[Senate Hearing 116-626]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 116-626
NOMINATION TO THE NATIONAL
AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION,
THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, AND
THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
NOVEMBER 10, 2020
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
53-853 PDF WASHINGTON : 2023
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ROGER WICKER, Mississippi, Chairman
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota MARIA CANTWELL, Washington,
ROY BLUNT, Missouri Ranking
TED CRUZ, Texas AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
JERRY MORAN, Kansas BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
CORY GARDNER, Colorado TOM UDALL, New Mexico
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee GARY PETERS, Michigan
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
MIKE LEE, Utah TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin JON TESTER, Montana
TODD YOUNG, Indiana KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona
RICK SCOTT, Florida JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
John Keast, Staff Director
Crystal Tully, Deputy Staff Director
Steven Wall, General Counsel
Kim Lipsky, Democratic Staff Director
Chris Day, Democratic Deputy Staff Director
Renae Black, Senior Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on November 10, 2020................................ 1
Statement of Senator Wicker...................................... 1
Statement of Senator Blumenthal.................................. 3
Statement of Senator Cruz........................................ 39
Statement of Senator Fischer..................................... 45
Statement of Senator Markey...................................... 47
Statement of Senator Thune....................................... 49
Statement of Senator Rosen....................................... 51
Statement of Senator Capito...................................... 53
Statement of Senator Lee......................................... 54
Witnesses
Dr. Greg Autry, Nominee to be Chief Financial Officer, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration........................... 4
Prepared statement........................................... 6
Biographical information..................................... 7
Daniel Huff, Nominee to be Assistant Secretary for Legislative
Affairs, Department of Commerce................................ 19
Prepared statement........................................... 21
Biographical information..................................... 21
Nathan Simington, Nominee to be a Commissioner, Federal
Communications Commission...................................... 27
Prepared statement........................................... 29
Biographical information..................................... 30
Appendix
Response to written questions submitted to Dr. Greg Autry by:
Hon. Tammy Duckworth......................................... 59
Hon. Jon Tester.............................................. 62
Hon. Kyrsten Sinema.......................................... 63
Response to written questions submitted to Daniel Huff by:
Hon. Maria Cantwell.......................................... 63
Response to written questions submitted to Nathan Simington by:
Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................ 65
Hon. Maria Cantwell.......................................... 70
Hon. Amy Klobuchar........................................... 77
Hon. Richard Blumenthal...................................... 77
Hon. Jon Tester.............................................. 83
Hon. Kyrsten Sinema.......................................... 84
NOMINATION TO THE NATIONAL
AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION,
THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, AND THE
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
----------
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:31 p.m., in
room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Roger Wicker,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Wicker [presiding], Thune, Cruz, Fischer,
Capito, Lee, Scott, Blumenthal, Markey, and Rosen.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER WICKER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI
The Chairman. The hearing will come to order. Welcome.
Today, the Committee will consider three nominations for
important roles within the Committee's jurisdiction.
The nominees before us today are Gregory Autry, the nominee
for the Chief Financial Officer at the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration; Daniel Huff, who has been nominated to be
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Legislative Affairs; and
Nathan Simington, nominated to be a Member of the Federal
Communications Commission. Welcome to all three of you.
The Chief Financial Officer at NASA is charged with
overseeing financial and budgetary matters for the agency. Dr.
Greg Autry has been nominated for this key role.
Dr. Autry previously worked as a Professor at the
University of Southern California and was the Director for the
Pacific Commercial Space Flight Initiative from 2018 until
2020.
He currently serves as the Vice President of Space
Development for the National Space Society. Since 2018, he has
served--since 2018 he has served as a Member of the Commercial
Space Transportation Advisory Committee, COMSTAC.
In 2017, he served as the interim White House Liaison for
NASA. Dr. Autry also has taught at Florida Tech International
Space University Center for Space Entrepreneurship at the
Kennedy Space Center, and that is a mouthful.
Greg Autry received a BA in history and computer science
from California Polytechnic University in 1999. Dr. Autry also
received his MBA from the University of California Irvine in
2002 and his Ph.D. in management, economics, and public policy
in 2013 from the University of California Irvine's Paul Merage
School of Business.
The Department of Commerce has a wide range of policy areas
within its portfolio and the Assistant Secretary of Commerce
for Legislative Affairs is an important liaison between the
department and Congress on all of them.
Daniel Huff is the nominee for this position. Mr. Huff is
currently serving as a detailee through the Office of
Presidential Personnel in the Executive Office of the President
where he works as an Advisor.
When he began his service as a detailee this spring, Mr.
Huff worked for the Department of Housing and Urban Development
as the General Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Office of
Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity where he began working in
the spring of 2019.
However, his home agency employer recently became the
Department of Commerce's International Trade Administration
where he is now a Deputy Chief of Staff.
From 2011 to 2019, Mr. Huff worked as a counsel at the U.S.
House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary and earlier
in his career he worked as crime and terrorism counsel at the
Senate Judiciary Committee.
He received his BA in mathematics, economics, and history
from the University of Toronto in 2002 and his JD from Columbia
Law School in 2005.
The Federal Communications Commission is the Nation's
independent government agency which regulates interstate and
international communications matters.
Mr. Nathan Simington has been nominated to serve as a
member of the FCC for a term of 5 years. From July 1, 2019, Mr.
Simington has been a senior advisor for the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, NTIA, at the
Department of Commerce since June 2020.
Before joining the NTIA, Mr. Simington was senior corporate
counsel for Bright Star Corporation in Miami, Florida, where
his portfolio included wireless credit, mergers and
acquisitions, tower services operations and logistics, head of
security, and regulatory compliance. Prior to joining Bright
Star, Mr. Simington practiced law as an associate at major law
firms in Chicago and Washington.
Nathan Simington graduated from Lawrence University in 2001
with a Bachelor's degree in music and received Master's degrees
from the University of Rochester in 2006 and 2007. In 2011, Mr.
Simington received his JD degree from the University of
Michigan Law School.
I would like to thank all of the nominees for testifying
today and for your willingness to serve in these positions, and
as a matter of fact, some of you went to extra effort to
testify in person and we very much appreciate that.
I now turn to the Acting Ranking Member of the Committee,
Senator Blumenthal, for his opening remarks. You are
recognized, sir.
STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for
having this hearing. Thank you to each of the nominees for your
public service in the past and in the future. Never more
important than we have public servants of integrity and ability
in these kinds of very important positions.
I want to focus on the FCC in particular. As all of us
know, whether we are parents or teachers or involved in our
education system, distance learning has been both a blessing
and a curse.
It has exposed huge inequities in our society from the
homework gap, digital divide, and other kinds of needs that
have not been addressed, quite simply, in providing distance
learning for students during this pandemic. And there has been
simply inadequate access which we need to remedy.
We need to provide electronic devices and Internet access
to low-income students or other students and young people and
seniors.
In Connecticut, a study by the Connecticut Conference of
Municipalities recently showed that 36 percent of our seniors
have no access to broadband connection. Thirty percent or more
in communities of color have no sufficient access.
The FCC needs to do more. After Hurricane Katrina, it did
do more than it is doing now. The FCC took sweeping action to
keep connected those whose lives had been upended by the
disaster and it dedicated $200 million to fund connectivity
efforts.
I have advocated and so have many of my colleagues using
Lifeline and E-Rate to do more.
Mr. Simington, I suggest that that will be a very important
challenge to you and the FCC, going forward, so far unmet.
I also note that you were selected to replace Commissioner
O'Reilly, whose nomination was pulled after he expressed some
doubt about President Trump's Section 230 Executive Order.
Commissioner O'Reilly told C-SPAN that he had, quote,
``deep reservations''. They, meaning Congress, provided any
intentional authority for the FCC on this matter, referring to
Section 230.
In a later speech, he appeared to challenge the Order on
First Amendment grounds. But Chairman Pai and Commission Carr
seemed to be intent on moving forward.
I am very concerned that you have been sent to the FCC on a
mission to execute that Order. In fact, President Trump tweeted
just this afternoon, ``We need action now on this very
important nomination.''
As you may know, it is not that often that the President of
the United States tweets about a nominee appearing before a
Committee that very afternoon, which seems to make clear what
he hopes and expects from you, which I think should trouble us
on this Committee and in the Senate.
The FCC cannot be simply an instrument of political policy
or bullying. This Committee should take seriously the risk that
the FCC will have diminished independence and, in fact, become
a tool of the President, this President, for the next 70-plus
days because that is how long he will be there, but possibly of
the interest groups that have spurred the President's
involvement in this issue.
So I look forward to asking about these topics, but equally
important the others who have been nominated as well to NASA
and the Department of Commerce. These positions are extremely
important and I hope that you too will preserve the
independence of your agencies.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal.
We are going to have opening statements in a moment. But
there is a required question that I think we will get out of
the way before we get into specific issues.
The Committee has a history of asking nominees at the
beginning of the nomination hearings to state for the record
that they pledge to work with Congress and the Committee in a
cooperative manner.
So let me ask you specifically this question. If confirmed,
will you pledge to work collaboratively with this Committee and
provide thorough and timely responses to our requests for
information as we work together to address this important--to
address important policy issues?
Dr. Autry?
Mr. Autry. Certainly, that is critical.
The Chairman. And Mr. Huff?
Mr. Huff. Yes, certainly.
The Chairman. And Mr. Simington?
Mr. Simington. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. OK. Now, at this point, I guess we will begin
with Dr. Autry. Your statements will be admitted into the
record in full and you are recognized for five minutes to
summarize your opening statement. So we welcome you here and
eager to hear from you, sir.
STATEMENT OF DR. GREG AUTRY,
NOMINEE TO BE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER,
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Mr. Autry. Thank you, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member
Cantwell, Acting Ranking Member Blumenthal, members of the
Committee and your staff.
It is an honor to be here, nominated by the President and
considered by this august body for this important appointment.
I am cognizant of the timing of this hearing and thank you
again for being here under these circumstances.
I would also like to thank my wife, Susan, and my son,
Gage, for attending, and my stepdaughter, Kristin, who was
unable to because of the restrictions.
I was raised by a single mother under often difficult
circumstances. Watching Neil and Buzz walk on the surface of
the Moon pulled me from a confusing environment into a world of
amazing possibilities.
I saw a better future for myself, for our nation, and
humanity. NASA's amazing scientific accomplishments in the
robotic exploration of our solar system inspired my choice of a
STEM career in computing. I founded a series of tech startups
and worked as an engineer and a manager in the corporate world.
Upon completing an MBA at UC Irvine's Merage School of
Business, I was invited to join the faculty. I found I had a
real passion for teaching management, entrepreneurship, and
economics to engineers.
I began researching the space industry in 2003. My Ph.D.
thesis explored governmental influence on industry emergence
within the space context.
As a faculty member at USC's Marshall School of Business,
my deep connection with America's traditional space firms and
startups built a reputation as an expert researcher and
commentator on the business of space.
I have also been proud to advocate for human and civil
rights in China, U.S. manufacturing jobs, and the protection of
American intellectual property. I have helped many students
secure space jobs.
I have supported several in their applications to the
Brooke Owens Fellowship, which provides mentoring for
undergraduate women. I have also mentored many startups. One of
these, Relativity Space, has raised over $175 million. They are
using private capital to refurbish older test stands and
buildings at NASA's Space Flight Center.
Serving on the NASA Agency Review Team gave me the
opportunity to delve deep into the agency's projects and
accounting.
Former NASA CFO David Radzanowski has written a letter to
this committee, noting ``Dr. Autry understands the role of the
CFO and its responsibilities. I believe you can count on him to
continue to deliver the high-quality management, oversight, and
reporting that has distinguished the Office of the Chief
Financial Officer at NASA for the last decade.''
The 1,800 employees in the Office of the CFO have been
doing a great job under superb leaders. If confirmed, I look
forward to joining Administrator Bridenstine and his excellent
team in implementing the agency's ambitious goals.
I have been an advocate for NASA's many fold missions
including planetary exploration, astronomy, earth sciences,
aircraft research, and human exploration. I have been a
longtime supporter of the International Space Stations, COTS,
and the commercial crew program.
Reaching Mars via the Moon will require all that America
has to offer. I have been a public supporter of all the
components of the Artemis system including the Space Launch
System, Orion Capsule, and Lunar Gateway.
Artemis gives SLS/Orion a mission worthy of their
capabilities, an issue that concerned me prior to the
administration's bold commitment to deep space exploration and
economic development of cis-lunar space.
NASA's talents, the immense capabilities of its prime
contractors, the innovative spirits of new startups are all
part of national competitive advantage that will make this an
American century in space, returning value to our taxpayers,
and empowering humanity. This task demands innovative financial
leadership that I am ready to provide.
Why spend money in space when we have problems here on
Earth? During Apollo, our Nation was engaged in an intractable
cold war, a bloody ground conflict in Vietnam. There were
bitter disagreements at home over the draft, civil rights,
racial injustice, and women's equality.
Several beloved American leaders were assassinated,
protests roiled our campuses, and riots rocked our cities. The
Hong Kong flu pandemic killed nearly 100,000 Americans in 1969.
Among that chaos, NASA's moon landing stands as an iconic
inspirational moment of those times. Space exploration shifted
our tech sector into overdrive and gave us insights and
solutions for our environmental challenges.
The payback has been huge. America can afford to have a
future. If I am confirmed as the CFO of NASA, I look forward to
working with you to ensure that the funds required to build
that future are wisely spent and accounted for in accordance
with the appropriations of the U.S. Congress.
Thank you again for your consideration. I hope you will
move to confirm my nomination and I am eager to address any
concerns or questions you may have.
[The prepared statement and biographical information of Mr.
Autry follow:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Greg Autry, Nominee to be Chief Financial
Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Thank you, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, Members of the
committee and staff.
It is an honor to be here, nominated by the President and
considered by this august body for this important appointment. I am
cognizant of the timing of this hearing and thank you again for being
here under these difficult circumstances. I'd also like to thank my
wife Susan, daughter Kristen and son Gage for attending.
I was raised by a single mother, under often difficult
circumstances. Watching Neil and Buzz walk on the surface of the moon
pulled me from a confusing environment into a world of remarkable
possibilities. I saw a better future for myself, our Nation and
humanity. NASA's amazing scientific accomplishments in the robotic
exploration of our solar system inspired my choice of a STEM career in
computing. I've founded a series of tech startups, selling a couple of
them. I've worked as an engineer and manager in the corporate world.
Upon completing an MBA at UC Irvine's Merage School of Business, I
was invited to join the faculty. I found I had a real passion for
teaching management, entrepreneurship and economics to engineers. I
began researching the space industry in 2003. My PhD thesis explored
governmental influence on industry emergence within the space context.
As a faculty member at the University of Southern California's Marshall
School of Business my deep connection with America's traditional space
firms and startups built a reputation as an expert researcher and
commentator on the business of space. I have also been proud to
advocate for human and civil rights in China, U.S. manufacturing jobs
and protection of America's valuable intellectual property.
I've helped many students secure space jobs and internships. I have
supported several in their applications to the Brooke Owens Fellowship,
which provides mentoring for undergraduate women. I've also mentored
many startups. One of these, Relativity Space, has raised over $175
million. They are using private capital to revitalize older test stands
and a derelict 200,000 square foot building at NASA's Stennis
Spaceflight Center.
Serving on the NASA Agency Review Team in 2016 gave me the
opportunity to dive deep into the agency's projects and accounting.
Former NASA CFO, David Radzanowski, has written a letter to this
committee noting that, ``Dr. Autry understands the role of the CFO and
its responsibilities . . . I believe you can count on him to continue
to deliver the high-quality management, oversight and reporting that
has distinguished the Office of the Chief Financial Officer at NASA
over the last decade.''
The 1,800 employees in the Office of the CFO have been doing an
excellent job under superb leaders. If I am confirmed, I look forward
to joining Administrator Bridenstine and his excellent team in
implementing the agency's ambitious goals.
I have been an advocate for NASA's manyfold missions including
planetary exploration, astronomy, Earth sciences, aircraft research and
human exploration. I've been a longtime supporter of the International
Space Station, COTS and the commercial crew program.
Reaching Mars, via the moon, will require all that America has to
offer. I've been a public supporter of all the components of the
Artemis program including the Space Launch System, Orion Capsule and
the Lunar Gateway. Artemis gives SLS/Orion a mission worthy of their
capabilities, an issue that did concern me prior to this
administration's bold commitment to deep space exploration and economic
development of cis-lunar space. NASA's talent, the immense capabilities
of its prime contractors and the innovative spirit of new startups are
all a part of the national competitive advantage that will make this an
``American Century in Space,'' returning value to our taxpayers and
empowering humanity. This task demands innovative financial leadership,
that I am ready to provide.
Why spend money in space when we have problems here on Earth?
During Apollo, our Nation was engaged in an intractable Cold War and a
bloody ground conflict in Vietnam. There were bitter disagreements at
home over the draft, civil rights, racial injustice and women's
equality. Several beloved American leaders were assassinated. Protests
roiled campuses and riots rocked our cities. The Hong Kong flu pandemic
killed nearly 100,000 Americans. Amongst that chaos, NASA's moon
landing stands as the iconic inspirational moment of those times. Space
exploration shifted our tech sector into overdrive and gave us both
insights into and solutions for our environmental challenges. The
payback has been huge. America can afford to have a future. If I am
confirmed as the CFO of NASA, I look forward to working with you to
ensure that the funds required to build that future are wisely spent
and accounted for in accordance with the appropriations of the United
States Congress.
Thank you again for your consideration. I hope you will move to
confirm my nomination. I am eager to address any concerns or questions
you may have.
______
a. biographical information
1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): Gregory
Willard Autry, Greg Autry, Greg W. Autry.
2. Position to which nominated: Chief Financial Officer, NASA.
3. Date of Nomination: July 21, 2020.
4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):
Residence: Information not released to the public.
Office: Information not provided.
5. Date and Place of Birth: April 25, 1963; Torrance, CA.
6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your
spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including
stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).
Susan Autry, wife, Retired Public School Principal.
Gage Autry, son, 23, Student, University of Southern
California, Major. Accounting. Graduated June 2020. Part time
employment at Elevated Materials, bookkeeping, customer
service. Currently applying for USAF Office Training School.
Kristen Wilkens, step-daughter, 42, Art Professor, Librarian.
7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school
attended.
PhD 2013--University of California, Irvine, The Paul Merage
School of Business. Management (focus Economics & Public
Policy)
MA 2002--University of California, Irvine, The Paul Merage
School of Business. Masters in Business Administration
BA 1999--California Polytechnic University, Pomona. History
Incomplete (BS) 1982--University of California, Irvine.
Computer Science (left school to pursue entrepreneurial
ventures in technology)
8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all
management-level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to
the position for which you are nominated.
Interim White House Liaison, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), Temporary Presidential Appointment.
January, February 2017
Founder, Southern California Commercial Spaceflight Initiative
University of Southern California. 2018 to present
Assistant Clinical Professor
University of Southern California, Lloyd Greif Center for
Entrepreneurial Studies, Marshall School of Business. August
2014 to present
CEO, Network Corps
Enterprise application development firm focused on Health Care
solutions for Kaiser Permanente. Apple authorized developer.
(Sold network-engineering division to Enhanced Technologies)
January 1997-August 2014
CEO, Wired Images
Digital Web Content production for Internet retailers, sold to
PlanetRx.com. 1999-2000
Technical Services Manager, CompuCom Systems
Managed service operations for IT solutions at CompuCom after
they acquired my startup (Riverside Doctor Micro). 1994-1997
CEO, Riverside Doctor Micro Computer Services
Apple authorized dealer and Computer services firm sold to
CompuCom Systems (NASDAQ: CMPC) in 1994. 1986-1994
Programmer, Hemascience Labs/Baxter Fenwal
Software development for medical device. 1985-1986
Software Engineer, Honeywell Training and Control Systems
Division
Software for production engineering on various military
projects. 1984-1985
Manager, Bronco Computer Store, Cal Poly Pomona
Established campus computer store at the university. 1984
CoFounder & CEO, HAL LABS
Entertainment Software developer. Founded in high-school, this
firm developed Atarisoft PAC MAN for Apple II and was
eventually reorganized by my partner as Future Point and sold
to Blizzard Entertainment. 1981-1994 (full time 1981-1983)
9. Attach a copy of your resume. Attached
10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time
service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other
than those listed above, within the last ten years.
Member, Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee
(COMSTAC), a Federal Advisory Committee (FACA) within DoT.
2018-2019. Reappointed 2020-2022
11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee,
partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any
corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise,
educational, or other institution within the last ten years.
President, Greg Autry Consulting Group, LLC 2019-
President, Netcrew Inc (DBA Network Corps) 1994-2014
Secretary, 121c inc (DBA Elevated Materials) 2015-2016
Board Member, 121c inc (DBA Elevated Materials) 2015-
Advisor, Relativity Space, 2019-
Editorial Board, New Space Journal, 2015 to current
Presidential Transition Team NASA Agency Review Team, 2016-2017
Advisory Council on Sustainability Education, University of
California Irvine, 2012-2013
Leader, U.S. Young Scholar & Experts Delegation to the Republic
of China (Taiwan), 2012
12. Please list each membership you have had during the past ten
years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable,
educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or
religiously affiliated organization, private club, or other membership
organization. (For this question, you do not have to list your
religious affiliation or membership in a religious house of worship or
institution.). Include dates of membership and any positions you have
held with any organization. Please note whether any such club or
organization restricts membership on the basis of sex, race, color,
religion, national origin, age, or disability.
Republican Party (registered voter)
National Space Society, 2017, Board Member, VP
Coalition for a Prosperous America, 2018-, Advisory board
American Jobs Alliance, 2012-2016, Board member
Sigma Eta Pi, 2016--faculty advisor, student entrepreneurship
club
Member, Committee on the Present Danger, China 2020-
Board of Directors, National Space Society, 2018-2020
Vice President of Space development, National Space Society,
2019-
Advisory Board, Coalition for a Prosperous America, 2017-
Board Member, American Jobs Alliance, 2012-2016
I would never join or support any organization that restricted
membership on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, national origin,
age, or disability.
13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office
(elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any
campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are
personally liable for that debt.
I have not been a candidate for an elected public office.
14. List all memberships and offices held with and services
rendered to, whether compensated or not, any political party or
election committee within the past ten years. If you have held a paid
position or served in a formal or official advisory position (whether
compensated or not) in a political campaign within the past ten years,
identify the particulars of the campaign, including the candidate, year
of the campaign, and your title and responsibilities.
Republican Party (registered voter)
15. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar
entity of $500 or more for the past ten years.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R, CA) 2011--$250, 2013--$400, 2014--
$400, 2014--$400, 2016--$400, 2018--$400.
I hosted a small fund raiser at my home for Rep. Rohrabacher in
May of 2018.
