[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]