton, do you think that principle would translate if
    we are able to increase the number of people in the workforce
    for deployment in these areas as well simply by providing them
    exposure to broadband conceptually as well as higher incomes?
        Ms. Layton. The question is what is it--the subsidy or the
    training?
        Mr. Walberg. The subside and, ultimately, the ability to
    hear and see and be involved and understanding that it's now
    available to me.
        Ms. Layton. So I agree with what you're saying. I mean, I
    think you're absolutely right. You have the workforce issue.
        We have described that for some people that it is an
    economic issue and that we need targeted subsidies for those
    individuals and we also have a skills gap to address. So I
    support those things.
        Mr. Walberg. So in that line, Mr. Edmonds, I would also
    ask, I would assume that if we get people to understand that
    this is for me now and if we are going to put these in and they
    see the technology--the towers, et cetera--going into a
    neighborhood that that's an opportunity for employment as well.
        Mr. Edmonds. It absolutely is an opportunity for employment
    and one thing that I would like to, you know, highlight with
    these, these are Americans who are really willing and ready to
    work and to participate in the economy. If they were extended a
    fair hand they would excel in that.
        Mr. Walberg. Of course, that's what we want to see.
        My time has expired. I yield back.
        Mr. Doyle. I thank the gentleman.
        The Chair recognizes Mr. Johnson for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Sural, of the various programs your office carries out,
    can you talk about what your state--how your state plays in
    digital literacy activities? Is that something primarily
    carried out at the state level or the local level?
        Mr. Sural. Thank you. It's carried out mostly at the local
    level. We have larger municipalities who have created digital
    inclusion working groups or collaborative.
        But at the state level we saw that work being done in some
    of our larger municipalities and through some of our
    universities. HBCUs was recently mentioned.
        North Carolina Central has an active program that helps and
    serves Durham. And so what we did at the state level was we
    decided to get all those folks together for lunch one day and
    we ended up creating the statewide collaborative to learn from
    them, and then to take what they've done successfully and try
    to what we call R&D--rip off and duplicate--in other areas of
    the state, either in municipalities or the rural areas.
        Rural areas are particularly challenging with this issue
    because they just don't have those underlying resources or
    advocates like they do in the urban areas.
        Mr. Johnson. OK. All right.
        Well, in your testimony you talk about how North Carolina
    is piloting innovative ideas to create sustainable solutions
    for broadband adoption. Can you give us a few more specific
    examples of what those pilots may entail that other states
    aren't doing?
        Mr. Sural. Sure. Sure. And we received a grant from IMLS
    that I mentioned in my opening and it's $250,000. So that's
    important because we just didn't have the resources.
        I mean, we had smart people who were very charming and good
    at what they do. But without funding we couldn't implement some
    of the ideas that we had. So thank you to IMLS for that grant.
        It's a two-year grant program and what we are going to do,
    the objective of that grant program is to create a play book
    for librarians; basically, something that we think we can scale
    not only across the state but across the nation.
        And so what we did was we set up digital literacy training
    and equipment and provide equipment to K through 12 students
    and families at the local library. We partnered with the school
    that had a one-on-one program so the student had a device but
    maybe not connectivity at home.
        We provided them with a wifi hot spot or a cellular hot
    spot and then they came in for six training sessions with their
    parents and they sat down and we did digital literacy training
    at the library with the computers there.
        The issue is sustainability after the grant ends and how we
    allow that librarian, who is strapped for resources in the
    poorest of the poor counties in North Carolina to continue this
    program, and we are going to take lessons learned from that and
    we'll wrap it in and we'll have it in our report and,
    hopefully, we'll have that play book out for everyone. So
    that's just one of the----
        Mr. Johnson. OK. Well, how important is sharing information
    on various broadband adoption initiatives through other state
    government channels? How important is that in improving
    broadband adoption--the broadband adoption rate nationwide?
        Mr. Sural. It's critical. It's what we have now. The
    network that we have now is important. In 2015 when I started
    this job we had 12 states that were part of what we called the
    State Broadband Leaders Network that works with NDIA to
    coordinate some of our meetings and monthly phone calls.
        Today, there are 48 states involved. This is how active
    states have gotten just over in that short period of time and
    how they see the need and how they can--and they know now that
    they can lead and so they're doing that.
        Mr. Johnson. Well, I imagine using the breadth of different
    community centers and state offices provides a good platform to
    spread awareness of the different resources out there. So I
    commend you for what you're doing. Keep it up.
        Mr. Chairman, I don't talk nearly as fast as my colleague,
    Billy Long, does. But I will yield back the balance of my time,
    too.
        Mr. Doyle. I thank the gentleman.
        Seeing no one else looking for time, the chair requests
    unanimous consent to enter the following into the record: a
    letter from Silicon Harlem, a letter from Seattle Mayor Jenny
    Durkan, a letter from Chattanooga Mayor Andy Burke, a letter
    from Digital Equity.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        [Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
        Mr. Doyle. I want to thank the witnesses for their
    participation in today's hearing. I would remind Members that
    pursuant to committee rules they have ten business days to
    submit additional questions for the record to be answered by
    the witnesses who have appeared and I would ask each witness to
    respond promptly to any questions that you may receive.
        At this time, the committee is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 12:24 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]

                    Prepared Statement of Hon. Frank Pallone

        Today's hearing focuses on promoting broadband adoption, an
    issue that affects every one of our districts whether they are
    urban, suburban, or rural. On this Committee, we have on many
    occasions discussed gaps in internet access and how to
    subsidize and incentivize building the infrastructure necessary
    to ensure that everyone has access to reliable, high-speed, and
    resilient internet service. But we must also consider the gaps
    in internet adoption-why people don't, or can't, subscribe to
    internet service when it is available to them.
        It is increasingly difficult to participate in today's
    economy without internet service, and yet millions of Americans
    who are wired for internet access aren't actually connected.
    The key reason most are not connected is cost.
        In New Jersey studies have found that nearly 17 percent of
    residents have no internet access in their homes. Of the
    families making $35,000 per year or less, only half have home
    internet connections. That means school kids in these
    households have to find public internet connections or wi-fi to
    complete schoolwork. And their parents are having to fill out
    job applications and complete educational courses on smart
    phones or at libraries. This certainly puts these families at a
    disadvantage.
        Fortunately, there are programs at the state, local and
    federal level that can provide assistance to people who have
    trouble affording internet access. But at the federal level we
    can and must do more.
        As we consider how to spend proceeds of future spectrum
    auctions, it is important that we invest in solutions to
    address these adoption issues. Members have introduced
    legislation tobegin closing these adoption gaps. I'm hopeful we
    can work to find a way to make these proposals-or others that
    might come as a result of this hearing today-bipartisan.
        The internet holds incredible promise for the future, but
    as the technology continues to advance, we must make sure that
    people are not left behind. That's the concept of digital
    equity, and it is one I know we will all stand up for. I look
    forward to hearing more from our witnesses and to finding
    bipartisan solutions to these issues.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]