Senator Ted Cruz (R, TX) 2018--$400 (from memory, don't find
this online)
Rep. John Culberson (R, TX) 2018--$500
Mark Takano (D, CA) 2013--$50
Chris Hearsey for Congress (D primary MD) 2016--$49
16. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary
society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition
for outstanding service or achievements.
I was elected President of my PhD cohort in 2008.
17. Please list each book, article, column, Internet blog posting,
or other publication you have authored, individually or with others.
Include a link to each publication when possible. Also list any
speeches that you have given on topics relevant to the position for
which you have been nominated. Do not attach copies of these
publications unless otherwise instructed.
I'm a prolific writer and speaker. I have spent some time reviewing
and hired a research assistant to help me compile a list, attached.
18. List digital platforms (including social media and other
digital content sites) on which you currently or have formerly operated
an account, regardless of whether or not the account was held in your
name or an alias. Include the name of an ``alias'' or ``handle'' you
have used on each of the named platforms. Indicate whether the account
is active, deleted, or dormant. Include a link to each account if
possible.
Facebook:
GregWAutry https://www.facebook.com/gregwautry/
Greg.Autry1 https://www.facebook.com/greg.autry1
Active
Instagram
GregWAutry https://www.instagram.com/gregwautry/
Active
(do NOT confuse me with gregautry.cga)
Twitter:
@GregWAutry https://twitter.com/GregWAutry
Active
(do NOT confuse me with @CGAGreg)
19. Please identify each instance in which you have testified
orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
governmental capacity and specify the date and subject matter of each
testimony.
March 21, 2013, Cyber Attacks: An Unprecedented Threat to U.S.
National Security, Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, and
Emerging Threats, House Foreign Affairs Committee
March 28, 2012, The Price of Public Diplomacy with China,
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, House Foreign
Affairs Committee.
20. Given the current mission, major programs, and major
operational objectives of the department/agency to which you have been
nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you
believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for
which you have been nominated, and why do you wish to serve in that
position?
During my service on the NASA Agency Review Team and as interim
White House Liaison, I spent three months of 7-day weeks, reviewing
every program and budget within the space agency along with a team of
experts. I had access to the agency's internal financial documents as
well as well as its leadership and staff. I was briefed directly by and
spent time with NASA CFO, David Radzinowski. I worked closely with Greg
Kennedy, who served as interim CFO as a member of the Trump ``Beachhead
Team'' in 2017. I remain friends with both Mr. Radzinowski and Mr.
Kennedy to this day and have their expertise and experience to call on
at any time. I am well acquainted with NASA's previous and current
leadership including the Administrator, whom I knew well before he was
appointed to that position. I am also acquainted with the leadership at
most of the NASA centers.
I have two decades of research and service within the space
industry. I publish frequently and am often a featured speaker at space
related conferences. This has provided me with a unique standing in the
industry and already have good working relationships with the
executives and representatives of NASA's major vendors. I've also had
the opportunity to work with many other agencies in the space arena
such as FAA's Office of Space Transportation, the Office of Space
Commerce in the Dept. of Commerce and the National Space Council. I
have worked with Members of Congress and their staffs on space policy
issues. I have visited the European Space Agency (ESA) and the Japanese
Agency (JAXA) as well and have cordial relationships there. I believe I
am well respected by almost all the stakeholders that care critical to
the success of NASA. These are relationships most new CFOs would need
to spend years cultivating. A head start on that relationship building
will move the agency forward quickly, at a time when it has a very
aggressive goal of placing astronauts on the Moon by 2024.
Our NASA Agency Review Team established an outline for the White
House's NASA budget priorities. As NASA's White House Liaison and a
member of the ``Beachhead Team'' I assisted in preparing the 2018 White
House budget request for NASA. This included meeting with OMB and
negotiating budget items. I also met with members and staff of
appropriations, commerce and technology committees in the House and
Senate to discuss the agency's requirements and their priorities.
I hold a Masters in Business Administration degree and a PhD in
Management with an emphasis in Economics and Public Policy and in
Strategy. I have 18 years of experience teaching and mentoring business
students. Many of these students are executives or managers at large
firms. My expertise has been in assisting commercial space startups. A
firm founded by two students I've mentored, Relativity Space, has
raised over $175m in venture financing.
I've served for two years on the Commercial Space Transportation
Committee, FACA at FAA. COMSTAC provides input to the FAA's Office of
Commercial Space Transportation (AST) on rulemaking and industry
promotion. I currently chair the Safety Working Group, which is
compiling recommendations for industry guidelines and best practices in
protecting the private civilian passengers on soon to be flying U.S.
commercial spacecraft.
21. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to
ensure that the department/agency has proper management and accounting
controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large
organization?
Pursuant to the Chief Financial Officer's Act, an Agency CFO is
statutorily empowered to ``direct, manage and provide policy guidance
and oversight of agency financial management personnel, operations and
activities'' of their agencies. Managing the team responsible for this
work is the primary function of the CFO. The OCFO is composed of a team
of civil service professionals including three Deputy CFOs and an
Associate Deputy CFO. Each NASA center (research facilities around the
country) has a Center CFO and staff. The professional expertise of
these individuals in governmental cost accounting and in managing the
uniquely high-risk programs is substantial. As Chief Financial Officer,
it would be my responsibility to Manage the Office of the CFO and it's
activities across NASA Headquarters, nice NASA Centers, the NASA Shared
Services Center and one Federally Funded Research and Development
Center (JPL).
The most important specific tasks of the NASA OCFO are:
Providing accurate, timely and actionable budget and financial
information to the Office of the Administrator, to the heads of
the Mission Directorates and to the Center Directors.
Ensuring agency compliance with Federal Law and Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and Federal Account
Standards Board (FASAB) standards.
Ensuring agency systems and internal controls are compliant
with the Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA), OMB
circular A-123 and the Digital Accountability and Transparency
Act.
Providing accurate budget and financial information to the
White House, OMB, Congress and public through the President's
Annual budget, NASA's four-year strategic plan, annual
financial reports and performance plans and in response to
specific requests.
Working with the Executive Office of the President and OMB to
develop the President's budget and subsequently with Congress
for budget approval. The OCFO includes a Agency Appropriations
Liaison specifically tasked for working with the House and
Senate Appropriations Committees and Budget Committees.
Providing tools and research to support NASA mission
development and operations over extended timelines in areas
such as cost estimation, joint confidence levels (cost and
schedule forecasting), independent program assessments and
enterprise risk management. Risk management at NASA is a
singularly important endeavor and crosses many domains
including the financial. It is important to note that nearly
every program at NASA is, by the nature of the agency, an
attempt to accomplish something that has never been previously
attempted by any organization. While our space agency is
renowned for its incredible successes, planning and conducting
operations hundreds or even millions of miles from Earth will
not always go as planned. The anticipated failure rate of
programs at NASA is much higher than at most governmental
agencies. It is also important to recognize that NASA risk
management often incorporates human safety elements,
particularly in the Human Exploration Mission Directorate.
Most NASA programs are multi-year efforts and several span decades.
Delays and budget overruns, while always undesirable, are not
surprisingly common with NASA programs. Providing continuity to long-
run programs and managing down fanatical risk without impeding
innovation or increasing risk to human safety is a task unique to the
NASA CFO. NASA greatly improved its financial reporting and recent
agency audits have praised the agency's efforts.
I've had professional experience working in and managing budgets in
organizations both large and small; from $100,000 to $300 million. Most
budget principals scale to larger baselines. The majority of my
experience has been in entrepreneurial ventures and small businesses
and startups and I view that as a positive. The goal at NASA today
should not be to keep the traditional, large organizational bureaucracy
on course but to do more with less and to do it faster. The practical
and responsive nature of dynamic startup organizations is a perspective
badly needed in governmental agencies in general and in keeping with
the innovative nature of this administration and the space agency
itself.
I have worked within large organizations including the University
of California system, the University of Southern California. In 2017, I
worked at NASA Headquarters coordinating 2018 NASA budget request with
the White House and OMB. This included meeting with Congressional and
Senate appropriations staff.
In the private sector I've been employed by two multinational
corporations, Baxter (Healthcare) and Honeywell. At CompuCom systems I
worked with the approximately $300 million budget for Southern
California operations within a $2 billion budget. I also directed
service teams in multiple locations across the Western United States.
While the services personnel reported to me through my local managers,
constant coordination was also required with the independent sales
managers at each location.
22. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the
department/agency, and why?
#1 The Budget
There has never been a more important time for strategic, space
savvy leadership in NASA Office of the CFO. The agency is facing its
biggest financial management challenge since the days of booming
budgets under the Apollo program. NASA has been blessed with visionary
support from President Trump and Vice President Pence. They have
assembled a highly regarded space leadership team at NASA, the National
Space Council, DoD, OSTP and Commerce. The White House has also issued
an aggressive set of space policy directives and established ambitious
goals for NASA. These goals include a sustainable human return to the
Moon with the first landing in 2024. They have also called for the
commercialization of Low Earth Orbit (LEO Commercialization) and of
lunar resources. These goals are to be achieved with the increased use
of public-private partnerships, cross agency cooperation (NSC, DoT,
FCC, Commerce) as well as increased engagement with and financial
support from our international partners.
NASA has received strong bipartisan support for its work on these
missions and the agency's budget has received the first significant
increase in nearly thirty years. In nominal terms the NASA budget
remained nearly flat between 1992 and 2024 at approximately $19
billion. However, without adjustment for inflation or the growth of
government NASA's share of total Federal spending fell by more than
half, from approximately 1 percent to just 0.42 percent. The White
House 2020 NASA budget request was $22.619 billion, and Congress passed
a $22.629 billion budget, which was signed by the President in December
2019. The President has requested $25.246 billion for FY 2021.
While the budget is larger the goals are even bigger.
``Accomplishing a whole lot more, with just slightly more,'' must be
the agency's mantra. The White House, Senate and House all have
slightly different priorities. The NASA Administrator and CFO are often
in the crosshairs of the fine points of those differences. Meeting the
White House's ambitious goals while maintaining all the programs that
the Congress demands be kept will not be easy to do, nor to explain
even in the best of circumstances. The agency has wisely leveraged
private sector investments to lower NASA's investment and risk via
carefully structured RFPs for the Lunar Gateway and the Human Landing
Systems (HLS). Managing these public-private partnerships effectively
will be crucial to the success of this program and the OCFO will play a
key role in that process.
The recent COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying economic impacts make
these far from the best of times to conduct an ambitious space
exploration program. Framing the NASA mission within the realm of
national R&D and infrastructure development is critical. I have done a
great deal of writing and speaking on the ways in which the space
investments of the 1960s and 1970s fueled the technology driven
economic expansions of the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s. The Congress and the
American public must see the immediate benefits in employment and the
future economic growth associated with NASA's work.
#2 Getting to the Moon by 2024
NASA's headline Artemis program must make rapid, visible progress
in fulling the Vice President's ambitious directive to place the first
woman and next man on the lunar surface by 2024. Significant delays or
failures in this program, could put the agency's reputation at risk and
undermine public support,
Over the last two decades, the agency has suffered a series of
high-profile delays, embarrassments and program cancellations. George
W. Bush's Constellation Program was canceled by an Obama White House
that saw it as behind schedule and over budget. Tepid support from the
Obama White House, under funding and vendor management issues resulted
in delays on development of HEOMDs primary exploration tools, the Space
Launch System and the Orion Deep Space Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle.
Reduced Congressional funding and vendor management issues resulted in
delays for the Commercial Crew systems designed to return Americans to
the International Space Station on U.S. rockets and space craft. The
Obama White House's Asteroid Redirect Mission was also canceled by the
incoming Trump team at the recommendation of the Agency Review Team I
served upon.
I have great confidence that NASA can transcend this recent
history. The agency enjoys a growing budget, bipartisan congressional
support and a very strong new leadership team. Administrator
Bridenstine has demonstrated the agency's new sense of alacrity and
commercial savvy in last year's awards for the Lunar Gateway Power
Propulsion Element (PPE) and Minimal Habitat (MHM). Newly appointed
Associate Administrator Doug Loverro has followed that path with the
selection of three Human Landing System (HLS) systems. The Office of
the CFO will play a critical role in securing and managing the funds
required to complete the Artemis landing, safely and on schedule.
The cooperation of America's best international partners will also
be required to make Artemis a success. Associate Administrator Gold has
been doing great work in that regard with the Japanese and European
Space Agencies. Ensuring that our international partners deliver
funding and real value rather than seeing American taxpayers
subsidizing foreign astronauts will be a critical oversight function of
the OCFO.
#3 Enabling Commercialization
The Space economy is already over $350 billion annually and
projections from Bank of America suggest it will grow to $2.7 trillion
over the next two decades, or roughly the size of the UK economy. The
White House, with broad Congressional support, has called for
Commercializing Low Earth Orbit and the development of lunar resources.
NASA plays a leading role in making this happen and stands to benefit
from cheaper commercial solutions in space transportation, logistics
and communications.
LEO commercialization is case where a relatively small amount of
well-placed NASA funding. Doing so will leverage existing industry
capabilities and attract new private investments that will fulfill both
NASA mission requirements and produce sustainable new capabilities and
infrastructure in the growing space economy. The retirement of the
International Space Station, sometime between 2025 and 2030 poses a
challenge for NASA's access to Low Earth orbit, a vital location for
experimentation and potentially for departure of future space
exploration systems. Abandoning human LEO activities to our
international competitors is not a viable geopolitical choice.
Successfully commercializing operations there will free the agency and
its budget for deep space exploration at the Moon and eventually on
Mars.
NASA's efforts to spark commercial efforts aboard the ISS National
Laboratory via its support of the Center for the Advancement of Science
in Space (CASIS) have been slow and at times, troubled. It is critical
that NASA effectively assist in the transition to commercial space
services in LEO, lead by American firms, without getting bogged down in
the attempt to force the creation of markets or lured into picking the
winners or losers in that market.
b. potential conflicts of interest
1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation
agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates,
clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement
accounts.
Outside of my teaching for USC and International Space University/
Florida Tech (summer), I am occasionally paid small amounts ($100-$300)
when I publish in Foreign Policy or the LA Times. This totaled less
than $2,000 for 2019. I'm a regular Forbes Contributor and they have an
agreement to pay for articles. I've not received any monies and I don't
anticipate it would exceed $1,000 a year at this point.
I am occasionally paid for speaking to groups in public or private
venues or for webinars/conference calls. The paid speeches are
typically on Global Trade and China relations and audiences are usually
corporate executives or investment professionals trying to understand
the shifting trade landscape. (I'm never paid for speaking on space at
conferences).
I have worked several times with Signum Global a US-UK advisory
group. There is no formal agreement, but I am typically paid $1,000 to
$1,500 for a phone call and $3,000 to $5,000 plus travel for a personal
appearance.
I would cease all these relationships upon nomination. There should
be no linger entanglements.
2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal,
to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business,
association or other organization during your appointment? If so,
please explain.
No. I would resign from all such positions upon nomination.
3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in
the position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will
resolve each potential conflict of interest.
I am an investor in 121C Inc. (DBA Elevated Materials). The firm
upcycles Carbon Fiber waste from the aerospace industry into various
products (skateboards, drone frames, drums). I am not involved in daily
operations, but I do advise on business strategy and have assisted with
investor and supplier relationships. The company does regular business
with Toray, SpaceX, Virgin Orbit and Virgin Galactic. It has done work
and is positioning to increase business with most other aerospace firms
and suppliers including Boeing and Northrup Grumman. I don't see any
direct conflict of interest--the scrap upcycling is not of financial
interest to NASA and is broadly supported by all aerospace firms.
However, I would remove myself from my advisory role and any other
functions with the firm.
4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial
transaction which you have had during the last ten years, whether for
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the
position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will resolve
each potential conflict of interest.
I don't see any such situation.
5. Identify any other potential conflicts of interest and explain
how you will resolve each potential conflict of interest.
I have directed a Southern California Commercial Spaceflight
Initiative at the University of Southern California which has received
contributions from the space industry in cash and in kind of about
$40,000 for the period 2018-2019. The funds are primarily used in
support of a small annual academic workshop. For reasons internal to
USC the Initiative has not be active in 2020. I don't really see this
as a conflict of interest, but I would cease my relationship with that
effort for practical reasons. Either another professor would take up
the effort or it would be suspended, and remaining funds returned to
the donors or allocated to other university projects supporting
students and aligned with their wishes.
6. Describe any activity during the past ten years, including the
names of clients represented, in which you have been engaged for the
purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or
modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and
execution of law or public policy.
I have worked for free as an advocate for trade reform and
commercial space legislation. Specifically, I helped the Coalition for
a Prosperous America oppose the Transpacific Partnership (TPP) trade
agreement. This involved writing, speaking and visiting with Members of
Congress and their staff. I was never paid or compensated. My airfare
and hotel were occasionally covered. Coach, and hotels less than $200/
night.
I worked independently as a concerned citizen in support of
increased NASA budgets and the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness
Act of 2015 (CSLA). I met with Members of Congress and their staff to
discuss these issues. Several members of the House Science and
Technology Committee in particular, have respected my input on matters
of U.S. national competitiveness in space and were willing to meet with
me individually. I was acting purely as a concerned citizen and not
paid nor guided by any organization or firm.
Neither of these activities were partisan in nature. Both my
efforts were successful with broad, bi-partisan support. In the space
arena in particular, there was virtually no opposition to the Cruz-
Nelson supported CSLA.
c. legal matters
1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics,
professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a
complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special
Counsel, professional association, disciplinary committee, or other
professional group? If yes:
a. Provide the name of agency, association, committee, or group;
b. Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
personnel action was issued or initiated;
c. Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
personnel action;
d. Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action,
complaint, or personnel action.
No.
2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by
any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal,
State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain. No.
3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were
an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency
proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please
explain.
I had a business dispute that was settled in arbitration in 1994.
4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain. No.
5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual
harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or
any other basis? If so, please explain. No.
6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information,
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in
connection with your nomination.
I cannot think of any specifically.
d. relationship with committee
1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with
deadlines for information set by congressional committees, and that
your department/agency endeavors to timely comply with requests for
information from individual Members of Congress, including requests
from members in the minority? Yes.
2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can
to protect congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal
for their testimony and disclosures? Yes.
3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested
witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with
firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes.
4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly
constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be
reasonably requested to do so? Yes.
______
Greg Autry--Curriculum Vitae
Education
PhD 2013 University of California, Irvine, The Paul
Merage School of Business
Management, Economics & Public Policy (+
Strategy Comprehensive)
MBA 2002 University of California, Irvine, The Paul
Merage School of Business
BA 1999 California Polytechnic University, Pomona
History (+ 72 units of Computer Science)
Academic/Governmental/Non-Profit Experience
Director, Pacific Commercial Spaceflight Initiative, Aldrin Space
Institute 2018-Current (formerly the Southern California Commercial
Space Flight Initiative at the University of Southern California)
Adjunct Professor, Florida Tech/International Space University Center
for Space Entrepreneurship, June 2019-Current (summer entrepreneurship
course at Kennedy Space Center)
Assistant Clinical Professor, University of Southern California, Lloyd
Greif Center for Entrepreneurial Studies, Marshall School of Business.
August 2014-July 2020
Vice President of Space Development, National Space Society, 2018-
Current
Chair, Safety Working Group of the U.S. Commercial Space Transportation
Advisory Committee (COMSTAC), FAA, Two-Year appointment by Secretary of
Transportation as a Special Government Employee (SGE) to Federal
Advisory Committee (FACA). Reappointed for additional two-year term,
April 2020 and appointed Chair of Safety Working Group, May 2018-
Current
Member, Presidential Transition Agency Review Team, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), December 9, 2016-January
20, 2017
Interim White House Liaison, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), Temporary Presidential Appointment. January 20-
February 24, 2017
Adjunct Professor, Lloyd Greif Center for Entrepreneurial Studies,
Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California. August
2013-June 2014
Adjunct Lecturer, Paul Merage School of Business, University of
California, Irvine. 2003-2014
Adjunct Lecturer, Argyros School of Business and Economics, Chapman
University. Spring 2013
Entrepreneurial and Professional Experience
CEO, Network Corps
Enterprise application development firm focused on Health Care
solutions for Kaiser Permanente. Apple authorized developer. (Sold
network-engineering division to Enhanced Technologies) January 1997-
August 2014
CEO, Wired Images
Digital Web Content production for Internet retailers, sold to
PlanetRx.com. 1999-2000
Technical Services Manager, CompuCom Systems
Managed service operations for IT solutions at CompuCom after being
acquired. 1994-1997
CEO, Riverside Doctor Micro Computer Services
Apple authorized dealer and Computer services firm sold to CompuCom
Systems (NASDAQ: CMPC) in 1994. 1986-1994
Programmer, Hemascience Labs/Baxter Fenwal
Software development for medical device. 1984-1986
Software Engineer, Honeywell Training and Control Systems Division
Software for production engineering on various military projects. 1983-
1984
CoFounder & CEO, HAL LABS
Entertainment Software developer. Founded in high-school, this firm
developed Atarisoft PAC MAN for Apple II and was eventually reorganized
by my partner as Future Point and sold to Blizzard Entertainment. 1981-
1994
Boards and Service
Advisor, Relativity Space
Have advised former USC students Jordan Noone and Tim Ellis since the
founding of their 3D Printed Rocket startup. Signed as official Advisor
in 2019. Firm has raised over $175m to date.
Member, Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC),
2018-Current
Federal Advisory Committee within FAA. Appointed by Elaine Chao,
Secretary of Transportation, 2018. Reappointed by Secretary Chao, 2020.
Member of the Board, National Space Society
World's largest non-profit advocacy organization for space settlement.
Founded by Werner von Braun (NSI) and Gerard K. O'Neill (L5). 2018-2020
Board Member, Interstellar Labs
New Space Startup headquartered in Paris, France. Dedicated to
producing enhanced environmental control and life support systems
(ECLSS) via a closed environment habitat (biodome) research and eco-
tourist destination. Facilities targeted for construction in Mojave
California and Kennedy Space Center. 2019-Current
Board Chair, 121C Inc./Elevated Materials
Commercial spacecraft carbon fiber upcycling. Manufacturers consumer
products including three successful Kickstarter campaigns. USC Student
startup. Raised over $1.5million in private investment. 2014-Current
Chair, Southern California Commercial Spaceflight Initiative Workshop,
Los Angeles, CA. October 2019
Speakers I recruited included: Lt. Gen. Steven Kwast (USAF ret.); Kevin
O'Connell, Director of the Office of Space Commerce; Brigadier General
Steven Butow, Defense Innovation Unit.
Chair, International Space Development Conference 2019, Washington,
D.C., Jul. 2019
Speakers I recruited included: NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine. NASA
Associate Administrator for Science Mission Directorate Thomas
Zurbuchen, National Space Council Executive Secretary Scott Pace.
Editorial Board, New Space Journal, 2015-current
Advisory Board Member, Coalition for a Prosperous America, 2017-Current
Board Member, China California Heart Watch, 2011-2012
Board Member, American Jobs Alliance, 2012-2016
Member, White House Presidential Transition Team (NASA) 2016-2017
Senior Economist, Coalition for a Prosperous America, 2013-2016
Member, Advisory Council on Sustainability Education, University of
California Irvine, 2012-2013
Leader, U.S. Young Scholar & Experts Delegation to the Republic of
China (Taiwan), 2012
PhD Class President, The Paul Merage School of Business, University of
California, Irvine, 2008
PhD Dissertation
Title: Governmental Roles in the Emergence of New Communities of High
Technology Organizations
Committee: Peter Navarro, Claudia Bird Schoonhoven, Yan Gong
Proposal Defended: July 18, 2012; Dissertation Defended: July 25, 2013
PhD Awarded: September 2013
Description: This dissertation examined the government influence on the
environment in which a new community of entrepreneurial organizations
emerges. The research context is New Space, entrepreneurial firms
pursuing commercial space launch, satellite and related businesses.
This dissertation contributes to the entrepreneurship, community
ecology and institutional theory literatures.
Research Interests
Governmental influence on entrepreneurial environments
Commercial spaceflight and UAS policy
Innovation policy, trade policy, technology transfer and national
competitive advantage
Publications
Selected Published Academic Papers and Case Studies
Bhattacharya, B., Autry, G & Perry V. 2020 ``Rocketing into the Future
of Manufacturing'', Harvard Business School Publishing Case Catalog
Autry, G. & Obasaju, L. 2018 ``Mojave Spaceport: Entrepreneurship in
the Public Sector'', Harvard Business School Publishing Case Catalog
Autry, G. September 2018. ``Commercial Orbital Transportation Services:
A Case Study for National Industrial Policy,'' New Space Journal. Vol.
6, No. 3.
Autry, G., Huang, L. 2014. ``An Analysis of the Competitive Advantage
of the United States of America in Commercial Orbital Human
Spaceflight,'' New Space Journal. 2(2): 83-110 Based on research
commissioned by the FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation
Autry, G., Huang, L. 2016 Strawther, Zhu, ``XCOR Aerospace: New Space,
New Place?'', Harvard Business School Publishing Case Catalog
Autry, G., Huang L., Dann, Kim, Siward, ``RelishMIX: Building Social
Media Management Tools for Hollywood'', Harvard Business School
Publishing Case Catalog
Autry, G. 2011. ``Space Policy, Intergenerational Ethics and the
Environment,'' Proceedings of the American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics Annual Conference (SPACE 2011), AIAA 2011-7033
Academic Conference Papers and Presentations
Autry, G. and Davidian, K. 2019, ``Process Approach for Organizational
Change and Innovation Research'', Research Caucus, Academy of
Management Conference, Boston MA. Panel: Andy Van de Ven, Jennifer
Woolley, Andy Aldrin
Autry, G. and Davidian, K. 2014 ``Overview of U.S. National Competitive
Advantage in Human Orbital Spaceflight,'' Proceedings of the American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Annual Conference (SPACE
2014)
Huang, L. and Autry, G. ``Rebels with a Cause: Perceptions, Beliefs,
and the Coopetitive Dynamics of Entrepreneurs in the Emergence of the
New Space Industry,'' This paper was accepted for presentation at the
2014 Babson College Entrepreneurial Research Conference
Published Book
Navarro, P. and Autry, G. 2011. Death by China: Confronting the Dragon,
A Global Call to Action. Prentice Hall/Pearson. Amazon Bestsellers Rank
(4/25/2018): #3 International Economics, #5 Political Freedom, #1 Trade
& Tariffs
Textbook Contracted for Publication
Autry, G. Small Business Management: The New Entrepreneurial Dynamic.
Proposal was peer reviewed and has been accepted for publication by
Flatworld. The anticipated publication date is Fall 2020
Book in Progress
Autry, G. The Meek Shall Inherit the Earth: The Entrepreneurial Space
Race. This book will survey the entrepreneurial teams creating
spacecraft technology startups in the emerging community known as ``New
Space''
Selected Business Press Articles
Autry, G. September 20, 2019 ``President Trump's China Policy is
Working, but You'd Never Know if From the Media Reports,'' LA Times
Autry, G. June 20, 2019 ``Space Research Can Save the Planet--Again,''
Foreign Policy
Aldrin B. and Autry, G. September 20, 2017 ``It doesn't take a rocket
scientist to run NASA'', Space News
Autry, G. 2012 ``New Space'', Global Trade: 82-91
Autry, G. and Navarro P. 2009 ``Leveraging Business Cycle Ups and
Downs,'' Financial Executive Magazine: 36-41
Forbes Contributor (regular)
Numerous other pieces in: Space News, The San Francisco Chronicle, The
Los Angeles Times, The Orange County Register, The Baltimore Sun,
Huffington Post
Documentary Film
Navarro, P. (Director); Addis, M.; Autry, G.; Zarinko, J.; (Producers);
Sheen, Martin (narrator), Death by China, 2012
Selected Conference Presentations and Panels
``China U.S. Trade Tensions'', UBS European Conference, London, UK.
November 12, 2019
``The Economist Debate: Free Trade'', World Trade Symposium (The
Economist), New York City, November 7, 2019.
``Mission Opportunities: Gateway to the Three Comma Club'', Panel
Moderator with: General Seven Butow; Col. Charles Miller Belmont; Tow
Cwik, NASA JPL; Steven Isakowitz, CEO Aerospace Corp. Air Force Space
Pitch Day, San Francisco, CA. November 6, 2019
``Failure is an option: Lessons from the Commercialization of U.S.
Spaceflight'', UDIP Conference, Oxford University, UK. Plenary Session,
August 1, 2019
``Japan--U.S. Conference on Peace in Northeast Asia 2019'', Panelist
with former senior US, Japan, Korea, China diplomats and military
leaders, Tokyo Japan, January 17, 2019
``Space Force'', Panel Moderator with: Doug Loverro, former Deputy Sec.
Def.; Terry Virts, former NASA Astronaut; George Nield, Former FAA Ast.
Admin.; Brian Weeden, Secure World Foundation. Politicon, Los Angeles,
CA, October 12, 2018
``Commercial Space Regulation'' Panel Moderator with: Rep. Dana
Rohrabacher, Dr. George Nield, Lorretta Whitesides. International Space
Development Conference, Los Angeles, CA, May 27, 2018
``Funding Innovation'' Space Symposium, Tech Track Speech, Colorado
Springs, CO, May 14, 2018
``Space Policy in the Trump Age'' Space Technology and Investment
Forum, Plenary Session, August 30, 2017
``Commercial Spaceflight'' Heritage Foundation, Eagle Forum Collegians
Summit Washington, D.C., July 19, 2017
``The View from Beijing: Chinese Space Efforts Past, Present and
Future'' Space Technology and Investment Forum, Plenary Session, August
2016
``Debate on the Trans Pacific Partnership v. Dan Ikenson, CATO''
American Manufacturing Strategies Summit, Costa Mesa, California,
November 2015
``Overview of U.S. National Competitive Advantage in Human Orbital
Spaceflight'' American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (SPACE
2014), San Diego, California, September 2014
``Overview of PARTS Analysis'', Emerging Space Industry Leaders
Workshop, Stanford University Department of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Stanford, California, May 29-30, 2014
``Space Policy, Intergenerational Ethics, and the Environment''
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (SPACE 2011) Long
Beach, California, September 2011
``California's New Space Industry''
Panel Moderator, California Democratic Party Convention, Sacramento,
California, April 29, 2011
Congressional and Parliamentary Testimony and Presentations
``China's Endgame Strategy--Leveraging U.S. Capital and Research to
Leapfrog America in Cyber, Military and Space Tech'' Congressional
Defense Forum Foundation Policy Forum, Capitol Hill, Rayburn
Congressional Office Building, Washington, D.C., June 23, 2017
``Cyber Attacks: An Unprecedented Threat to U.S. National Security''
Testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives, The U.S. House Foreign
Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Washington, D.C.,
March 21, 2013
``The Price of Public Diplomacy with China''
Testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives, The U.S. House Foreign
Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Washington, D.C.,
March 28, 2012
``Exposing the Cost of China's Cyber Assault Against America''
Congressional Defense Forum Foundation Policy Forum, Capitol Hill,
Rayburn Congressional Office Building, Washington, D.C., September 20,
2013
``Grounding China's Reality Distortion Field''
Presented at the House of Commons, Ottawa, Canada, November 2, 2011
Grants
FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation grant, $65,000 annually
sub-award via the Aldrin Space Institute, Florida Institute of
Technology. Raised matching funds from industry participants including
Deloitte, SpaceX, Virgin, Aerospace Corp, JPL and NASA Ames. Pacific
Commercial Spaceflight Initiative
Interdisciplinary Teaching Grant, $20,000, Greg Autry (Marshall School
of Business), Dana Milstein (Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and
Sciences--Writing Program), and Vahe Peroomian (Dornsife College of
Letters, Arts and Sciences--Physics and Astronomy)--Terraforming Mars:
A Sustainable Habitation and Development of Humanity's Second Home
Awards & Certifications
FAA Remote Pilot in Charge Certification (commercial drone operator
part 107), April 2017
Microsoft MCSE (certified systems engineer), 1997
Cisco CCNA (certified network administrator), 1998
PhD (peer) Teaching Awards 2010 and 2011, ``Good with MBA Students
Award'' 2012
2012--Outstanding Teaching Assistant: Full Time, Fully Employed, and
Executive MBA cohorts
2011--Outstanding Teaching Assistant: Fully Employed and Executive MBA
cohorts
2010--Outstanding Teaching Assistant: Full Time, Fully Employed, and
Executive MBA cohorts
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Dr. Autry.
Next, Mr. Huff, you are recognized for five minutes, sir.
STATEMENT OF DANIEL HUFF, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Mr. Huff. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, Ranking
Member Pro Tempore. It is an honor to be here. I grew up, of
course, Jewish and I had a number of Catholic friends and they
had confirmations, and I did not. So it is now nice to be here
as a part of a confirmation process.
But, you know, I think that talking about being an honor to
be here, it really is, and it is a phrase that is used, I
think, in a perfunctory way and I do not mean it in that way at
all.
I grew up in Boston surrounded by history. My mother used
to read to me about Sam Adams and Paul Revere and John Hancock
and his big signature, and that really instilled in me a love
for the country and set me on a path to public service.
My first job in Washington was with Senator Specter from
Pennsylvania and I remember sitting behind him in the Senate
Judiciary Committee in the staff row and looking out and just
being so thrilled to even be there, and if you had told me then
that I would one day be on the other side of the dais I do not
think I would have believed you. So I want to say believe me
when I say it really is an honor to be here.
What interests me about the Commerce Department really is
its broad jurisdiction. When I went off to college, I asked my
father, you know, what should I study, and he taught math at
Harvard and he said, well, you know, you really should get the
building blocks of modern analysis, mathematics, economics,
learn some history too, and that will sort of set you up to
understand a lot of very different things.
And so it did, and the Commerce Department looks at marine
fisheries and patents and trade and economic data and all sorts
of tremendously different things, statistics at the Census
Bureau, and just being in an environment where you get to learn
and work with and learn new things every day about new issues
really fascinates me.
But, of course, in any job interview you have to explain
not simply why you want the job but why they should want you,
and I think that I bring to the table certain unique
characteristics.
In particular, I served almost a decade on the Senate and
House Judiciary Committees. That gave me real perspective on
how to serve as a bridge between Congress and agencies, because
I have seen oversight and legislative efforts between Congress
and the Executive Branch from across administrations of both
parties.
I have seen it from both sides. I, essentially, know the
things that--the gimmicks and the games and sort of the
negotiations, the really good things that happen, and I think
that gives me a special perspective and would really situate me
well to be--I do not want to say perhaps an advocate is the
wrong word but a strong voice for Congress's prerogatives with
the agencies.
The other thing that I think I bring to the table perhaps
more of a unique way is as a proven history of coming up with
creative solutions to problems.
I did this for my former boss, Chairman Bob Goodlatte, and
I think--I hope I could do it here, too, because I know between
the Executive Branch and the legislative branch issues arise
and sometimes you have to find some compromise, and I sort of
take--I am not good at everything but I am good at coming up
with fresh ideas and I think that I could come up with a fresh
perspective that, hopefully, can help resolve certain issues in
certain circumstances and keep things between the branches
moving well.
I guess a third point is that on the House Judiciary
Committee I did a lot of work on state issues--issues of state
taxation, and that really introduced me to a lot of state and
local level officials, and I really learned to see how they
view the Federal Government.
And part of the Commerce Department's portfolio really does
deal in trade issues and things that affect states in a very
local way and I think that having those relationships and the
benefit of that perspective will also make me an effective
person in this role, which governs not just relationships
between the Executive Branch and Congress but also between the
Executive Branch and state and local officials.
So, in closing, I want to thank President Trump for
nominating me and my friends and family for being with me every
step of the way.
And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
[The prepared statement and biographical information of Mr.
Huff follow:]
Prepared Statement of Dan Huff, Nominee to be Assistant Secretary for
Legislative Affairs, Department of Commerce
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell and distinguished Members
of the Committee, thank you for allowing me to appear before your
Committee, it is an honor.
Saying ``it's an honor'' is something of a stock phrase in
Washington, but I do not mean it in a perfunctory way. I grew up in
Boston where history was all around me. My mom used to read to me about
Paul Revere, Sam Adams and the Boston Tea Party. It filled me with
pride in our country and set my sights on a path to public service. My
first job in Washington was as a staff member on the Senate Judiciary
Committee. I vividly remember sitting at hearings like this one in the
staff row behind Senator Specter brimming with excitement. If you had
told me then that I would one day be on the other side of that dais, I
don't think I would have believed you. So thank you again for affording
me the opportunity to appear before you as you consider my nomination.
What I love about the Commerce Department is its broad
jurisdiction. From marine life, to the census, to international trade
to patents, it spans a breadth of scientific and economic knowledge
with which the members of this Committee are intimately familiar. When
I went off to college, I was not sure in what to major. My dad, who
taught math at Harvard, suggested a broad path of study. He told me
that mathematics and economics are the language of modern policy
analysis and that I should focus on getting the building blocks. I
added history for good measure. I believe that my broad educational
background in these areas makes me uniquely suited to communicate with
you, if confirmed, about the myriad of issues within the Department's
jurisdiction. I love learning new things and, I know that, if
confirmed, the Commerce Department portfolio would be an endless source
of interesting issues for me to help you tackle.
But of course, as with any job interview, I need to explain not
just why I want the job, but why you should want me.
The position of Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs
requires a deep understanding of both the Senate and House. The
Assistant Secretary serves as a bridge between the Department and
Congress.
I spent nearly a decade as counsel to the House and Senate
Judiciary Committees. In those roles, I was responsible for both
oversight and legislative initiatives. Accordingly, I have deep
experience with, and healthy respect for, the oversight
responsibilities of Congress. I know what it is like to make reasonable
oversight requests only to have them stonewalled by an agency. Having
seen both sides, I will be an effective advocate for Congress's
prerogatives within the Department.
In addition, I have a proven record of finding creative solutions
to problems. As issues arise between Congress and agencies, whether on
oversight requests or constituent needs, I would be able to inject
fresh thinking that could help foster compromise.
Finally, the Assistant Secretary position is responsible not just
for relationships with Congress, but also with the States. As a staff
member on the House Judiciary Committee, I was the lead staffer on a
number of interstate commerce issues, most prominently the Internet
sales tax issue. Through this work, I built relationships at the state
and local level and came to a better understanding of the way that
these jurisdictions view and interact with the Federal government. If
confirmed, I believe this perspective would be valuable in helping to
advance the Commerce Department's trade promotion agenda.
In closing, I want to thank President Trump for nominating me, and
my family and friends who have been with me every step of the way.
With that, I am happy to answer any questions. Thank you Mr.
Chairman.
______
a. biographical information
1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): Daniel Huff;
Dan.
2. Position to which nominated: Assistant Secretary for Legislative
Affairs, Dept. of Commerce.
3. Date of Nomination: 7/21/20 (approximately).
4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):
Residence: Information not released to the public.
Office: Eisenhower Executive Office Building, 1650 Pennsylvania
Ave NW, Washington, DC 20502.
5. Date and Place of Birth: July 2, 1979; Boston, MA.
6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your
spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including
stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).
7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school
attended.
a. Columbia Law School, JD, 2005
b. University of Toronto, BA, 2002
8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all
management level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to
the position for which you are nominated.
a. Detailee, Executive Office of the President, Office of
Presidential Personnel
b. Department of Housing and Urban Development, General Deputy
Assistant Secretary
c. Stonington Global LLC, Independent advisor
d. House Judiciary Committee, Counsel
e. Middle East Forum, Director of the Legal Project
f. Senate Judiciary Committee, Counsel
g. Advisor, Tancredo for President
h. McKinsey & Company, Management Consultant
9. Attach a copy of your resume. See attached.
10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time
service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other
than those listed above, within the last ten years. None.
11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee,
partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any
corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise,
educational, or other institution within the last ten years.
Partner/Founder, YayNay LLC
12. Please list each membership you have had during the past ten
years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable,
educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or
religiously affiliated organization, private club, or other membership
organization. (For this question, you do not have to list your
religious affiliation or membership in a religious house of worship or
institution.). Include dates of membership and any positions you have
held with any organization. Please note whether any such club or
organization restricts membership on the basis of sex, race, color,
religion, national origin, age, or disability.
Republican Jewish Coalition
13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office
(elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any
campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are
personally liable for that debt. No.
14. List all memberships and offices held with and services
rendered to, whether compensated or not, any political party or
election conn1tlttee within the past ten years. If you have held a paid
position or served in a formal or official advisory position (whether
compensated or not) in a political campaign within the past ten years,
identify the particulars of the campaign, including the candidate, year
of the campaign, and your title and responsibilities. None.
15. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar
entity of $500 or more for the past ten years. None.
16. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary
society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition
for outstanding service or achievements.
Harlan Fiske Stone Scholar, Columbia Law School
University of Toronto Scholarship
Howard Ferguson Scholarship; University College, U. of
Toronto
17. Please list each book, article, column, Internet blog posting,
or other publication you have authored, individually or with others.
Include a link to each publication when possible. Also list any
speeches that you have given on topics relevant to the position for
which you have been nominated. Do not attach copies of these
publications unless otherwise instructed.
Eiden Probe, Trump Taxes Raise Similar Questions, The Wall
Street Journal (Nov. 24, 2019), https://www.wsj.com/articles/
biden-probe trump-taxes-raise-similar-questions-11574634388
Robert Mueller Has a Money Problem, The Wall Street Journal
(Mar. 24, 2019), https://www.wsj.com/articles/robert-mueller-
has-a-money-problem-11553468712
Will the Market Adrenaline Last? Fox News.com, May 10, 2010
Why Is America Curbing Free Speech, and Giving Extremists
What They Want? Fox News.com, Sept. 24, 2010
Is the First Amendment in Jeopardy? Fox News.com, Jul. 6,
2010
The latest terrorist tactic: litigation, The Daily Caller,
Jan. 11, 2011
Ayaan Hirsi Ali & Daniel Huff, It's time to fight back
against death threats by Islamic extremists, The LA Times,
Sept. 27, 2010
Profiling airline passengers is constitutional and
effective, The Daily Caller, Dec. 10, 2010
Islamic Extremist Targets Facebook Users, FrumForum, Oct.
29, 2010
The Speech Act should not pre-empt state law, The National
Law Journal, Aug. 9, 2010
A Silver Lining at the Human Rights Council, The Legal
Project Blog, Mar. 26, 2010
Eitan Meyer & Daniel Huff, OIC places the United States in
its crosshairs, The Legal Project Blog, Dec. 27, 2009
Extraordinary Rendition: Constitutional Issues, Law Library
of Congress, Washington, D.C., Dec. 5, 2007. Video available
here.
Islamists New Weapon: Libel Law, FrumForum, Jan 25, 2010,
http://frumforum.com/entry/islamists-new-weapon-libel-law
Lawfare: The Use of Law as a Weapon of War, New York County
Lawyers' Association, with John Bolton and others, moderated by
James Taranto, Mar. 11, 2010. (My remarks focused on how
predatory lawsuits threaten the vital role private citizens
have played in aiding the government in the identification of
terrorists and sources of terror financing.)
Islamists' Twin Assault on Free Speech, teleconference town
hall, Oct. 28, 2010. Audio available here.
I believe I wrote an opinion piece in the university paper
in the 2001-2002 school year regarding terrorism, but I don't
recall if it was actually published and have been unable to
find a copy. If found, I will forward.
18. List digital platforms (including social media and other
digital content sites) on which you currently or have formerly operated
an account, regardless of whether or not the account was held in your
name or an alias. Include the name of an ``alias'' or ``handle'' you
have used on each of the named platforms. Indicate whether the account
is active, deleted, or dormant. Include a link to each account if
possible.
https://www.instagram.com/huffsomefun/?hl=en (dormant)
https://www.snapchat.com/add/huffun (dormant)
https://twitter.com/realdanhuff (dormant)
https://www.instagram.com/danhnffl776/?hl=en (dormant)
https://www.facebook.com/dan.huff.927 (dormant)
19. Please identify each instance in which you have testified
orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
governmental capacity and specify the date and subject matter of each
testimony. None.
20. Given the current mission, major programs, and major
operational objectives of the department/agency to which you have been
nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you
believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for
which you have been nominated, and why do you wish to serve in that
position?
The position of A/S for Legislative Affairs requires a deep
understanding of both the Senate and House. The A/S serves as a bridge
to Congress. I spent nearly a decade as counsel to both the House and
Senate Judiciary Committees. In that role, I was responsible for both
oversight and legislative initiatives. Accordingly, I have deep
experience with and healthy respect for the oversight prerogatives of
Congress. I know what it is like to make reasonable oversight requests
only to have them stonewalled. On the legislative side, I was the lead
staffers on a number of interstate commerce issues most prominently the
Internet sales tax issue. Through this work, I better understood the
importance of strong national frameworks to keep the U.S. competitive
globally.
My broad educational background in economics, mathematics and law
makes me uniquely suited to understand the myriad issues within the
Department's vast jurisdiction from the Census Bureau, to PTO, to NIST
to NOAA.
21. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to
ensure. that the department/agency has proper management and accounting
controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large
organization?
If confirmed as A/S for Legislative Affairs, my role in those
issues would necessarily be limited. That said, I managed over 400
people as a General Deputy Assistant Secretary (GDAS) at HUD. As GDAS,
I introduced a number of' process improvements into daily operations
including a centralized database of' commonly used forms. Prior to
coming to Washington, I was a management consultant with McKinsey and
Company where I helped advise senior business leaders in Fortune 50
companies on management issues.
22. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the
department/agency, and why?
The Census--By law, the President must receive the count by
December 31, 2020, and report to the House Clerk within one
week of the opening of the 117th Congress. Making sure not just
that the that count is done properly, but that it is perceived
as done so it critical. Congress will have many questions
heading in into the fall so it is critical to have someone
there who can serve as an effective bridge.
Fair Trade--With the economy already hurt by the COVID-virus
making sure U.S. manufacturers compete on a level playing field
is even more important to getting America back on its feet. The
Commerce Department needs to redouble its efforts to ensure
robust enforcement of, for example, section 232 tariffs as well
as antidumping and countervailing duty laws.
Leadership in Space--Certain space related responsibilities
have been transferred to the Commerce Department from DOD.
These include critical policies to avoid in-space congestion
and collisions as commercial space commerce increases and
ensure the integrity of space-based position, timing and
navigation services. These duties in the final frontier will
require much analysis and hard work.
b. potential conflicts of interest
1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation
agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates,
clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement
accounts.
McKinsey & Company Retirement Program:
1. Special Situations Enhanced-Liquidity USD
2. Passive U.S. Bonds
2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal,
to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business,
association or other organization during your appointment? If so,
please explain.
No. Per my ethics agreement I will step away from my involvement
with YayNay LLC.
3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in
the position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will
resolve each potential conflict of interest.
None. The OGE has cleared me following my divestiture of stock in
Microsoft.
4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial
transaction which you have had during the last ten years, whether for
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the
position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will resolve
each potential conflict of interest. None.
5. Identify any other potential conflicts of interest, and explain
how you will resolve each potential conflict of interest.
None. I have a passive interest in a startup software company I
founded, YayNay LLC, in which I would no be longer active pursuant to
my OGE agreement.
6. Describe any activity during the past ten years, including the
names of clients represented, in which you have been engaged for the
purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or
modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and
execution of law or public policy.
As part of my approximately 1 month consulting job with Stonington
Global, I advised on their efforts to aid their client B&H camera with
issues relating to sales tax collection legislation.
c. legal matters
1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics,
professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a
complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special
Counsel, professional association, disciplinary committee, or other
professional group? No.
If yes:
a. Provide the name of agency, association, committee, or group;
b. Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
personnel action was issued or initiated;
c. Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
personnel action;
d. Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action,
complaint, or personnel action.
2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by
any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal,
State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain. No.
3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were
an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency
proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please
explain. No.
4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain. No.
5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual
harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or
any other basis? If so, please explain. No.
6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information,
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in
connection with your nomination.
N/A.
d. relationship with committee
1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with
deadlines for information set by congressional committees, and that
your department/agency endeavors to timely comply with requests for
information fron1 individual Members of Congress, including requests
from members in the minority? Yes, to the best of my ability.
2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can
to protect congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal
for their testimony and disclosures? Yes, to the best of my ability.
3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested
witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with
firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes, to
the best of my ability.
4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly
constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be
reasonably requested to do so? Yes.
______
The Chairman. Thank you very much for that testimony.
Mr. Simington, you are recognized for five minutes, sir.
STATEMENT OF NATHAN SIMINGTON, NOMINEE TO BE A COMMISSIONER,
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Mr. Simington. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell,
and Acting Ranking Member Senator Blumenthal and distinguished
members of the Committee, it is an honor and a privilege to
appear before you today.
I am humbled to have been nominated by President Trump to
serve as a Commissioner of the Federal Communications
Commission and it is an honor to have this committee consider
my nomination.
I would like to begin by expressing my gratitude to you and
your staffs. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to meet
with you and discuss issues of great concern to you and your
states.
Now more than ever, during the COVID pandemic,
telecommunications are at the center of how we work, study, and
carry out our lives. If I am so fortunate as to be confirmed, I
commit to continued close engagement with all of you and the
public good.
If the Committee will indulge me a moment, I would like to
recognize my family. In attendance today are my sons, Adrian,
who is 14, and Lawrence, who is eight. My beloved wife, Larisa,
and our son, George, who is three, are unable to attend.
My family is the center of my life and I am greatly blessed
to have their love. I would also like to thank my parents,
Erroll and Ruth Simington, for their constant support and
encouragement. In addition, I would like to extend my
congratulations to Messrs. Huff and Autry on their nominations.
I come before this Committee at a momentous time. America
is where innumerable communications technologies were born,
from the transistor to the laser to the communications
satellite.
The first cellular phone call was placed by an American
engineer on the streets of New York. American
telecommunications innovation has been an enormous boon to the
world.
And yet, too many Americans remain disconnected. As a boy
from a farming family, growing up we had a telephone and three
snowy television channels at our farmhouse.
But my parents had a computer in the basement, too, and it
was my passport to a world of technology and education. I value
connectivity because this childhood experience put me on the
road to appear before this august committee today.
We have a tremendous opportunity before us as a nation to
complete the long project of closing the digital divide. Our
fellow Americans cannot, must not, be left disconnected, even
as communications technology advances. The opportunities before
us will remain beyond our grasp so long as so many Americans
are foreclosed by geographical or other barriers from reaching
them.
Furthermore, for the first time, American
telecommunications leadership may be in question. The
persistence of the digital divide is a factor in this.
If some Americans are denied access to advanced
technologies, we are denying ourselves the benefit of their
contributions and this lack can compound once it becomes
generational. Philo Farnsworth, so the story goes, invented
television image scanning while plowing a field.
May this union of the pastoral and the cutting edge inspire
us to ensure that all of our children are able to fully realize
their potential.
My journey has taken me from my family farm to higher
education and opportunity in America. I was a top lawyer at an
international wireless mobility company and I am now fortunate
to work at the executive branch's telecommunications agency,
the National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
I believe this experience gives me a valuable perspective
on the challenges and opportunities before the industry, the
Commission, and the American people.
So I would like to briefly outline the view and approach
that, if I am confirmed, I would bring to the Commission under
the umbrella of four principles.
First, regulatory stability. We have all reaped great
benefits from vigorous competition in telecommunications. The
Commission must always place the public interest first and to
do so to improve consumer welfare it must be careful not to
chill development by going over the line with intrusive,
disruptive, and burdensome regulation.
Second, universal connectivity. I would like to point out
two success stories, the recent improvements of service and
reach.
Since 2015, broadband has grown much faster and much
cheaper. The volume of data carried over each megahertz of
consumer wireless has increased by over 4,000 percent and we
are much closer to closing the digital divide than we were a
few short years ago.
This is a record to be proud of. If I am confirmed, I will
continue to uphold Congress's mandate to the Commission under
Section 254, while always looking for opportunities to improve
and extend the connectivity.
Third, public safety and national security. Congress has
directed the Commission to keep the spectrum commercialization
pipeline full. But conflicts have arisen with public uses.
Congress, the Commission, and public users can reconcile
these conflicts and get win-win outcomes. The COVID pandemic
has demonstrated the strength of America's networks under
strain while exposing weaknesses in delivery of vital services.
I understand the conflicts and challenges. If I am
confirmed, I will protect public interests even as sorely
needed spectrum commercialization continues briskly as directed
by Congress.
Fourth, public interest. The Commission's efforts are
justified in the end only if the American people are well
served. The Commission must prevent illegal marketing, keep 911
up to date, balance the rights of television companies, and
restrain unwanted robocalls, which is perhaps the issue that
most unifies Washington.
These issues are not as flashy as the policy debates over
spectrum auctions or broadband build outs. But for many
Americans, they are where telecoms' rubber meets the road.
If I am confirmed, I will be a strong advocate for the
Commission's public interest mandates and engage with Congress
and the public in furtherance of them.
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, Acting Ranking
Member Blumenthal, and members of the Committee, please accept
my thanks once more for considering my nomination and I look
forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement and biographical information of Mr.
Simington follow:]
Prepared Statement of Nathan Simington, Nominee to Serve as a
Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and distinguished Members
of the Committee, it is an honor and a privilege to appear before you
today. I am humbled to have been nominated by President Trump to serve
as a Commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission, and it is
an honor to have this Committee consider my nomination.
I would like to begin by expressing my gratitude to you and your
staffs. Over the past several weeks, you have given me the opportunity
to meet with you and discuss issues of great concern to you and your
states. Now more than ever, telecommunications are at the center of how
we work, study, and carry out our lives. Thank you for sharing your
insights on the Commission's role in advancing the public interest;
thank you as well for discussing current challenges and possible
solutions. If I am so fortunate as to be confirmed, I commit to
continued close engagement with all of you in the public good.
If the Committee will indulge me a moment, I would like to
recognize my family. In attendance today are my sons Adrian, who is
fourteen, and Lawrence, who is eight. My beloved wife Larisa and our
son George, who is three, are unable to attend. My family is the center
of my life and I am greatly blessed to have their love. I would also
like to thank my parents, Erroll and Ruth Simington, for their constant
support and encouragement. In addition, I would like to extend my
congratulations to Messrs. Huff and Autry on their nominations.
I come before this Committee at a momentous time. America is where
innumerable communications technologies were born, from the transistor
to the laser to the communications satellite. The first cellular phone
call was placed by an American engineer on the streets of New York.
American telecommunications innovation has been an enormous boon to the
world.
And yet, too many Americans remain disconnected. As a boy from a
farming family, when I was growing up, we had a telephone and three
television channels at our farmhouse. But I had a computer in the
basement too, and it was my passport to a world of technology and
education that was like sheer magic. This was long before commercial
internet, but I have never forgotten the experience of designing an
adder circuit on a fuzzy green screen, with a copy of the 1986 World
Book at my elbow to look up unfamiliar words. I value connectivity in
part because this childhood experience put me on the road to appear
before this august Committee today.
We have a tremendous opportunity before us, as a nation, to
complete the long project of closing the digital divide. Our fellow
Americans cannot, must not, be left disconnected even as the world
enters the fifth generation of wireless communication. The
opportunities before us will remain beyond our grasp so long as so many
Americans are foreclosed, by geographical or other barriers, from
reaching them.
Furthermore, for the first time, American telecommunications
leadership may be in question. The persistence of the digital divide is
a factor in this. If some Americans are denied access to advanced
technologies, we are thereby denying ourselves the benefit of their
contributions, and this lack can compound once it becomes generational.
Philo Farnsworth, so the story goes, invented television image scanning
while plowing a field. May this union of the homely and the cutting-
edge inspire us to ensure that all of our children are able to realize
their potential.
My journey has taken me from my family farm to opportunity in
America. I was a top lawyer at an international wireless mobility
company, and I am now fortunate to work at the executive branch's
telecommunications agency, the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration. I believe this experience gives me a
valuable perspective on the challenges and opportunities before the
industry, the Commission, and the American people. With this in mind, I
would like to briefly outline the view and approach that, if I am
confirmed, I would bring to the Commission. I will discuss this under
the umbrella of four principles.
My first principle is regulatory stability. We have all reaped
great benefits from vigorous competition in telecommunications, enabled
by private infrastructure investment. The Commission must always place
the public interest first. And to do so, to improve consumer welfare,
it must be thoughtful about potential chilling effects on development
if its regulatory efforts go over the line and become intrusive,
disruptive and burdensome.
By sticking to stability, competition and consumer protection, we
stand the best chance of seeing continued telecommunications
development and modernization. We will support innovation and
entrepreneurship and promote consumer welfare. And we will modernize to
continue creating good jobs and increasing productivity. If I am
confirmed, I will support the Commission's ongoing commitment to light-
touch regulation.
My second principle is universal connectivity. The commission's
record over the past few years should be assessed by looking at two
success stories: the improvement of service and the growth in
connectivity. Since 2015, broadband has grown much faster and much
cheaper. Since 2012, the volume of data carried over each megahertz of
consumer wireless spectrum has increased by over 4,000 percent. And we
are much closer to closing the digital divide today than we were a few
short years ago. This is a record to be proud of. If I am confirmed, I
will continue to uphold Congress's mandate to the Commission under
Section 254 while always looking for opportunities to improve and
extend connectivity. The Commission's current efforts to expand access
are exciting. I would love to do my part in delivering on them.
My third principle is public safety and national security. Congress
has directed the Commission to keep the spectrum commercialization
pipeline full, but conflicts have arisen with public uses. Congress,
the Commission, and public users can reconcile these conflicts and
achieve win-win outcomes. The COVID pandemic has demonstrated the
strength of America's networks under unprecedented strain; however, it
has also exposed weaknesses in our ability to deliver vital services.
As a senior advisor at a public agency, I understand the conflicts and
challenges that we face in vindicating these vital interests. If I am
confirmed, I will ensure that public interests are protected while
sorely needed spectrum commercialization continues briskly in
accordance with the will of Congress.
My fourth principle is serving the public interest. All of the
Commission's efforts are justified, in the end, by whether the American
people are well-served by telecommunications. The Commission must
prevent illegal marketing, keep 9-1-1 up to date, balance the rights of
television providers, and restrain unwanted robocalls--perhaps the
issue that most unifies Washington. These issues may not be as flashy
as the policy debates over spectrum auctions or broadband buildouts,
but for many Americans, they are where telecom's rubber meets the road.
If I am confirmed, I will be a strong advocate for the Commission's
public interest mandate functions, and I will commit to having an open
door and top-notch responsiveness to concerns from Congress and the
public.
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and Members of the
Committee, please accept my thanks once more for considering my
nomination. I look forward to answering your questions.
______
a. biographical information
1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used):
Nathan Alexander Simington.
2. Position to which nominated: FCC Commissioner.
3. Date of Nomination: September 16, 2020.
4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):
Residence: Information not released to the public.
Office: National Telecommunications and Information
Administration, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution
Avenue NW, #4899, Washington, D.C. 20230.
5. Date and Place of Birth: January 31, 1979; Saskatoon,
Saskatchewan, Canada.
6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your
spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including
stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).
My wife's name is Larisa Loredana Simington. She is currently a
full-time homemaker and was last employed as a music professor at
Eastern Michigan University, in 2011.
7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school
attended.
Juris Doctor, University of Michigan, 2011
Master of Arts, University of Rochester, 2007
Master of Music, University of Rochester, 2006
Bachelor of Music, Lawrence University, 2001
8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all
management-level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to
the position for which you are nominated.
I worked in various teaching and part-time positions while an
undergraduate and in graduate school. In 2007-2008, I worked for a year
as an assistant at marketRx, a pharmaceutical market-research company
that has since been acquired by Cognizant Technologies. While in law
school, I worked as a research assistant for Prof. Cindy Schipani at
the University of Michigan Ross School of Business, then as a summer
associate at Mayer Brown LLP's Chicago office. Upon graduation, I was a
Public Interest Law Initiative Fellow while studying for the bar, then
formally began my legal career with Mayer Brown LLP upon completion of
the bar exam.
I practiced law in Chicago for four years, with Mayer Brown LLP and
Kirkland & Ellis LLP. During this period, I worked with and learned
from some of the most prominent asset finance lawyers in the world. I
then practiced for two years with Chapman and Cutler LLP in Washington,
D.C., again specializing in asset finance and related areas of
securities and bankruptcy law. In 2017, I was recruited to work at
Brightstar Corp. by the then-head of their financial services group.
At Brightstar, I was core leadership on the financial services
team. We designed and implemented retailer and carrier financial
products currently in use worldwide. This business was very successful
and grew to have the highest revenue per employee of any group within
Brightstar.
Thanks to my success in this area, I found myself asked to take
increasing responsibility. In addition to financial services, I became
responsible for global treasury, distressed credit, acquisitions and
divestments, audit and internal compliance, domestic sales channels,
and our Sprint relationship. In this expanded role, I had daily contact
with the senior leadership team, including the general counsel, the
chief financial officer and the treasurer, and frequent contact with
executives at SoftBank, our corporate parent. I directly supervised all
lawyers worldwide below the general counsel level with respect to any
portfolio under my control. I was the legal lead for over $800 million
of credit facilities worldwide and for an American trade credit program
with an annual turnover of over $4 billion. I turned down a promotion
to Associate General Counsel in order to accept my current position
with the Department of Commerce.
My experience with Brightstar has put me on the front lines of the
wireless industry, from domestic retail dealers to carriers overseas. I
know current economic and financial concerns intimately and I am deeply
informed on accounting, operations, and above all, capital management
issues. To win the race for 5G, establish universal access and fulfill
the mandate of the FCC, America must coordinate across government and
private industry to remove the barriers holding back the dynamism of
our wireless sector. Spectrum initiatives, though necessary, will not
win this race by themselves. America must also help its carriers and
tower companies to maximize capital efficiency while incentivizing the
broadest penetration of advanced technologies into consumer markets. I
know the operational and financial landscape and, as an FCC
commissioner, I will make sure that American. industry has the
assistance and support that it needs to unleash its full creativity on
this issue.
9. Attach a copy of your resume. A copy of my resume is attached.
10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time
service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other
than those listed above, within the last ten years.
I have no previous government experience.
11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee,
partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any
corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise,
educational, or other institution within the last ten years.
Senior corporate counsel--Brightstar Corp. (2017-2020)
Associate--Chapman and Cutler LLP (2015-2017)
Associate--Kirkland & Ellis LLP (2013-2015)
Associate--Mayer Brown LLP (2011-2013)
PILI Fellow--Active Transportation Alliance (2011)
Summer Associate--Mayer Brown LLP (20l0)
GMAT Instructor--Veritas (2009-2010, part-time)
12. Please list each membership you have had during the past ten
years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable,
educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or
religiously affiliated organization, private club, or other membership
organization. (For this question, you do not have to list your
religious affiliation or membership in a religious house of worship or
institution.). Include dates of membership and any positions you have
held with any organization. Please note whether any such club or
organization restricts membership on the basis of sex, race, color,
religion, national origin, age, or disability.
I have been a member of the Illinois state bar since 2011. The
Illinois state bar does not discriminate on the basis of sex, race,
color, religion, national origin, age, or disability. I am a member of
the Kirkland & Ellis alumni organization. The Kirkland & Ellis alumni
organization does not discriminate on the basis of sex, race, color,
religion, national origin, age, or disability. I am a member of the
University of Michigan alumni organization. The University of Michigan
alumni organization does not discriminate on the basis of sex, race,
color, religion, national origin, age, or disability. Other than those
and my church membership, I have no applicable affiliations to
disclose.
13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office
(elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any
campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are
personally liable for that debt.
I have never been a candidate for or held any public office.
14. List all memberships and offices held with and services
rendered to, whether compensated or not, any political party or
election committee within the past ten years. If you have held a paid
position or served in a formal or official advisory position (whether
compensated or not) in a political campaign within the past ten years,
identify the particulars of the campaign, including the candidate, year
of the campaign, and your title and responsibilities.
I am a registered Republican, but otherwise have no memberships or
offices in any party or election committee. I have never held a paid
position with a campaign or served in a campaign in any advisory
capacity or position.
15. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar
entity of $500 or more for the past ten years.
I have never made any political contributions.
16. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary
society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition
for outstanding service or achievements.
University of Michigan Law School--Dean's Scholarship, $60,000
(2008-2011)
Presser Graduate Award, $10,000 (2005)
17. Please list each book, article, column, Internet blog posting,
or other publication you have authored, individually or with others.
Include a link to each publication when possible. Also list any
speeches that you have given on topics relevant to the position for
which you have been nominated. Do not attach copies of these
publications unless otherwise instructed.
While in private practice, I co-authored a client alert titled
''SEC proposes amendments to money market fund rule''. This alert is
available online at https://www.lexology.com/libra1y/
detail.aspx?g=c4731b5d-6999-401b-8682-7d6afd1ff6ee.
While a college student, of legal drinking age, I wrote an untitled
column about craft beers for The Lawrentian, Lawrence University's
student-run newspaper. Most of the columns are not available online,
but I was able to find two archived columns:
``Southern Germany brings tradition and individual talent to
beer'', available at http://www.lawrentian.com/archives/106248,
and ``Let your beer reflect the seasons: May is for light
German beers'', available at http://www.lawrentian
.com/archives/105372.
Other than the above, I have authored no books, articles, columns,
Internet blog postings, or other publications, individually or with
others, and I have given no relevant speeches.
18. List digital platforms (including social media and other
digital content sites) on which you currently or have formerly operated
an account, regardless of whether or not the account was held in your
name or an alias. Include the name of an ``alias'' or ``handle'' you
have used on each of the named platforms. Indicate whether the account
is active, deleted, or dormant. Include a link to each account if
possible.
Major Platforms:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/nsimington
(active account with few posts.)
Twitter: https://twitter.com/nsimington
(nominally active account, 2 tweets, no deleted or concealed
tweets.)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nsimington/
(active account.)
Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/
UCyUXyl_PMKosUGipvdF9GYA
(active account used for media viewing and family videos with
no public uploads.)
Miscellaneous:
https://www.violinist.com/directmy/bio.cfm?member=nsimington
(dormant, last active in 2007.)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/288632l4@N08/
(dormant, still contains a few family pictures.)
https://www.chess.com/member/nsimington
(active.)
https://www.hulver.com/scoop/user/nathan/
(dormant, last active in 2014.)
Google+ account linked to my gmail account; this was dormant at
the time that Google+ was discontinued in 2019.
19. Please identify each instance in which you have testified
orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
governmental capacity and specify the date and subject matter of each
testimony.
I have never testified before Congress in any capacity either
orally or in writing.
20. Given the current mission, major programs, and major
operational objectives of the department/agency to which you have been
nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you
believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for
which you have been nominated, and why do you wish to serve in that
position?
I currently serve as Senior Advisor at the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) within the
Department of Commerce. NTIA serves as the President's principal
advisor on telecommunications policies and shares, with the FCC, the
task of regulating the use of wireless spectrum in the United States.
In this role, I have worked on a wide variety of broadband and spectrum
matters, including the American Broadband Initiative, FirstNet, the
World Radiocommunication Conference, and interagency spectrum
management and repurposing initiatives. I also work on securing global
supply chains and initiatives to replace existing insecure wireless
infrastructure.
I have extensive experience working on telecommunications issues in
the private sector. For over three years, I worked at a global
telecommunications company that provided logistics, consulting and
operations services to most of the world's most important manufacturers
and wireless carriers, as well as industry intermediaries such as
distributors and insurance companies. In this job, I quickly rose to
become the top internal attorney beneath the general counsel and
frequently served as the lead attorney to senior executives and the
board of directors on ``bet-the-company'' issues.
Prior to my in-house experience, I worked as counsel for prominent
law firms, including both Kirkland & Ellis and Mayer Brown. In those
jobs, I routinely lead deals with complex regulatory requirements,
including liaison work with the SEC to bring over $50 billion of trust
assets into compliance with new regulatory requirements. I also worked
on utility projects and on wireless device and cell tower deals, thus
becoming familiar with the legal and business nuances of each.
My public and private-sector experience provides me with the
background needed to help the FCC carry out its vital
responsibilities--from extending America's global leadership in 5G and
other next-generation technologies, to ensuring the security of
America's networks and supply chains, to promoting the buildout of
high-speed networks to every community in this country.
America has been the world leader in telecommunications since the
earliest days of radio. Beyond technological leadership, America has
also led the world in connectivity. We must remain true to our heritage
in pursuing the goal of universal access to the latest and foremost
communication technologies.
Now, for the first time, strategic rivals have emerged to threaten
American primacy and, thereby, our economic position, our technological
leadership, our national security, and our promises to the American
people of continuing leadership and access to advanced
telecommunications. My experience in cutting-edge management practices
in the wireless industry gives me a window into the challenges facing
every wireless-industry executive team. My experience at NTIA gives me
a front-line perspective on the challenges of onshoring and secure
supply chains. As a commissioner, I would work with companies across
the telecommunications sector to identify and resolve current
challenges, and I would do so without either weakening the market model
that American freedom requires or placing undue burdens on the public
purse. In particular, the Universal Service Fund (USF) managed by the
FCC is a key component by which America ensures that all citizens are
able to obtain necessary telecommunications access. My expertise in
telecommunications finance will help the FCC in its mission to make the
most of the USF in order to benefit all Americans, including those
whose communities are currently underserved or for whom access is
prohibitively expensive.
This is a vital part of fostering a competitive and dynamic market
for wireless innovation. With 50 percent of worldwide Internet use
taking place via smartphone, and 20 percent of Americans using
smartphones as their sole Internet device, there is no closing the
digital divide without careful attention to cost barriers imposed by
device and service costs. To extend American leadership in 5G wireless
and win the race to nationwide universal 5G, the FCC must engage
productively with industry to reach free-market solutions to current
capital constraints. The FCC's expert work on spectrum will be
complemented and strengthened by work on the financial front. I have
the necessary industry insight to solve these problems, and I believe
that this is the most impactful work I could do to strengthen America
and help the American people. I want my children to grow up in an
America full of renewed promise and true to the American heritage of
innovation and achievement.
21. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to
ensure that the department/agency has proper management and accounting
controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large
organization?
I have extensive relevant real-world management experience. I
worked closely with my former employer's CFO and Treasurer on a daily
basis. I have managed many billion-dollar bond deals. I closed one of
the largest asset-based loans in the wireless industry during the COVID
crisis, and I designed complex accounting-based financial products in
present use worldwide. Additionally, as senior counsel at my former
employer, I led the legal team for data-security auditing and
compliance. This required an organization-wide audit and validation of
controls of all kinds. In order to obtain the necessary certifications,
we had to examine every contract and process to make sure that our
clients could have total faith in our data integrity and security when
we were handling sensitive personal or health data.
I am very familiar with lean, high-productivity operations. I was
core management on our product team with highest profitability per
employee; we reached this goal by constantly working to identify the
best uses of resources and exercising great care in our choices about
where to allocate them. I am also familiar with fraud identification
and examination techniques. As a commissioner, I would work closely
with the Office of the Managing Director to obtain necessary reporting
before formulating my own assessment of controls and audit reports. I
would work with the audit team to ensure that controls are
affirmatively followed and understood at the operational level. And I
would contact other agencies to determine their concerns, if any, with
present FCC processes and outcomes.
This experience will prove especially relevant to management and
oversight of the USF. The USF supplies vital programs relating to
universal access. As an FCC commissioner, I will ensure careful
oversight of the USF to maintain public confidence in the FCC's
stewardship and continued success in its mission.
22. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the
department/agency, and why?
The FCC faces many challenges. The first major challenge is freeing
spectrum for consumer use while ensuring that Federal agencies can
continue to carry out their missions unobstructed. This poses technical
and regulatory obstacles to private and public actors as we work
together to win the race to 5G. Winning this race will provide a
cornucopia of great innovations to all Americans. These include low-
latency industrial controls through the ``Internet of Things'', new
personal medical devices and telemedicine to improve pandemic
responses, and even self-driving cars. 5G is how we will reach the
promise envisioned in 1990s in the earliest days of consumer internet.
But to get there, we must harmonize these new spectrum and bandwidth
needs with established defense and infrastructure needs. Regulators,
agencies and industry must collaborate to find the best outcome for
all.
The second major challenge is telecommunications supply chain
security. Achieving true supply-chain security will include reforms at
all levels, including software audits, semiconductor manufacturing re-
onshoring, tower equipment pulls and replacements, and the fostering of
a stronger domestic high-tech sector. Secure supply chains will be a
boon to all Americans, bolstering national security, preventing
industrial espionage and ensuring the security of personal data. This
also represents an opportunity to accelerate the buildout of more
modern Internet and wireless infrastructure. The FCC already plays a
significant role in this effort, but it will remain a challenge for
years to come.
The third major challenge is closing the digital divide to reach
full digital inclusion. To reach this goal, the FCC must foster
continued growth in connectivity without undermining market-based
solutions. The FCC will achieve this by an intelligent use of
regulatory and oversight powers to encourage coordination between
government and industry to achieve widespread prosperity and
sustainable progress.
b. potential conflicts of interest
l. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation
agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates,
clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement
accounts.
I have no such financial arrangements other than interests in three
retirement accounts. One of my retirement accounts is a Vanguard
account sponsored by Kirkland and Ellis. The second is an interest in
the Chapman and Cutler master trust operated by OneAmerica. The third
is a JP Morgan account sponsored by Brightstar. Upon appointment, I
would divest from all of these and roll the funds into my present U.S.
Government retirement account.
2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal,
to maintain employment affiliation, or practice with any business,
association or other organization during your appointment? If so,
please explain.
I have no such commitments, agreements or expectations, whether
formal or informal.
3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in
the position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will
resolve each potential conflict of interest.
I have no such investments, obligations, liabilities or other
relationships.
4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial
transaction which you have had during the last ten years, whether for
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the
position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will resolve
each potential conflict of interest.
I have no such business relationship, dealing or financial
transaction potentially constituting or resulting in an actual or
possible conflict of interest.
5. Identify any other potential conflicts of interest, and explain
how you will resolve each potential conflict of interest.
My present agency, NTIA, is a co-regulator of wireless spectrum
with the FCC. NTIA is also the President's advisor on
telecommunications policy. In both capacities, NTIA routinely
communicates with and petitions the FCC. As an FCC commissioner, I
would not allow this present institutional affiliation to affect my
judgment or decisions relating to matters before or involving the FCC.
Furthermore, the FCC is an independent agency, so as an FCC
commissioner, I would have heightened accountability to Congress as
well as the executive branch. In my opinion, I have not had involvement
with any NTIA matters currently before the FCC to an extent requiring
recusal, but in any situation involving a potential conflict of
interest, I would seek advice from Federal ethics counsel prior to
taking any action.
6. Describe any activity during the past ten years, including the
names of clients represented, in which you have been engaged for the
purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or
modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and
execution of law or public policy.
I have never been involved in any activities in which I was engaged
for the purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage,
defeat or modification of any legislation or affecting the
administration and execution of law or public policy.
c. legal matters
1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics,
professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a
complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special
Counsel, professional association, disciplinary committee, or other
professional group? If yes:
a. Provide the name of agency, association, committee, or group;
b. Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
personnel action was issued or initiated;
c. Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
personnel action;
d. Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action,
complaint, or personnel action.
I have never been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics,
professional misconduct, or retaliation, or been the subject of a
complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special
Counsel, professional association, disciplinary committee, or other
professional group.
2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by
any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal,
State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain.
I have never been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by any
law enforcement authority, whether Federal, State, or otherwise, other
than for a minor traffic offense.
3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were
an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency
proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please
explain.
Neither I, nor any business or nonprofit of which I am or were an
officer has ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency
proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation, with the
following exceptions:
1. Brightstar Corp. As a large international corporation,
Brightstar Corp. routinely engages in civil litigation as both
plaintiff and defendant. Brightstar Corp. is not, on information and
belief, currently implicated in any administrative proceedings. On
information and belief, there are four currently pending civil cases in
the United States to which either Brightstar Corp. or its primary
United States operating company, Brightstar US, LLC, are a named party:
Ben Nash v. Brightstar Corp., Case no. 3D19-2093, before the
Third District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida, and
Brightstar Corp. v. Chaim Tzvi Nash AKA Ben Nash, and PCS
Wireless, LLC, Case no. N20M-09-011, before the Delaware
Superior Court. These cases involve a dispute over certain used
wireless devices and associated pricing practices. The amount
in controversy is approximately $10 million.
Brightstar US, LLC vs. Reliance Communications, LLC, Case no.
0611601/2019 before the New York Superior Court. This case is a
suit brought by Brightstar against a wireless device
distributor for nonpayment. The amount in controversy is
approximately $6 million.
Brightstar Corp. et al., v. Warren Barthes et al., Case no.
2019-030740-CA-01, before the Circuit Court for the Third
District of the State of Florida. This case is a suit brought
by Brightstar against the former owner of a business acquired
by Brightstar alleging malfeasance prior to and subsequent to
acquisition. The amount in controversy is approximately $10
million.
2. NTIA. As a major Federal government agency, NTIA is routinely a
party to administrative proceedings and is also involved in civil
litigation from time to time. However, the NTIA is currently not party
to any administrative proceedings.
The sole currently pending Federal case to which NTIA is a named
party is In Re Subpoena to National Telecommunications and Information
Administration, Case No. 1:19-mc-00040-RDM. This matter is before the
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. NTIA was subpoenaed
by Frontier to produce records related to a qui tam case involving a
Broadband Technology Opportunities Program grant, which is pending in
U.S. District Court in the Southern District of West Virginia--CityNet,
LLC v. Frontier West Virginia Inc., et al., (Case No. 2:14-CV-15947).
The U.S. Government declined to intervene in the qui tam case. The
subpoena matter has been stayed since April 16, 2020, pending the
resolution of the Frontier bankruptcy proceedings. NTIA is represented
by the Office of the U.S. Attorney/District of Columbia in the subpoena
matter.
Additionally, there are two matters in which NTIA officials acting
in their official capacities are named defendants.
The first is Rock the Vote. et al., v. Trump. et al., Case No.
3:20-cv-06021. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California on August 27, 2020. The plaintiffs have
asserted various First Amendment claims against NTIA Deputy
Administrator Doug Kinkoph, as well as President Trump, Attorney
General Barr, Secretary Ross and OMB Director Russell Vought in their
official capacities. The Department of Justice/Civil Litigation/Federal
Programs is representing the U.S. Government in this case.
The second is a complaint filed in Canada on August 24, 2020, by
one Graham Schreiber, against various defendants, including current and
former U.S. Government officials. The subject of the complaint appears
to be Internet domain names. NTIA Sr. Telecommunications Policy Advisor
Suzanne Radell, who has served as a U.S. Government representative on
the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Governmental
Advisory Committee, is named in the complaint (along with almost 100
other individuals and companies). The Department of Justice/Civil
Litigation/Office of Foreign Litigation is representing the U.S.
Government and is working through local counsel in Canada and through
the State Department to assert the U.S. Government's sovereign immunity
to the suit.
4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain.
I have never been convicted, pled guilty, or pied nolo contendere
to any criminal violation other than a minor traffic offense.
5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual
harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or
any other basis? If so, please explain.
I have never been accused, formally or informally, of sexual
harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or
any other basis.
6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information,
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in
connection with your nomination.
I do not feel that there is any additional information that should
be disclosed in connection with my nomination.
d. relationship with committee
1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with
deadlines for information set by congressional committees, and that
your department/agency endeavors to timely comply with requests for
information from individual Members of Congress, including requests
from members in the minority?
Yes, absolutely. The FCC's nature, as an independent agency
established by statute, makes it especially accountable to Congress.
Insufficient responsiveness to Congress, including individual Members,
calls the democratic mandate of the FCC into question. It would be a
staffing priority for me to establish dedicated outreach channels in
order to strengthen my connection to both sides of the congressional
aisle, and I would be certain to treat requests from members in the
minority with the utmost attention and respect.
2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can
to protect congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal
for their testimony and disclosures?
Yes, unquestionably. Whistleblowers can be unpopular among
established members of a bureaucracy, including upper management.
However, as a corporate lawyer, I firmly believe that suppressing the
truth always makes everything worse, and the truth always, always comes
out. Internal malfeasance festers and can bring healthy companies down,
ruining the livelihoods of thousands of innocent people.
I believe whist]eblowers are a vital and valuable resource to any
organization. I have no prior Washington career and have no commitment
to bureaucratic continuity to weigh against my intention to expose and
resolve problems as soon as they manifest. I find the idea of
retribution against witnesses viscerally offensive and damaging to any
agency's democratic mandate--no officer of an agency has any legitimate
power except that which is delegated to them by the American people in
accordance with the Constitution.
3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested
witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with
firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee?
I will do so with pleasure. Congress has entrusted the FCC with a
large budget drawn from regulatory fees; these fees are charged for
access to resources held in trust for the American people. FCC
personnel have been entrusted with the money, time and position to
become some of the foremost experts in the world on their technical and
regulatory issues. This includes an obligation to inform Congress,
especially through its designated Committee, of the fruits of this
expertise in comprehensive but digestible formats. If the FCC fails in
this duty, it is depriving Congress of the power to legislate
appropriately, so this is a major public trust.
4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly
constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be
reasonably requested to do so?
It would be both my duty and pleasure to testify before any such
committee at any time and for any reason that such committee deemed
appropriate.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Simington, and thank
you all.
Senator Cruz has a tight connection to a flight back home
to Texas and so I am going to let him step in front of me and,
Senator Cruz, you are recognized for five minutes, sir.
STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ,
U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS
Senator Cruz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your
graciousness. As you noted, you now have an enormous chit in
your pocket, which I expect you to call in at some point.
Dr. Autry, let us start with you, and as you may recall in
2015 President Obama signed my bill, the Commercial Space
Launch Competitiveness Act, into law, and a follow up to that
legislation, the Space Frontier Act, passed the Senate last
Congress.
A provision of that legislation authorizes a lower Earth
orbit commercialization program. In your judgment, how much
progress do you expect the agency to make in the next 5 years
for commercialization planning and what support does the agency
need from Congress to boost commercialization efforts?
Mr. Autry. Thank you, Senator Cruz.
I do not know if you recall, we had a breakfast in a
McDonald's in John Wayne Airport a couple years ago before we
were both on a flight to Houston. I think I thanked you then. I
would like to thank you again for your support of space and, in
particular, the 2015 Commercial Space Launch Act and the
follow-up legislation.
LEO commercialization is important. As you know, there has
been some fits and starts. To be clear, the job of CFO at NASA
is not a policy position and my job is to make sure that we do
what you folks want done and that we report back to you
accurately that it has been done.
That said, my personal opinion is that it is critically
important that we need to get everything we can out of our huge
investment and the partners' investment in the International
Space Station.
I believe there has been progress at CASIS and ISSNL after
some fits and starts in that. I am glad to see that the PORT
has been assigned to a vendor that will add an additional
module specifically for commercial development.
As you may know, there have not been funds coming forward
for the Free Flyer program and I understand there are differing
opinions on that.
I look forward to getting into the agency and understanding
what they intend to do with the $15 million they do have for
that money and what their objectives are and report back to you
at that time on what I have learned.
But at this point, I do not have any further details on
that other than I support, in general, where we are going and
getting everything we can out of station.
Senator Cruz. Well, I appreciate that very much, Dr. Autry,
and you have shown to the folks at home just how sexy and
glamorous working in the space industry is. Having breakfast at
McDonald's in John Wayne Airport is pretty highfalutin.
Mr. Autry. And Senator Cruz flies coach. I can tell you
that.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cruz. A lot.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cruz. I try to do my part.
All right. Let us shift. I look forward to working with you
on these issues and also working with you on issues concerning
royalties for inventions and discoveries on station.
That has been an issue we have been working in a bipartisan
manner in this committee and working with NASA, and so I look
forward to working with you, going forward, on those issues.
Mr. Autry. Good. Again, it is not a policy position, but I
think there is opportunities there that the CFO can engage in
with your leadership.
Senator Cruz. Thank you.
Mr. Simington, let us shift to a very important topic, Big
Tech. As you know, I have been very vocal that I am deeply
concerned about the conduct of Big Tech and I think Big Tech's
pattern of censorship and silencing views with which they
disagree poses the single greatest threat in this country we
have to free speech and poses the greatest threat we have to
our democracy.
What are your views on the issue of Big Tech censorship?
Mr. Simington. Thank you very much, Senator. In brief, the
question of Big Tech censorship is--although it is not
primarily the concern of the FCC, I do not believe,
nonetheless, these are issues of great concern to all of us.
I think there has been an implicit bargain struck that we
are now starting to call into question that there would be an
open Internet with a free exchange of ideas and freedom as the
primary basis.
There is nothing--there is nothing illegal about having a
partisan website or about having partisan traffic online, or
about determining what sort of views should be allowed on a
website and, of course, we would not want to contravene the
First Amendment.
But, on the other hand, I think a lot of people have found
themselves recently unable to establish certainty about what
they can say online, what will happen to the content of their
speech and where, if not on the most popular venues or the
venues with the greatest functionality, where online they are
actually able to speak at all.
Senator Cruz. As you know, Chairman Pai has announced a
rulemaking on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Do
you agree that that rulemaking is a good idea? Do you think
Section 230 is in need of reform?
Mr. Simington. Senator, I do, and I note that the General
Counsel of the FCC has outlined the process by which he
believes it is proper to accept jurisdiction.
Senator Cruz. Thank you, and I would ask if you are
confirmed that you keep front and center the free speech values
embodied in our First Amendment and the necessity of robust
open debate.
The most recent step of Big Tech censoring the New York
Post, a major media outlet, constituted a dramatic escalation
in those censorship efforts, and I think this is going to be an
ongoing issue that we will wrestle with on the executive side
and the legislative side for a long time.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. And thank you, Senator Cruz. Safe--and safe
travels to you.
Senator Blumenthal.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As you may know, Mr. Simington, I have been a leading
advocate of reform of Section 230 in the U.S. Senate and,
certainly, a--I hope an advocate of free speech values.
But I will be very blunt with you, I am deeply concerned
that the President's Executive Order is, in effect, an assault
on the credibility and legitimacy of the FCC. The NTIA, during
your time there, in effect, acted as an arm of the President in
supporting seeming retaliation against political rivals.
Specifically, consumers deserve an independent FCC free
from political interference and possible manipulation, whether
it is on Section 230 or anything else, and I would like to know
whether you helped to draft the NTIA's petition for rulemaking
on Section 230?
Mr. Simington. Thank you. Thank you, Senator.
Yes, I played a minor role in drafting the petition. The
petition's substantive legal arguments had been, largely,
outlined prior to my joining the NTIA.
But there is a lot of work in bringing a piece of legal
work to completion. I helped with the blocking and tackling. I
helped with editing and cite checking.
I, of course, discussed with the other members of the NTIA
political staff the public relations and responses. Once it
became clear that I was to be considered for this position that
we are--the nomination which we are discussing today, then at
that point I ceased any active work on the petition whatsoever
and I was not involved in any of the drafts of response
comments.
Senator Blumenthal. Well, you wrote a document to the
Americans for Tax Reform to promote the Executive Order, didn't
you?
Mr. Simington. No. I am afraid, Senator, I do not believe
that I ever sent a document to Americans for Tax Reform in any
capacity.
Senator Blumenthal. Did you take other steps to promote or
defend the NTIA petition after it was published?
Mr. Simington. One strategy item that was discussed that
never came to fruition was to draft an op-ed for the agency
head to place in the New York--I am sorry, in the--in the Wall
Street Journal.
I believe that op-ed was proposed, discussed, edited, but
it did not, ultimately, wind up being submitted.
Senator Blumenthal. So your active involvement was before
the NTIA petition was submitted?
Mr. Simington. I am sorry if I have been unclear, Senator.
My involvement with the petition continued briefly after it was
submitted, probably two or three weeks. As far--however, it
terminated prior to the NTIA response.
Senator Blumenthal. Well, let me--let me come back. The
Americans for Tax Reform, you submitted in a private forum?
Mr. Simington. No, I have never submitted a document of any
kind to Americans for Tax Reform, Senator.
Senator Blumenthal. Did you present orally?
Mr. Simington. No, I have never presented--I have never
given any kind of formal presentation or address to Americans
for Tax Reform.
Senator Blumenthal. Did you--have you had any discussions
with the White House about the issue of the FCC's planned
rulemaking on Section 230?
Mr. Simington. No, I have not discussed planned--any
contemplated future action of the FCC on the part of 230 with
the White House.
Senator Blumenthal. How about on the topic of Section 230
reform?
Mr. Simington. Yes. During the time when I was being
considered for nomination to the FCC, I had a conversation
about a variety of topics of which 230 was a relatively minor
part with members of the Presidential Personnel Office.
Senator Blumenthal. Well, in light of your participation in
the NTIA petition and your discussions with the White House, I
think you need to commit now to recuse yourself from voting on
rulemaking with respect to Section 230.
Will you commit to do so?
Mr. Simington. I appreciate the question, Senator. In my
judgment, which I do not consider final, I believe it would be
premature to make such a commitment. As----
Senator Blumenthal. Why would it be premature to make such
a commitment? You have been involved in this issue in a formal
way in an organization that has, in effect, advocated the
President's position and you have talked to the White House
about that position.
Mr. Simington. Yes, that is correct. It would be--Senator,
it would be difficult to avoid the conversational topic. It was
not the focus of my conversations at the White House.
However, I appreciate your concerns, and if I am confirmed,
the first thing that I will do will be to go to the FCC Ethics
Office and discuss this matter in detail and, of course, will
abide by the recommendations as to recusal.
Senator Blumenthal. On another matter, do you believe that
the FCC has the ability to interpret E-Rate rules to allow
schools to use their funds for students who are stuck at home
right now?
Mr. Simington. That is an excellent question, Senator, and
one of--a matter of grave concern to us all because, as many
people say, the schoolroom has become the kitchen table.
Senator Blumenthal. Well, will you commit to interpreting
the E-rate rules to allow schools to use their funds for
students to do that?
Mr. Simington. I sympathize with the result of--such a
commitment would entail and, of course, I would pursue whether
it would be possible to make that determination if appointed to
the Commission.
I am not privy to the Commission's internal deliberations
in determining that that was not the interpretation that they
wished to adopt and----
Senator Blumenthal. Let me ask you, in the past I have
asked the Chairman of the FCC to commit to using Lifeline funds
for this purpose.
Just one more question, Mr. Chairman.
Will you commit to using at least $1 billion for Lifeline?
Mr. Simington. I believe the current Lifeline budget is
about $2.4 billion of which about $900 million and some is
actively used. There is capacity for more of Lifeline to be
used and I would be delighted to explore with you and your
office and the Commission, if confirmed, methods of doing so.
Senator Blumenthal. Let me just say, Mr. Simington, I am
deeply troubled by your lack of specificity on E-rate funds, on
Lifeline, but most important, your apparent refusal to commit
to recusing yourself, and I will put a hold on your nomination
as long as you decline to make that commitment because I
believe that the independence of the FCC above all, whether we
agree or disagree with the outcome of its decision, is of
paramount value.
And I know that you have been sent to the FCC instead of
Mr. O'Reilly because he was fired. He stood up to the
President. We need the FCC to be independent.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal.
Let us just nail down a couple of things here.
Mr. Simington, if Senator Blumenthal is under the
impression that you participated in drafting or participating
in the writing of a policy paper for Americans for Tax Reform,
he is under a mistaken impression. Is that your testimony?
Mr. Simington. Yes, that is correct, Mr. Chairman. I am
unsure where this was reported or how the distinguished Senator
got this impression.
The Chairman. But, nevertheless, it was--it was not you?
Mr. Simington. That is correct.
The Chairman. OK. And then with regard to my friend's
request that you commit to recuse yourself from any
deliberations of Section 230, would I be correct to assume that
you are going to be guided by the--by the advice that you will
receive from counsel including counsel in whatever ethics
department you have there at the FCC? Is that your testimony?
Mr. Simington. That is my testimony, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. And so it would be premature to assume what
their advice would be, but you will be guided by that?
Mr. Simington. Senator, I would defer absolutely to the
advice of ethics counsel.
The Chairman. OK. And then--and then your participation in
this NTIA petition for rulemaking of Section 230 was merely,
sort of, being called into the game after the decision was
already made and involved in what you call blocking and
tackling. Is that right?
Mr. Simington. Yes, that is----
The Chairman. So and just explain to us what that would be.
It does not sound like you were calling the shots on that.
Mr. Simington. That is an accurate characterization, Mr.
Chairman. I did not draft--I did not draft any of the original
versions of the petition. My comments were made on finished
versions.
I did not coordinate or devise the legal strategy, and I
would estimate that the number of words actually written by me
in the petition would be on the order of 5 to 7 percent.
The Chairman. OK. Well, let us move then to the RDOF, the
Rural Digital Opportunity Fund auction, which will make some
$60 billion available to providers to serve unserved areas.
Given the need for broadband today, I believe that
providers should start building these new networks as soon as
possible. So this summer I introduced the Accelerating
Broadband Connectivity Act, which would reincentivize RDOF
auction winners to start construction within 6 months of
receiving funds and start service within 1 year.
I assume that would be music to your ears, Mr. Simington,
and would you like to say today that the Accelerating Broadband
Connectivity Act is the right approach to accelerating the
deployment of broadband through RDOF and why?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate--I would like to state my appreciation, for
the record, for your leadership on this as well as that of
Senators Capito and Blackburn.
Assuming a passage and, obviously, if I were appointed, I
would, of course, work with Congress in whatever determination
they made as to how to deliver and implement and fund programs.
I applied the sharp increase in timeline from completion in
eight years to completion in three.
During the time of this pandemic when, as many members of
the Committee have noted, the ability to deliver services is
greatly impacted. I believe that this will put services in
front of people who desperately need them much quicker than it
would otherwise.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. And then let us see if
we can squeeze in something about rip and replace. You know,
the President signed our Secure and Trusted Communication
Network Act into law.
While rip and replace is an important step toward securing
rural networks we need to do more. What additional steps are
available to the FCC to help secure our communications networks
and encourage the development of next-generation technologies?
Mr. Simington. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I will be
brief since time is short.
I think that the----
The Chairman. But as you have seen, leeway is given to
certain senior members.
Mr. Simington. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate
any leeway.
So, but nonetheless, to help this happen something that is
immediately within the FCC's powers is to make judicious use of
waivers and to enable the use of test bids in order to promote
domestic development in technology.
Fundamentally, we find ourselves in this situation because
we have become dependent on technology originating offshore
that is incredibly difficult to audit.
I have a copy of a report, which I would be happy to share,
with your office that states that a single capacitor placed in
the appropriate way can enable the security on a chip to be
cracked.
So the more control we have over the provenance and
fabrication of chips the better, and the more we can develop
our industry for that purpose and enable it at the FCC level,
the better. If confirmed, this would certainly be a priority
for me.
I think as well this raises the larger question of
engagement with Congress for joint actions to promote
electronics, entrepreneurship, and domestic manufacturing, and
enhanced activities in the--on the level of software supply
chain security, which is going to be the security issue of
greatest concern in the age of greater adoption of all around.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, and if I might take a
point of personal privilege, I assume that Adrian and Lawrence
are sitting right behind you.
Mr. Simington. They are, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Would they like to stand and give a wave to
members of the Committee? Good to have you gentlemen with us. I
hope this is not your last hearing before the Senate Commerce
Committee.
Thank you very much, and I am over my time.
Senator Fischer, I believe, is next, joining us remotely.
STATEMENT OF HON. DEB FISCHER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA
Senator Fischer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for
holding this nomination hearing today.
Mr. Simington, according to the FCC's annual reports,
between 2012 and 2018 American states and jurisdictions
diverted more than $1.2 billion in 911 fees to non-911
programs. Do you share concerns about the effects this fee
diversion away from 911 services causes?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator. I do share this concern.
Committed funds are committed for a purpose. Obviously, money
is fungible, but the intent of the program is potentially
violated if committed funds are diverted.
Senator Fischer. Do you have any suggestions on ways that
we could prevent states and other jurisdictions from diverting
those fees?
Mr. Simington. Senator, this is--this is a question that--
this is a question upon which I would need to consult with the
enforcement bureau with the other Commissioners and with expert
staff on the Commission in order to determine an action plan.
There are several items docketed internally within the FCC
for dealing with this, but I am not privy to the level of
detail as to how far these are advanced.
Senator Fischer. Thank you. Also, in response to the
pandemic Congress provided the FCC with funding through the
CARES Act to support expanded telecommunications, broadband
connectivity, and devices needed for telehealth services.
Mr. Simington, do you believe that there are important
takeaways from how the Commission stood up the COVID-19
telehealth program and how quickly they were able to get the
entire appropriated amount disbursed?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator.
Yes, I applaud the efforts of the FCC on many fronts in
ruling out a COVID-19 response, whether that was, as you say,
getting telehealth up and running and functioning quickly.
Of course, there are individual problems that have been
discovered along the way. But, overall, we are very happy that
it is there. In addition, the FCC has--went out and secured the
historic Pai pledge to get private--the private industry to
step up and make things easier for people who are suffering
service disconnections and service lapses due to COVID.
In general, I am very impressed by the response of
America's regulatory bodies and networks under this time of
great and unprecedented strain.
Senator Fischer. As we are looking at the--another COVID
package, I guess I am not asking if you are going to give
advice to Congress at this point.
But do you believe that Congress should consider
prioritizing additional funding for this program? If you were
going to prioritize this program where--I guess I am asking you
how important do you feel it is?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator.
Telehealth is a type of program that is--that is, in some
ways, unprecedented at the FCC because it entails--it entails
looking at the network infrastructure that is supporting the
telehealth activities, which may vary immensely between
locations, even similarly situated locations.
It involves delivery of services. There are great
geographical disparities in where telehealth is needed and it
is not always obvious just on the basis of terrain or broadband
penetration.
There has been a great focus on delivering education
services. Obviously, that is important. But telehealth has been
the cornerstone of USF for a long time and telehealth relief
is, obviously, more needed now than ever.
So I would applaud Congress prioritizing this and I, if
confirmed, would look forward to implementing this on the front
lines with Congress.
Senator Fischer. I would agree with you on that.
Telehealth, I think, during this pandemic has just been vital
in so many areas and so many states, and I think it has only
highlighted how important it is and, really, what the
opportunities are for it as we continue in the future.
Next, sir, I would like to ask you about the Universal
Service Fund and the high-cost program. It is a main avenue of
Federal support for broadband network deployment in high-cost
rural areas.
Will you commit to ensuring this program has the
sustainable resources needed to provide voice and broadband
services in rural areas?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator.
As you note, the high-cost program is used to deliver a
variety of services, the demand for which rises and falls. For
example, land lines, obviously, are falling but in some areas
remain the best connection and with the most established
infrastructure.
Without being privy to the internal deliberations of the
FCC on how it allocates funds, I cannot commit to a specific
funding level.
However, that is not to say that I do not recognize this as
a key priority and I would work very closely with you and your
office to ensure that necessary USF funds, particularly within
the high-cost program, are delivered in order for services to
maintain.
Senator Fischer. And would you commit to ensure that the
Universal Service Fund as a whole has the proper oversight to
prevent waste, fraud, and duplicative spending?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator.
I will absolutely commit to that, and there are many
investigations over the last few years over into just exactly
the sort of thing that you are talking about. Obviously, this
is an enforcement priority at the FCC and if I become a
Commissioner and I am confirmed, then it would continue to be a
priority for me to ensure enforcement is working properly.
Senator Fischer. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. And thank you, Senator Fischer.
Senator Markey is next, joining us remotely also.
STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS
Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
Mr. Simington, right now in the United States we have an
educational crisis. We have millions of children, more than 10
million, most likely, who do not have the Internet at home and
that is leading to a homework gap that is leading to a learning
gap which is leading to, ultimately, an opportunity gap for
these young people, in the third grade or the fifth grade.
If you do not have the Internet at home, you are going to
be left behind and you are going to know that you have been
left behind.
Now, the Federal Communications Commission under Chairman
Ajit Pai has ruled that the FCC cannot allocate E-rate funding
for at-home learning, and since I am the author of the E-rate
program I absolutely disagree with that interpretation and I
think it is very shortsighted, but it is wrong as well.
What is your interpretation, Mr. Simington, as to whether
or not the Federal Communications Commission can use E-rate
funding to help children at home get the connections which they
need?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator.
This is, of course, a question of vital concern. I think we
all agree that learning in the home is how learning is taking
place for the vast majority of America's students right now and
I think we can further agree that deficiencies in equipment and
facilities contribute to both the homework gap and the
digital--well, they are symptoms of the digital divide and they
contribute to the homework gap, and I agree with you that this
is a matter of grave concern.
As to the--as to the interpretation advanced by the
Chairman, the Chairman, of course, sets the agenda of the
Commission. But at the end of the day, the Commission is a
collegial body and I view all decisions coming out of the
Commission as being informed by that collegiality.
And, as such, if I am confirmed to the Commission I would
be one vote among five and one voice among five, and as such I
would have to consult with the----
Senator Markey. So what would--what would your voice be
saying, Mr. Simington? Would it be saying, let us do it, or
would you say, let us not do it? Would you agree with Chairman
Pai or would you not?
Mr. Simington. So I would need to discuss with the other
Commissioners how they--how they arrived at this interpretation
and what fears they have about other--about knock-on effects if
this interpretation is adopted that you urge, and I cannot
commit to a particular interpretation today but I certainly
would commit to taking your concerns seriously, Senator, and to
working with you----
Senator Markey. Well, let me--let me--let me add on--let me
add on here. You know, the Department of Interior also made a
request.
The Trump Department of Interior also made a request to the
Federal Communications Commission to broaden its interpretation
because, obviously, out in the Native American community there
is a real need to have an expansive interpretation of the kind
of virtual learning that can take place. And so Trump's own
Department of Interior made this request as well.
Do you think the Department of Interior made a mistake in
making a request to the FCC that they broaden the
interpretation so that there can be a greater, more expansive
use, especially amongst the Native American community?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator.
So I, certainly, would not say that it is ever a mistake to
make such a request. The FCC is charged with making the
determination and I have to--I have to assume that the FCC used
their best judgment and took all aspects of the situation into
account.
That is not to say that I would come to the same
conclusion. I do not want to prejudge the issue. But it is to
say that I would need exposure to the internal deliberations
that were--to get a full picture of how the FCC as a whole came
to that interpretation.
Senator Markey. Well, I know what Ajit Pai's decision was.
He decided that he did not have the authority, which I totally
disagree with, and the totality of the situation just boils
down to him making a decision that it was the incorrect
interpretation of the statute, which he is completely and
totally mistaken about.
So, again, this is a crisis. We have an incredible
educational crisis in our country, especially amongst the poor
and black and brown and immigrant children, Native American
children.
They are going to be left behind because the FCC has taken
this extremely narrow interpretation of the use of E-rate
funding and it is a huge mistake, and again, we are fighting
hard to add money into whenever the next coronavirus package
comes down the line to add $4 billion so that the funding would
be there.
But it is a step beyond which I think we really have to go
because the funding should have been coming right out of the E-
rate program. That was my intent when I created the E-rate
program and it still is today.
So thank you, Mr. Simington, and thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Markey.
Senator Thune.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA
Senator Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this
hearing today and I appreciate all of our nominees' willingness
to serve in these important positions.
Mr. Simington, Universal Service Fund at the FCC has had a
significant impact on states like South Dakota that have large
rural areas. But more work needs to be done to connect rural
Americans with reliable broadband services.
As part of that effort, the FCC is currently conducting the
first phase of the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, the RDOF
fund, which will provide $16 billion of funding for broadband
services.
As Commissioner at the FCC, will you commit to ensuring
that any potential high-cost USF recipients are thoroughly
vetted up front to confirm their ability to deliver on
broadband service promises?
Mr. Simington. I am delighted to make that commitment,
Senator.
Senator Thune. I, along with several of my colleagues on
this Committee, have supported efforts to bolster the private
sector's ability to build out 5G networks and believe any
efforts to nationalize 5G would have an adverse effect on the
United States' ability to win the race to 5G. Can you say--
express whether you have concerns or not with the idea of
nationalizing 5G?
Mr. Simington. Delighted to do so, Senator.
So, first of all, I would like to state that I support the
long-standing auction and commercialization regime that has
been legislated by Congress. Congress has made its intention
clear about every two years--actually, almost like clockwork--
that we are to continue commercializing spectrum, and if
confirmed, I would certainly abide by the will of Congress on
this point.
Furthermore, I note that a commercialization regime via
some other means such as a commercialized grant regime would
contradict the path by which the United States unequivocally
won the race to 4G and having a 4G economy.
Beyond this, it is unclear to me how a U.S. Government
network could be commercialized, legally speaking, and I guess
the last point I would make on this is that spectrum is not a
network and so far I have heard no proposals about building
nationalized fiber, backhaul, towers and, as such, I am not
sure that the--I am not sure that the prospects of so-called
nationalized 5G are as real a threat as they are, obviously, an
apparent one.
But, of course--but, of course, that does not mean that we
should create uncertainty in the market by leaving the issue
out there. I think it is important to--for me to reassert that
the--that Congress's regime is the one that I would consider
myself bound by unless and until Congress were to radically
change direction.
Senator Thune. Good, and I hope the FCC would continue to
reject the idea of nationalizing.
During the COVID-19 pandemic we have seen increased demand
for higher download and increasingly important upload speeds.
At the same time, the continued deployment of 5G will require
the densification of fiber networks in order to expand 5G in
rural America.
How important is it for Federal programs to ensure that
broadband networks meet the needs of consumers today and in the
future as we continue to eliminate the digital divide?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator. That is an excellent
question, and for the--for the answer I would point in part to
the funding mechanism for RDOF--rather, the tiering mechanism
for RDOF, which contemplates both support for a minimal level
of service and superior support for higher levels of service.
So under the RDOF proposal as currently in place, 25/3,
which is the considered the minimal Federal standard for
broadband, does qualify for support, and if you look at a map
of broadband coverage of the country as a whole, clearly, there
are large swaths of the country where something is better than
nothing and entering the modern age is--you know, is better
than being left behind.
As against that, 25/3 might not be totally future proof
either, and in areas where there is already existing service at
that level we would not want to fund anything duplicative, for
example. So it would be ineligible for RDOF anyway.
But the highest--the highest tier of latency and of upload/
download speed is eligible for the most support and so it works
as a sliding scale so that we are able to get some support
where it is needed and we are able to get the highest level of
support for higher priority projects such as, for example, in
an area that has the potential for highly advanced industrial
automation by Internet of Things to have true 1/1 gigabit and
get there right away and not wait another 10 years.
Senator Thune. And you referenced this already, but
spectrum we have got mid, low, high band spectrum, all of which
are important. Will you commit to work with us to identify and
move forward on opening up additional bands that can help
advance U.S. leadership in wireless connectivity?
Mr. Simington. I absolutely will, and I note that the NTIA
has a current commitment to do this, which I actively support
and I worked with OSM on.
Senator Thune. Great. Final question. I understand you have
already been asked this a couple different times, but let me
just ask as well whether you would support a complete repeal of
Section 230, if not, why, and as you perhaps know, I have a
bill along with Senator Schatz to reform Section 230 and there
are other bills out there as well. So what is your view on
that?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator, and thank you for your
leadership and my thanks to Senator Schatz as well for his
leadership on the PACT Act.
My view is that--is that 230s repeal is, obviously, a
matter for Congress. There have been calls for it on both sides
of the aisle and there has been strong resistance on both sides
of the aisle.
Not being a legislator and not having any immediate
prospects to becoming one, my views would just be advisory. As
far as 230 reform and its possibilities at the FCC, my sense is
that the FCC has indicated its ability to accept jurisdiction
but has not necessarily indicated any particular direction and,
certainly, not, to my knowledge there is no--there is no Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking out there, and I suspect the FCC, having
taken so long to accept jurisdiction, will engage on a long
process of being, first of all, guided by Congress to determine
what Congress's future desires are for the direction of 230;
second, establishing an evidentiary record and, again, in
consultation with Congress; and third, making--looking for all
the things that could go wrong because, in my judgment, 230 is
an important law and we do not want to touch it and break a
bunch of other things.
Senator Thune. OK. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I will submit a question for our other
panelists, and congratulations on your nominations.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Thune.
Senator Rosen.
STATEMENT OF HON. JACKY ROSEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA
Senator Rosen. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Wicker. I
appreciate--I appreciate you calling on me today. My questions
are for Mr. Simington this afternoon and I want to talk a
little bit about rural broadband and its impacts on maternal
health.
You know, in Nevada and across the country rural
communities have been grappling with the impact of the
coronavirus pandemic.
We have all had to quickly adapt technologically, migrating
to virtual tools and systems including distance learning,
telework, and, of course, telemedicine. It has been
incredibly--it has been incredible to see the way technology,
specifically telehealth, has enabled patients to receive care
safely.
While telemedicine is not a complete substitute for
receiving an in-person evaluation, it is useful in many
applications including keeping pregnant and new mothers safe
while accessing maternal care.
That is why I introduced the Data Mapping to Save Moms'
Lives Act alongside Senators Fischer, Young, and Schatz. This
bipartisan legislation would direct the FCC to consult with the
CDC to incorporate data on maternal health outcomes into the
FCC's broadband health maps in order to show where poor
broadband access and high rates of poor maternal health
outcomes--well, see where they overlap. In this way, we want to
determine where the telehealth services are needed the most.
So, Mr. Simington, can you please talk about the importance
of accurate mapping, particularly for understanding how access
to broadband affects health outcomes amongst our high-risk and
vulnerable population, and is mapping health outcomes something
that you will be committed to doing and pursuing if you are
confirmed to the Commission?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator, and first, let me begin
by thanking you for your work in advancing this legislation and
for identifying an issue that perhaps goes too often ignored.
I would--I would certainly like to--I would certainly like
to reiterate my support for the idea of telemedicine and for
the concept of finding ways to deliver telemedicine more
broadly and more efficaciously.
But you have asked me to talk about mapping so I am going
to focus on that. The difficulty until now is that mapping has
resided in a disparate collection of agencies, and a number of
different agencies have had different agencies have had
different mandates that deliver--to deliver broadband subsidies
or broadband build-outs at different levels of service.
There just has not been a uniform clearinghouse
establishing a single standard, and we are still not at a
single standard. I want to be perfectly clear.
The standards contemplated under the Broadband Data Act,
although a great improvement, are still some time from being
implemented so and that is particularly painful because we are
in the middle of RDOF right now and we face the prospect of
breaking ground before we have gotten to the best quality of
geo-mapping and, in some cases, just operating with bare census
tracks, although we are doing our best to get beyond that.
The first thing that I would do to--if I were confirmed to
the Commission to try to forward the goal of your legislation--
that is, of tying mapping to better understanding health
outcomes--would be to look once more around the Federal
Government and see what additional mapping resources could be
brought to bear and, in particular, at the NTIA we have maps
that contain certain proprietary overlays over the Department
of Agriculture maps.
I have discussed--I have discussed the pros and cons of
bringing those into the FCC process internally within NTIA.
This is certainly something I would continue to pursue if I
were to be confirmed as a Commissioner.
The second thing is----
Senator Rosen. And--I am sorry. Let me--it is a matter of
time. I have got just about a minute. I want to ask you one
more thing quickly. Will have some questions for the record as
well.
But Nevada is home to 27 tribes, and according to the FCC
less than half of rural tribal households have access to fixed
broadband service.
So in just about the minute I have left, we have a lot of
issues in our tribal communities and I am an original co-
sponsor of the Extending Tribal Broadband Priority Act, which
would require the FCC to open a new 2.5 gigahertz rural tribal
priority window that would last at least 180 days.
So would you support creating a new tribal priority window
so that tribes across this Nation can address their disparities
in broadband?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator. I would be delighted to
endorse a tribal priority window. As you know, there was
controversy between the FCC and a number of senators over the
length of the priority window with the tension being between
allowing more tribes to participate and breaking ground sooner.
I think that the way to rectify this is to do better
outreach to tribes earlier in the process in order to allow
them to make more effective use of a shorter priority window.
I say shorter. In this case, shorter might be better if it
allows groundbreaking in 30 days instead of 180 days. But this
would be a matter that I would continue to discuss with you and
your staff to ensure the best outcome for underserved tribal
communities.
Senator Rosen. Thank you. I appreciate that. Particularly
in the pandemic, some of those time lines that might have been
more achievable need to be extended now as we respond to
coronavirus.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Rosen.
Senator Capito.
STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA
Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to
thank our panelists today for joining us.
Like many others, I have--my questions are for Mr.
Simington. I appreciate the phone call that we had, Mr.
Simington, and I would like to kind of jump off of what you
have already been discussing, which is the RDOF.
As we know, on October the 29th, 2020, just several weeks--
well, not even several weeks ago, the RDOF kicked off and I
think it holds great promise.
I mean, it has been held out to our state of--my state of
West Virginia has having maybe almost as much as $700 million
to close that digital divide.
So I guess my question is, one, how long do you feel that,
as this is moving forward, are we going to be able to get a
clear perspective in individual states of how successful the
RDOF has been, how many local folks are bidding and whether the
coverage there is as grand and as large as we hoped that it
would be? Do you have any perspective on timing and what those
indicators could be?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator. Apologies. My mic was
off.
So the--so you raise a great point about RDOF and about
timing indicators. I will note that this is one factor that
leads me to be optimistic about the possibility of an
accelerated broadband connectivity fund to get RDOF delivered
faster.
The timing--the timing implications of the current build-
out schedule, just to rehearse those, are 20 percent delivery
in--20 percent delivery, then 40 percent delivery, then 60
percent delivery, leading to completion of the original
estimate by the end of year six with additional build-outs in
year seven and eight to clear the original estimate if there
is--if there was an under estimate or to pick up--pick up
places to provide this service.
The difficulty is an 8-year build-out schedule does not
help anyone who needs service right now, and the accelerated--
the ABC fund approach would require delivery of service by the
end of year one to at least some households. So that is one--
that is one promising approach that I would support.
The other difficulty, of course, with--is the tension
between time--between time to get the maps right and time to
break ground. The longer we take to get the maps right the
longer it takes to break ground, and this has been a chronic
problem throughout RDOF in the planning phases that has led to,
eventually, the auction taking place in anticipation of--in
anticipation of the use of census tracks for much of the
mapping.
So I share your concerns and would look forward to
discussing both of these issues further and, if confirmed,
obviously, I would closely monitor RDOF throughout its life.
Senator Capito. Well, I am hoping that the broadband data,
which you have already addressed, will help us with the mapping
issues and that can also help us with the RDOF.
But the other thing that I have great concern about, having
seen buckets of money coming in to our state in particular
aimed at, you know, filling out the middle mile or getting it
to that last house, and then, you know, a bundle of excuses by
providers as to why that has not occurred.
No claw back of any of the dollars and the lack of delivery
of services at a level which has been promised has been very
disappointing.
So I guess I would prevail upon you, when I vote for your
confirmation--hopefully, you will be confirmed--that the
enforcement mechanisms that are in place are actually used and
are tough enough to make sure that, you know, the promises made
are the promises kept.
And I think that, you know, in many rural areas it has been
a lot of promises and a lot of money, quite frankly, that still
has not delivered the service that I think the areas are due
and expect and, certainly, in this COVID environment very much
want.
So I want to join with you and get an assurance from you
that the enforcement mechanisms and the oversight would be
there at the FCC if you were to be confirmed?
Mr. Simington. Senator, I am delighted to offer you--to
offer you full cooperation and active support and active
coordination on--coordinating on enforcement to the fullest
degree to ensure that monies spent on connectivity achieve
connectivity without getting bogged down in a mire of waste,
fraud, and abuse.
Senator Capito. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Capito.
Senator Lee, you are the last one in the queue so you are
recognized for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH
Senator Lee. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. I assume that
means I have unlimited time.
The Chairman. I do not think that is quite what I said, no.
Senator Lee. OK. Just making sure.
Thanks to all of you for being here. In the few minutes
that we have got remaining in the hearing I want to cover a few
important issues.
Mr. Simington, thanks for the time that you have given to
me so far to discuss issues that are before the Commission and
that involve the Commission. It has been helpful and I want to
spend some time today following up on a couple of things that
you and I have previously discussed but have not been able to
get through completely.
I want to begin by talking a little bit about spectrum
policy. As you know, spectrum is absolutely essential to the
development of technology, the kinds of technologies that we
are increasingly relying on, and because spectrum is a finite
resource--it does not exist to an unlimited degree--we have to
figure out ways to better use it and to better manage it.
Some of that can be done through technology. Some of it
also has to be done through improved public policy and through
ways that we can figure out how best to allocate the spectrum
for both licensed and for unlicensed purposes.
One serious issue that I think is holding us back from
better spectrum management and decisionmaking involves the
dysfunctional interagency process dealing with spectrum. The
FCC handles commercial spectrum bands and the NTIA handles
government spectrum bands.
So one question I wanted to ask you is should NTIA or a
Federal agency be able to veto an FCC decision to license a
band for a commercial purpose?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator.
This is--this is, indeed, a major question. As you note,
there have been repeated conflicts over particular spectrum
auctions and particular bands, and it is leading increasingly
to recourse to legislative solutions which, of course, we would
all deplore, hoping it be handled appropriately between the
agencies.
As to the question of whether the NTIA should be able to
veto the FCC, unfortunately, I am not sure that the Memorandum
of Understanding is 100 percent clear. Different positions have
been asserted by different agencies.
Oddly, the NTIA has asserted that it is a co-regulator
while certain language in--on FCC decisions--I am sorry, on FCC
Report and Order that I have reviewed suggests that each agency
may act unilaterally.
So I think coming up with a more robust memorandum of
understanding to address this exact point would be highly--
would be highly efficient in helping the agencies to resolve
conflict.
But I suspect, Senator, you are asking me if as a matter of
policy I believe that that should be the case, and I would say
that that would--that would seriously impugn the ability of the
FCC to serve as the commercial spectrum regulator in the United
States.
Senator Lee. Fair point and well said.
What about when a particular Federal agency--let us just
say, hypothetically, the Department of Defense--steps in and is
the one trying to halt it and it does so by saying national
security. This cannot happen because of national security. If
this happens, dogs and cats will be living together in the
streets. The wrath of God, Book of Revelation type stuff.
Complete apocalypse will be at our door.
Should that make a difference if the agency trying to veto
it is asserting a national security interest and reason why
that license should not move forward?
Mr. Simington. That is an excellent question, Senator, as
well and very timely. I am going to answer it with respect to
the Ligado matter specifically.
So as you know, Ligado was a 5-0 decision by the FCC. If
the question is did the FCC appropriately follow its statute
and obey its legal standard, I would say that the answer has
just got to be yes. I do not see any other way to read the
record.
As against that, the--we find ourselves in a little bit of
a legal tangle because the Department of Defense also has a
statute that says it cannot tolerate threats to military GPS
and it is illegal for the DOD to consent to anything that would
threaten military GPS, and that is the avenue through which the
DOD is pushing back on this specific decision.
So we have, so to speak, the immovable object and the
irresistible force. Now, I think that this is--I think that
this is a regrettable state of affairs and there is no way to,
so to speak, formalistically resolve it within the system
because we have two different legal standards that are--that
are just inevitably in conflict and this is why we need a
better interagency process that is capable of taking, perhaps,
national security concerns into account without rising to the
level of a veto.
I know the veto would make the DOD, effectively, the
spectrum regulator of last resort and, presumably, commercial
license holders would be vastly unsettled by that outcome.
So much more careful thought is needed on this in order to
keep all the equities attended to.
Senator Lee. All right. Gets even worse, of course, when
that hypothetical Federal agency steps in and convinces
Congress to resolve the issue for it, based on political
considerations and scare tactics.
Do you think that Federal agencies currently, as a general
matter, do they use their spectrum allocations effectively and
efficiently?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator.
This is--this is a very interesting question because there
is no doubt that on any given megahertz commercial operators
send vastly greater quantities of signal.
I mean, I noted--I noted in a statement--in my opening
remarks that commercial usage of--commercial output over a
given megahertz have expanded by about 4,000 percent over about
the last 8 years and that is--that is, of course, greater than
any comparable expansion of Federal activity.
Now, as to the question of efficiency of use, the
difficulty is that some bands and some uses are not susceptible
to the sort of extremely dense uses you would see in the
commercial world. So this really becomes a case by case
question.
Senator Lee. Mr. Chairman, I am undyingly deferential to
you as the Chairman. I see my time has expired. I have one more
question. It is a small question. It is not one----
The Chairman. Does any member have an objection?
Without objection.
Senator Lee. Thank you.
The Chairman. The Senator may proceed.
Senator Lee. All right. So I would like to know whether you
regard the Internet as a public utility and whether, if
confirmed, you would ever consider classifying the Internet or
support classifying the Internet as a Title 2 common carrier?
Mr. Simington. Thank you, Senator.
Whether by the Internet we mean edge providers or whether
we mean broadband delivery services, commercial wireless, I
see--I see no reason to pursue reclassification.
I think it would be much better for us to continue under
Title 1 classification instead of changing the rules again
after 3 years.
Senator Lee. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Lee.
The hearing record will remain open for two weeks. During
this time, senators are asked to submit any questions for the
record with the final submission deadline being close of
business Tuesday, November 24, 2020.
The Committee then asks the witnesses that upon receipt of
any questions for the record you submit your written answers to
the Committee as soon as possible but no later than the close
of business on Tuesday, December 8, 2020.
With that, we conclude the hearing. Thank the nominees for
their willing to serve and for their testimony.
This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:53 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to
Dr. Greg Autry
Question 1. NASA's CFO oversees a $22.6 billion budget that covers
a range of projects with different needs. What in your past work
experience enables you to lead such a large and critical budget?
Answer. Thank you, Senator Duckworth. I appreciate the opportunity
to discuss my qualifications.
My service on the NASA agency review team provided me with an
unparalleled opportunity to delve deeply into NASA programs, budgets
and accounting. As the business professor on the team, I was often
tasked with budget analysis and with engaging the Office of the CFO
during our research. I would encourage you to reread the letter that
then NASA CFO David ``Radz'' Radzanowski has sent to this committee in
support of my nomination. He writes:
``Dr. Autry understands the role of the CFO and its
responsibilities to Congress, the NASA Administrator, the
Office of Management and Budget and the White House. I believe
you can count on him to continue to deliver the high-quality
management, oversight and reporting that has distinguished the
Office of the Chief Financial Officer at NASA over the last
decade.''
The CFO's job is not one of managing the details of a $28 billion
budget (NASA appropriations for FY 2020 were $22.6b, offsetting
revenues from work done for other agencies and unobligated balances
carried over from the previous year add more than $5b to total
budgetary resources.) NASA CFO is a leadership position managing 1,200
civil servants and 600 contract employees in the Office of the CFO.
These highly qualified NASA personnel are fully capable of doing the
bookkeeping, accounting and reporting. The agency recently issued
another excellent Annual Agency Financial Report for FY2020 and
received a 10th consecutive ``Clean'' opinion from the external
auditor. I concede that I expect my supporting team to be more
knowledgeable about the details of process and procedure than I.
I have extremely broad management and finance experience. I've led
small, innovative organizations as well as teams and budgets inside a
large corporation distributed across several states. My management
expertise resulted in me being requested by the University of
California, Irvine to join their faculty following the completion of my
MBA there. After several years of teaching, I was encouraged to pursue
a PhD in Management and I was hired by the Marshall School of Business
at the University of Southern California. My USC workshops attracted
highly respected business and governmental space figures.
I've taught management, accounting, finance and economics to
executives, professionals and entrepreneurs for two decades. Many of
the students I've mentored have gone on to great success in space
firms. I would note that Relativity Space, whose founders I have
mentored since their time at USC, just secured a new $500 million
investment at a valuation of over $2 billion. This is on top of their
previously raised $177 million.
I possess a unique understanding of private sector space operations
and insight into the agency from a programmatic and process viewpoint.
The current and previous administration have, with Congressional
support, expanded public-private partnerships significantly. The
contracting landscape is evolving, and the vendor pool is expanding in
ways that are challenging to career professionals at GAO and OMB.
Moving ahead, maximizing the value of both traditional contractors and
entrepreneurial firms requires an understanding of how they operate,
what resources they have, and how they view their relationship with
governmental. If confirmed, I will add significant value in ensuring
that Congress gets what they expect from appropriations.
Question 2. The CFO plays a very important role in promoting and
securing funding for critical scientific programs. The 2018 NASA budget
request that you worked on included cuts to climate studies and STEM
programs. How did you come to the conclusion to cut these important
programs?
Answer. Thank you, Senator, for the opportunity to address this.
The CFO isn't a policy making position, and the CFO does not establish
the priorities of NASA budget. If confirmed it will be my job to
implement the will of Congress as represented in appropriations. My
efforts at securing science funds will be directed by the NASA
Administrator with input from the Science Mission Directorate and the
Decadal Survey.
I am passionate educator and mentor to STEM students. My own STEM
career was inspired by NASA's accomplishments. My wife has been a
public-school teacher and principle. Your committee has received many
letters in support of my nomination from leading space scientists and
engineers I have had the pleasure to work with. These include Dr. Alan
Stern, PI on the New Horizons probe to Pluto; Dr. Scott Hubbard, NASA's
former ``Mars Czar,'' former Ames Director and professor of
Astronautics at Stanford; along with most of the leadership at USC's
renowned department of Astronautics, where Neil Armstrong earned an MS
during his Apollo days. How STEM education is supported at NASA is not
the decision of the CFO. I will implement the will of Congress under
the direction of the NASA administrator.
My record on NASA's role in understanding and improving the
stewardship of our planet is clear. I would not have 20 solar panels on
my roof or own two electric cars without NASA's important investments
in STEM. While I don't take personal responsibility for the FY2018
budget request, I will note that it did protect most of the very large
increases that had been implemented in preceding years. The 2018
request for ``Earth Systemic Missions'' was $778 million vs. the 2007
budget of $473 million.
Question 3. If confirmed as NASA's CFO, would you support funding
for climate studies and STEM programs?
Answer. CFO is not a policy position, and my personal beliefs and
priorities will not set the budget. If confirmed, my job will be to
manage Congressional appropriations responsibly, under the guidance of
the NASA Administrator. I will do so at the highest ethical standard
and provide accurate reports to stakeholders on how these funds were
allocated. The NASA Administrator and Science Mission Director will
advocate for programs they believe will return the most value from our
taxpayer investment. Their choices will be informed by the decadal
survey.
My personal record supporting NASA's role in Earth Science research
and in developing technologies that mitigate pollution is clear. It is
critical that we understand our own planet's atmosphere, oceans and
climate, and that we learn from the history of our neighboring worlds
as well. Learning what events caused Mars to lose most of its
atmosphere and surface water, and how the surface of our ``sister
planet'' Venus was transformed into a hellish landscape by a natural
runaway greenhouse gas syndrome, may give us insights into our own
biosphere.
NASA inspired my own STEM career in computing. And inspired me as a
first-generation college student. I have spent a great deal of time
connecting STEM students with careers in aerospace. Nothing would make
me happier than being able to connect students with NASA, its rich
educational resources, internships, and activities. Congress, the White
House and the NASA Administrator will determine the best organizational
mechanisms for this.
Question 4. Can you please state whether you accept the
overwhelming scientific consensus demonstrating that humans are the
primary driver of climate change over the last 100 years?
Answer. As noted, the CFO is not a policy position. I take our
environment seriously. Lessons my stepfather, instilled in me still
ring true, ``Always leave the camp cleaner than you found it'' and
``Leave nothing but footprints.'' I grew up in the Los Angeles of the
1970s, where the air was nearly as unbreathable as Beijing's is today.
American ingenuity solved that problem. We should do our best to limit
any emissions in ways that support American standards of living and
competitive economic development. Someday, space-based solar power
systems may provide zero pollution energy at night and under winter
cloud cover (serious shortfalls of ground-based systems).
That said, I am a social science researcher trained in economics
and management theory and not a climate scientist. I should not
interpret data and models that I do not fully understand. I would not
expect a climate scientist to ``accept'' an economic theory, even if it
were the dominant paradigm advocated by most leading economists.
Science must not be politicized. From my outsider understanding of the
topic, a majority of climate scientists believe that human activities
have contributed to the emission of gases that can induce climate
change and that this poses a significant ecological threat. That
concerns me.
If confirmed, my job will be to manage Congressional science
appropriations responsibly, under the guidance of the NASA
Administrator. I will do so at the highest ethical standard and provide
accurate reports to stakeholders on how these funds were allocated.
Question 5. The stated mission of the office of the CFO for NASA is
``To be the credible expert, trusted advisor and source of quality
information on matters related to finance and resources, including the
management of associated risk, for NASA programmatic and institutional
decision making.'' How will you be able to help a leading U.S.
scientific agency understand and prepare for the effects of climate
change?
Answer. I will follow the will of Congress and support Congress in
doing their job of appropriations by providing accurate financial
reporting and timely answers to inquiries. However, I am not qualified
determine how the agency should ``understand and prepare for climate
change.'' I must leave that understanding to NASA's excellent
scientists, and the preparations to engineers and facilities staff at
our field centers. Where appropriate, I will strive to honestly convey
the concerns and needs of these experts to Congress.
I would politely suggest to Congress that when considering
infrastructure spending bills, appropriations should be included for
urgently needed repairs to NASA's aging infrastructure. The agency is
burdened with a number of facilities constructed in the 1950s and 1960s
that are badly in need of repair, updating, and environmental
remediation. I look forward to working with you to ensure those
facilities remain capable of supporting NASA's missions, and that they
are safe for our workers under any anticipated conditions.
Question 6. International cooperation is essential to the future of
progress in space, from the International Space Station to addressing
space junk. On Russian television you said that China is worse than
1930s Nazi Germany government and you are a member of the group
Committee on Present Danger: China, which believes that ``As with the
Soviet Union in the past, Communist China represents an existential and
ideological threat to the United States.'' Do you see any benefits to
cooperating with China in the space domain?
Answer. Thank you, Senator Duckworth, for the opportunity to
address this extremely important question. The position of CFO is not a
policy making one and my job will be to implement the will of Congress
as directed by the NASA administrator under the guidance of the White
House.
I could not agree more with you about the critical importance of
international cooperation in space. NASA has been, and continues to be,
an agency that represents America at its best and positively engages
with many nations in the grandest of human endeavors, with full
transparency--something that some other national space agencies cannot
claim.
With specific regard to China, let me first say I sincerely wish
that my admonitions over the last two decades had not been as prescient
as they have turned out to be. I could enumerate the offenses of the
current Chinese regime, but we all know what those are and how large
their scale is. The U.S. Senate has reacted to recent gross violations
of civil rights in Hong Kong and human rights among the Uighur peoples.
I sincerely thank you for that.
My respect and admiration for the people of China is backed by
activities of record. I have traveled extensively in China as a
researcher, tourist and volunteer. The committee has received letters
in support of my nonmention from many of my Chinese American
colleagues, students and friends. Wei Jingsheng, widely regarded as the
Father of Chinese Democracy, wrote:
When in California, I have made an effort to visit Dr. Autry at
his university and to show my support for his work in business,
economics, space and civil rights.
I am not alone in my concern. A Pew research report last month
showed that an unfavorable view of China is held by 73 percent of
Americans, 73 percent of Canadians 73 percent, 75 percent of South
Koreans 75 percent, 81 percent of Australians 81 percent and 86 percent
Japanese.
There are areas where cooperation with the Chinese regime in space
will be required due to treaty obligations and safety concerns. There
are also other areas where cooperation with China may be desirable. In
particular, the exchange of scientific data and materials may
accelerate our knowledge of the solar system without risk to our IP or
security. These choices will be made by NASA Administrator, guided by
the White House and Congress.
Question 7. If the U.S. does not engage with China in space, are
any other countries poised to counterbalance China's ambition and
ensure that the space domain remains open and accessible?
Answer. Another excellent question. Again, the CFO is not a policy
making position, but my record on advocating for international
engagement in space is very public.
Our goals in space must include expanding human knowledge as well
as developing the economic and material potentials of that domain.
These activities will benefit the American taxpayers who fund them, but
will also return value to everyone on Earth, as NASA has for decades.
As we take our first steps into the solar system, we must be
careful to avoid repeating the historical errors of the age of
exploration and take carry only Lincoln's ``better angels of our
nature,'' with us. There should be no place in the future of humanity
for totalitarianism, censorship, religious oppression or ethnic
persecution. The world expects no less of the United States.
Many free nations have already joined our scientific and human
exploration efforts in space. NASA's current work on the Artemis
Accords, which will establish bold goals and set strong standards and
behavioral norms in space, will benefit all nations. The swift adoption
of these bilateral agreements by an expanding group of very diverse
nations is a testament to the respect the world has for our space
agency and our democratic institutions.
Question 8. If confirmed, how will you engage with China
productively to prevent further militarization of the space domain and
a counterproductive new ``space race''?
Answer. Again, the CFO is not a policy making position or
diplomatic position. It is significantly removed from military policy
and geopolitical strategy. Engagement choices will be made by the White
House, Department of State, Congress and the NASA Administrator.
As an economist and business expert let me note that a ``space
race'' need not be military nor counterproductive. Competition in
scientific discovery, human exploration, technological innovation and
commercial development can be a powerful, positive force. Whether that
competition is on an Olympic ice rink or in space, bold attempts to
enhance national prestige have often been a force for good. Many
tangible benefits to humanity were spawned by the first Space Race
including GPS, satellite communications, Earth imaging and the research
computing network that eventually became the Internet.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Jon Tester to
Dr. Greg Autry
Question. NASA's EPSCoR program brings much-needed research
investment to places outside the major tech hubs, including Montana,
and has long enjoyed broad bipartisan support in Congress. Why has the
Trump administration worked so hard to eliminate not just this program
but the entire Office of Education at NASA, including in the FY2018
budget that you helped to develop?
Answer. Thank you, Senator Tester, for the opportunity to address
this. The NASA CFO isn't a policy making position, and the CFO does not
establish the NASA budget. If confirmed it will be my job to implement
the will of Congress as represented in appropriations.
My record in support of governmental funding for research
investment is a strong and public one. As a business professor I
specialized in teaching engineering students, and as a researcher I
focused on the role of government in the emergence of new industries. I
have noted my own STEM career was inspired by NASA's accomplishments in
the 1960s and 70s. I went from being a first-generation college student
to a professor at a leading university, mentoring STEM student.
Regarding past decisions, I cannot speak for the White House on
their broader goals. Specifically, I had no input whatsoever on any
decision involving the EPSCoR program at the National Science
Foundation.
I do not take personal responsibility for the entire 2018 budget
request nor the specific decisions concerning NASA's Office of
Education. I don't believe anyone opposed NASA STEM engagement and the
issue was more about the most effective mechanism for delivering it. I
would need to look into the current state of this issue and report back
to you. An outside study to determine whether a dedicated office at
NASA HQ is the most effective way for NASA to deliver value to STEM
education might be useful. If confirmed, I will implement Congressional
STEM education appropriations under the guidance of the NASA
Administrator.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Kyrsten Sinema to
Dr. Greg Autry
Planetary Defense. NASA is tasked with the responsibility of
planetary defense, however recent studies and reports indicate that
planetary defense research and activities are underfunded at the
agency.
Question. How will you work with your NASA colleagues to ensure
that this critical responsibility is adequately funded so that missions
can meet their optimal timelines for launch?
Answer. Thank you, Senator Sinema, for bringing up this important
topic. The dramatic photos of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 slamming into
Jupiter taken by NASA's Hubble space telescope promoted the first
Congressional response to the NEO threat. Much is already being done.
The Catalina Sky Survey, based at the University of Arizona, has
discovered roughly 50 percent of the 20,000 known Near Earth Objects
(NEOs). NASA's Planetary Defense Coordination Office is working with
powerful partners in government and industry. DoD, DoE, NSF and FEMA
are already engaged in this process with NASA's Planetary Defense
Coordination Office (PDCO). In September, NASA signed an MOU with the
newly created U.S. Space Force that includes cooperation on Planetary
Defense. Whenever appropriate we should seek align the interest of
America's private investors with NASA's goals in order to maximize
return to our taxpayers.
NASA is also engaging our international partners in addressing this
global threat. The Asteroid Impact and Deflection Assessment (AIDA)
mission, which combines ESA's Hera mission with NASA's Double Asteroid
Redirect Test (DART) spacecraft which will test deflection techniques
in space. Non-spacefaring countries can also contribute, and the
International Asteroid Warning Network (IAWN) is good example of this.
If confirmed, I will prioritize bringing myself up to speed on the
critically important NEOSM (Near-Earth Object Surveillance Mission)
project and other proposals for tracking threats to our planet, and
keep you informed on the progress.
Testing mitigation options is important as well. Most important, as
referenced in your question, is insuring the launch of NASA's DART
spacecraft next July. DART benefits from years of investments Congress
has supported in NASA's Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) systems, also
being used on the upcoming Lunar Gateway. As CFO it would be a priority
of mine to ensure that the DART project stays on schedule for its
critical launch window. The target binary asteroid will not wait for us
to be ready. If confirmed, I will do what is in my power to clear any
bureaucratic delays and work with you and with OMB to make sure the
funds appropriated for this are well and properly used, and that you
are kept informed of the progress on the project. I look forward to
working with you on planetary protection efforts if I am confirmed.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
Daniel Huff
Current Role at the International Trade Administration. In a letter
to the Committee dated November 5, 2020, you noted that you are
currently serving as Deputy Chief of Staff at the International Trade
Administration (ITA) while also being detailed back to the White House
as an Advisor in the Office of Presidential Personnel (OPP).
Question 1. Please detail your current responsibilities at ITA.
Answer. I am entirely focused on my White House detail and
therefore not involved in the day to day operations of ITA.
Question 2. Please specify the amount of time, during your term as
an employee of ITA, that you have spent working on matters at ITA and
the amount of time you have spent working on matters at OPP.
Answer. I am focused entirely on the White House detail until it
ends.
Question 3. As part of your detail at OPP, do you play any role in
recommending or vetting any nominees, Schedule C, on non-career SES
appointees for positions at the Department of Commerce? If so, please
detail specific nominees you have been involved with including their
names and the positions for which they have been considered.
Answer. My role at PPO is focused on legal issues and strategy. I
am not involved in recruitment or vetting. However, I did pass on the
resume of an acquaintance, Trey Mayfield, to the team that handles
recruitment, and I believe he is now a lawyer in the GC's office at
Commerce.
Question 4. In your position at either ITA or OPP, have you been
involved in the creation of any new Schedule C or non-career SES
positions? If so, please list each position, when that position was
created, and the name of the person (if any) currently occupying the
position.
Answer. No.
Question 5. In your position at either ITA or OPP, have you been
involved in the conversion of any Schedule C or non-career SES
positions to positions in the career civil service. If so, please list
each position, when that position was converted, and the name of the
person (if any) currently occupying the position.
Answer. No.
Question 6. Please explain your role, if any, in the vetting or
hiring of Nathan Simington to serve as a Senior Advisor at the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA).
Answer. None. As noted above, I focus on legal issues and strategy
at PPO.
Question 7. Please explain your role, if any, in the vetting of
Nathan Simington in connection with his nominations to serve as
Commissioner on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Answer. As noted above, I focus on legal issues and strategy at
PPO. However, I do recall that I sat in on his interview with PPO.
Repeal of Fair Housing Rule at HUD. Your resume indicates that,
prior to assuming your current duties, you served as the General Deputy
Assistant Secretary, Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, at
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In this
position, your resume indicates that you ``developed and oversaw key
HUD policy initiatives featuring innovative approaches.''
Question 8. Please detail any role you had in the July 2020 repeal
of a 2015 Obama Administration rule (the ``Affirmatively Furthering
Fair Housing'' or AFFA'' rule) that required communities receiving
housing grants to take steps to eliminate segregation in their
communities.\1\ Under the new rule, communities would be allowed to
just self-certify these efforts.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Evan Weinberger, Trump Administration Repeals Obama-Era
Fair Housing Rule, Bloomberg Law, July 23, 2020, available at https://
news.bloomberglaw.com/banking-law/trump-administration-repeals-obama-
era-fair-housing-rule.
\2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer. I helped advise on and draft the rule. I recognize that not
everyone agrees with it, but the legal and policy justifications set
forth in the rule's preamble are persuasive.
Transparency in the Release of Scientific Information and Data. On
October 27, 2020, the New York Times reported that the Department of
Commerce issued a memorandum in August 2020 that prohibits the release
of any ``internal or external communications'' unless they are
``approved by political staff at the department at least three days
before being issued.'' \3\ According to the article, this policy
applies to ``social media posts, news releases and even agencywide e-
mails.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Christopher Flavelle and Lisa Friedman, As Election Nears,
Trump Makes a Final Push Against Climate Science, N.Y. Times, Oct. 27,
2020, available at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/27/climate/trump-
election-climate-noaa.html.
Question 9. Please detail any role you had in the drafting of this
memorandum.
Answer. None.
Question 10. Please detail any role you currently have, ether in
your position as Deputy Chief of Staff at ITA or as an Advisor in OPP,
in the enforcement of the policy in this memorandum.
Answer. None.
Question 11. Does the policy announced in this memorandum also
apply to communications, including e-mails and telephone calls, with
Members of Congress or Congressional staff?
Answer. Because I am not involved in enforcing it, I am afraid I am
not in a position to provide the answer to this. However, if confirmed,
I would be pleased to work to get you a prompt reply.
Question 12. Does this memorandum have any exceptions that allow
for Department employees to exercise their whistleblower rights with
regard to the Office of Inspector General or Congress?
Answer. Because I am not involved in enforcing it, I am afraid I am
not in a position to provide the answer to this. However, if confirmed,
I would be pleased to work to get you a prompt reply.
Question 13. Please provide a copy of this memorandum. If you
refuse to provide the memorandum, or any portion thereof, please
provide a detailed explanation of this refusal, including the any
specific privilege you are invoking and the name of the official
directing you to invoke such privilege.
Answer. I understand that the Department is waiting for a formal
request by letter from Ranking Member Cantwell for the memorandum. I
appreciate why that formality may frustrate you, but because I am not
yet confirmed, and the President's term is almost over, I have no
leverage to pressure the Department to release it otherwise. That said,
if confirmed, I would do my utmost to get you the document promptly.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to
Nathan Simington
It is important to understand that telecommunications services in
remote, high cost areas such as Alaska must have support from
predictable and stable FCC programs that help make the business case
for service--including Alaska's version of the high cost USF program,
the Alaska Plan. On August 23, 2016, the Commission adopted the Alaska
Plan Order, which freezes $1.5 billion in funding over ten years and
allocates that money to maintain, extend, and upgrade broadband service
across certain areas of Alaska. The plan has been a significant
success, and invaluable for Alaska. Due to the predictability provided
by stable high cost funding in Alaska since the plan went into effect,
over 50,000 locations in Alaska have had broadband deployed or
upgraded, thousands of Alaskans are benefiting from upgraded wireless
coverage, and major construction is happening in the middle mile space.
The Alaska Plan will go through FCC staff review later this year and
into next: wireline early next year and wireless beginning in 2021. As
part of the plan, service providers have agreed to meet certain
performance obligations--this review will look at these performance
obligations.
Statement: Thank you, Senator, for the opportunity to address your
questions and concerns. I am aware of the unique circumstances,
challenges, and geographical situation of Alaska. I am also aware that
Congress and regulatory bodies have been most successful in addressing
Alaskan issues when they have taken Alaska's unique situation into
account. I hope that my responses show both a present commitment to
Alaskan issues and a desire to both work with your office and your
constituents in good faith and to see for myself how better to serve
the people of Alaska.
Question 1. Would you agree that predictable and stable funding is
crucial in order to provide service in remote, high cost areas like
Alaska?
Answer. Yes. And frankly, I do not believe the FCC's approach to
universal service in Alaska has provided the predictable and stable
funding necessary for providers to build and maintain service in
remote, high cost areas. Among other things, this has had a negative
impact on health care providers in the state that need connectivity to
serve their communities and on the Alaskans that live and work in those
areas. For instance, the FCC's 2019 revisions to the Rural Health Care
(RHC) Program are credibly claimed to be producing anomalous and
arbitrary rates that are the opposite of predictable and stable
outcomes. The slow pace with which the FCC is acting on Alaska issues
only compounds these problems.
I believe strongly in regulatory certainty, rural connectivity and
the expanded provision of vital services, such as health care, through
telecommunications. Predictable and stable funding is crucial
everywhere, but especially to provide service in remote, high cost
areas like Alaska. Indeed, health care providers in Alaska and the
wireless and wireline providers that serve them face a unique set of
challenges. When it comes to building and maintaining networks in
Alaska, the FCC needs to do a better job of taking those challenges
into account when reaching its decisions. Without predictable and
stable funding, providers in Alaska simply cannot make the investments
necessary to bridge the digital divide.
As someone who grew up in rural Canada, I believe I have a valuable
perspective on the challenges of serving remote communities, and if I
am confirmed I would bring that perspective to the FCC.
Question 2. Will you commit to ensure that the Alaska Plan's
reviews are completed through a fair and transparent process and with a
reasonable outcome which will not delay or diminish broadband service
in Alaska?
Answer. Yes. If the FCC is to faithfully carry out its statutory,
universal service obligations, it must complete the Alaska Plan review
in a manner that provides a fair and transparent process and reaches a
reasonable outcome. Indeed, fairness, transparency and the preservation
of broadband service in Alaska must be baseline goals for the
Commission's implementation of the Alaska Plan.
Question 3. Will you commit to not reducing high cost funding to
Alaska, including the Alaska Plan, Alternative-Connect America Cost
Model (A-CAM), and Connect America Fund (CAF) II?
Answer. Yes. The Alaska Plan, A-CAM and CAF II are already in
progress. As such, it would be an extraordinary action to cut them and,
based on the evidence I have reviewed, I see no reason or benefit to
doing so.
Question 4. It is obvious more funding is needed to finish
extending broadband service to all rural Americans. Will you commit to
increasing funding for broadband? If so, how do you think that should
be distributed?
Answer. I agree that additional funding will be necessary to extend
broadband to every rural American. Current funding levels will not be
enough to get the job done. If I am confirmed, I will work to ensure
the FCC actually meets its obligations that Congress codified in
Section 254 of the Communications Act. I commit to ensuring the level
of funding necessary for the FCC to meet that statutory mandate. I will
seek to ensure that such funding is distributed in a manner consistent
with the principles of universal service established pursuant to
section 254, with a particular focus on closing the digital divide in
rural and high-cost areas, including Alaska. The circumstances leading
to the persistence of the digital divide vary among communities, and
the Commission should tailor its distribution of funds to ensure that
each community is able to obtain meaningful connectivity. Expanding
connectivity in high-cost and remote Alaskan communities must be
reflected in the FCC's USF decisions. I am committed to reaching
decisions that do just that, if I am confirmed.
Question 5. What are your thoughts on introducing 5G terrestrial
service into the 12 GHz band?
Answer. It is critically important that we find way to make more
spectrum available for 5G deployment. I favor exploring whether it is
possible to use this potentially underutilized band in a way that
results in a ``win-win'' for incumbent users, 5G operators, and the
public at large.
In order to create market certainty, the Commission should
therefore make it a priority to act on the petitions currently before
it regarding this band. If this band proves viable for terrestrial
service, it may take years to resolve the required license
reclassifications. Potential users will need to begin planning the
necessary capital raises and go-to-market strategies. Current users
will need lead time to modify installations and adjust to coexistence
with terrestrial service. One thing is certain: we cannot wait in the
race to 5G.
Question 6. If you are confirmed, will you commit to come to Alaska
early in your term for over a week to experience the geography,
climate, and other factors that make Alaska a uniquely challenging
environment for telecommunications services?
Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I would be honored to travel to Alaska
for over a week early in my term. I am eager to see the challenges,
successes, and ongoing needs of Alaska and Alaskans. If confirmed, I do
not believe that I would be able, without visiting Alaska, to
effectively assess, respond to or support Alaskans' unique conditions
or needs. Hopefully my time in Alaska will help guide me to make the
right decisions and give me material to further enhance my ability to
advocate with colleagues on issues important to your state.
The Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) and the FCC is
administering the Rural Health Care (RHC) USF program in a manner that
is destructive to Alaska. It has had severe negative effects on our
carriers, our health care service providers, and the availability of
service for some of the most vulnerable populations in the country--
many whose only option is telemedicine. Issues include retroactive
funding cuts, years-long languishing funding requests and appeals, a
slow and opaque process, and new rule changes that will
disproportionately impact Alaska.
Question 7. Will you commit to work with me to solve these issues
as expeditiously as possible?
Answer. Yes. I believe the FCC's USF decisions are credibly claimed
to be producing arbitrary and anomalous results in Alaska. As noted
above, the FCC's 2019 RHC decision is just one example. The slow pace
with which the FCC has reached these determinations has only compounded
the problems. Providers--whether serving health care facilities or
remote communities in Alaska or elsewhere--need greater certainty and
predictability to make the massive investments necessary to build and
extend broadband service.
Question 8. Will you commit to work to convince your fellow
commissioners to help solve these issues as expeditiously as possible?
Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I would work to ensure that my FCC
colleagues understand basis for the credible claims of arbitrary and
anomalous results the agency's decisions may be producing in Alaska and
convince them that the agency should take expeditious action to address
those issues.
Question 9. If some of your fellow commissioners continue to treat
Alaska unfairly, how will you push back?
Answer. There are a number of issues the FCC could resolve right
now that would bring much needed certainty and predictability to
communities in Alaska. If I am confirmed, I would make it clear to my
FCC colleagues that we should take up and resolve those issues before
the agency votes on unrelated proceedings that do not rise to the same
level of importance. I would work to ensure that the FCC satisfies
Congress's mandate to the FCC under Section 254 and, furthermore,
Congress's mandate to take Alaska's unique circumstances and needs into
account when considering matters before the FCC. I would vote
accordingly, advocate to my fellow commissioners that they do the same,
and ensure that we as a Commission are held to public account when we
fail to fulfill our obligations.
In recent years, USAC's processing of funding requests for the RHC
program has slowed to a snail's pace. Many funding requests are tied up
at USAC due to bureaucratic indecision, and USAC makes frequent
administrative errors requiring applicants such as health care
providers to appeal to the FCC. USAC's processes are entirely opaque,
so applicants have no visibility into where their applications and
appeals may stand, and USAC gives them no time-frame for decision. All
of these problems impose great administrative costs, and leave service
providers as well as rural health care providers in an impossible
position. It undermines efforts to deliver effective tele-health
services, which is especially important in a crisis such as we now are
facing with COVID-19. Alaska has carriers with pending rate approvals
from 2 and 3 years ago. Some have finally been approved (not
disbursed), although at dramatically reduced rates, and some have still
had no action. I have relentlessly pushed the Chairman and the FCC to
expedite these processes. I have received pre-confirmation commitments
from at least one Commissioner to address these issues, but to no
avail.
Question 10. Would you agree that RHC program participants should
be fairly compensated in a timely manner?
Answer. Yes. RHC program participants must be fairly compensated in
a timely manner. Failure to do so will disincentivize participation in
RHC to the great detriment of patients and communities reliant upon the
program. In recent years, the FCC has not acted in a timely enough
manner and its decisions may now be producing anomalous results.
Question 11. Would you agree that withholding funding for multiple
years after services have been rendered is an unacceptable way to run a
program?
Answer. Yes. Applicants are entitled to clear and timely
determinations regarding their eligibility for funding. If an applicant
is entitled to funding under the statute and the Commission's rules,
there is no justification for withholding that funding--whether for one
year or multiple years. It's critically important that applicants and
providers understand the rules of the game up front, and that those
rules not be changed midstream.
Question 12. Would you agree that changing rates after services
have been rendered resulting in retroactive funding cuts is not a fair
or transparent way to run a program?
Answer. Yes. Applicants are entitled to clear and timely
determinations regarding their eligibility for funding. Once reached,
such determinations should not be subject to retroactive revision. It
is critically important that applicants and providers understand the
rules of the road up front, and that those rules not be changed
midstream.
Question 13. Would you agree that allowing appeals to languish for
years is an unacceptable way to run a program?
Answer. Yes.
Question 14. Will you commit to working expeditiously on reforms to
USAC's processes to improve transparency and to prevent delayed and
vital support? Will you commit to advocating for this with your fellow
commissioners?
Answer. Yes.
Question 15. Will you commit to advocating for expeditious rate
approvals and reviews? Will you commit to advocating for this with your
fellow commissioners?
Answer. Yes.
Question 16. What do you believe is a reasonable time period for a
rate approval or review under this program?
Answer. The public interest would be best served by providing
carriers with certainty and predictability. The program should have
clear processes and standards so that post-hoc reviews and approvals
are rare, not routine; review causes uncertainty and delay. But when a
review is needed, it should take weeks, not years. Lengthy reviews, in
the absence of the need for extensive discovery, are unacceptable and
do not further the public interest. When the Commission does approve a
rate, that rate should be good not just for the backward-looking year
but for the future as well. That would help mitigate some of the harms
that flow from the FCC's recent, drawn out rate approval processes.
Applicants are entitled to clear and timely determinations
regarding their eligibility for funding. If confirmed, I commit to
working with your office so that the FCC's processes provide certainty
to applicants.
Question 17. Will you commit to impose strict deadlines on USAC and
the Bureaus, and insist that applications and appeals do not languish
for years? Will you commit to advocating for this with your fellow
commissioners?
Answer. Yes.
Question 18. Will you commit to much greater FCC oversight of USAC?
Will you commit to advocating for this with your fellow commissioners?
Answer. Yes. Every FCC Commissioner has an obligation to ensure
that USAC is a good steward of Americans' hard-earned dollars and that
the FCC's universal service program is administered in a manner that is
fair and efficient. That is the best way to ensure that Congress's
mandate for universal service in Section 254 is met: ``There should be
specific, predictable and sufficient Federal and State mechanisms to
preserve and advance universal service.'' Greater FCC oversight of USAC
decisions will further this goal. Any uncertainty or instability is the
Commission's problem and, if confirmed, I will commit to addressing
this issue.
The FCC revised its RHC Program rules in August 2019. I had
requested an expedited rulemaking from Chairman Pai as a part of
Commissioner Carr's confirmation process to address many of the
problems our state had been experiencing with the program and to lay
out clear rules for the future. These rules are anything but helpful to
Alaska, and anything but clear.
The rules group rural communities into rurality tiers and provide
subsidy awards only for the difference between the median of rural
rates and the urban rate for functionally similar services in the same
tier. In Alaska, there are four tiers, but even in the most rural
tiers, many communities with very different costs of service are in the
same tier. For example, communities in the same tier may be served by
different technologies (satellite vs. fiber or terrestrial wireless
networks), be of different population sizes, be closer to or farther
from the nearest fiber network, have access to fewer or more
competitive networks, or have different topography, significantly
affecting the cost to serve them. The rules short-change communities
where rates are above the median (sometimes way above) due to the very
high cost of service. These are the Alaskan communities that have the
least broadband infrastructure and the most limited access to health
care providers, and thus have the greatest need for support from the
Rural Health Care program. The FCC also delegated the work to set
median rates for each service to USAC, which does not have the
authority, information, or experience to make these critical support
decisions. Petitions for reconsideration of the rules have been pending
for almost a year, and yet the FCC has so far refused to stay the
effective date of these new rural and urban rate rules. Additionally,
the Alaska delegation sent a letter to the Chairman back in April
requesting that the FCC delay the implementation of these rules in
light of the pandemic. Many health care providers are strained enough
without trying to navigate an incomplete and new process. The Chairman
did not address or act on this request.
The bidding season for Funding Year 2021, which is governed by
USAC's new median rate database and cost model waivers, has already
begun. The database is a disaster and will not work--especially in
Alaska. Our carriers will have to file cost model waivers for most
services on a case-by-case basis, which will be stuck in the same
impossibly slow review and appeals process at USAC and the Bureaus.
Question 19. Would you agree that ignoring petitions for
reconsideration with no acknowledgment or response while going ahead
with a new program is unfair and poor governance?
Answer. Yes. I believe that petitioners are entitled to a timely
response to their petitions, and that timely disposing of such
petitions--one way or the other--is simply good governance. Likewise,
communicating timely with petitioners is also fundamental to good
governance.
Question 20. Will you commit to support delaying these new rate-
setting rules while the pending petitions for reconsideration are fully
addressed? Will you commit to advocating for this with your fellow
commissioners?
Answer. The petitions for reconsideration and applications for
review, presently before the full Commission, raise fundamental
questions that should be resolved before the bidding for 2021 takes
place. As noted above, there are credible claims that the current
approach is producing arbitrary and anomalous results. If confirmed, I
would support action that provides more certainty, more predictability
and more reasonable rates, whether that action is a suspension, waiver,
or delay of new rate-setting rules. Relief should be provided as soon
as possible, and if confirmed, I would commit to working with my
colleagues to accomplish this result.
Question 21. Given that the that the database is clearly not ready
and it will likely result in a disproportionate impact on Alaska, will
you commit to support delaying these new rate-setting rules in light of
the pandemic until at least bidding season 2022? Will you commit to
advocating for this with your fellow commissioners?
Answer. There are steps the FCC could take right now to address the
arbitrary and anomalous outcomes that its 2019 RHC decision is credibly
claimed to be producing. If confirmed, I would support taking the
immediate actions necessary to ensure fair rates and a stable,
predictable outcome for Alaska--whether that action involves delaying
rates or taking other steps. I commit to advocating for those actions
with my fellow commissioners if I am confirmed. COVID-19 has clearly
produced a once-in-a-century challenge and clearly any rulemaking needs
to take it into account.
Question 22. Will you commit to work with Alaska's stakeholders and
me to fix the program? Will you commit to advocating for this with your
fellow commissioners?
Answer. Yes.
Alaska's health care and telecom providers are struggling to keep
up with increased demand, financial strain, and diminished workforce
because of COVID-19. In early April, the Alaska delegation wrote to
Chairman Pai asking that he take certain steps in response to COVID-19
to facilitate the delivery of tele-health services in rural Alaska. We
requested suspending the new RHC rural rate setting rules from August
2019, which I have already mentioned. We also recommended waiving the
funding cap on Rural Health Care support for Funding Year 2021 to meet
increased telehealth demands. The FCC has imposed a cap on annual RHC
support of $581 million (adjusted for inflation), which makes it the
smallest of the Universal Service programs. This cap limits the
program's ability to provide adequate support in response to rapidly
increasing demand due to COVID. We also recommended suspending audits
and investigations, and extending response deadlines for responding to
USAC and FCC inquiries so tele-health providers can focus on providing
essential services during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Question 23. Will you commit to support waiving the funding cap on
RHC support due to the pandemic for Funding Year 2021 to the extent
that demand exceeds the cap imposed by the FCC? Will you commit to
advocating for this with your fellow commissioners?
Answer. As noted above, the FCC's August 2019 decision is credibly
claimed to be producing certain arbitrary and unjustified results. This
is clearly not in the public interest. If I am confirmed, I will
investigate the complaints about the August 2019 decision and advocate
for the FCC to take immediate, corrective action where warranted. The
urgency of this is only sharpened by the acute additional need caused
by the COVID-19 pandemic. If my findings suggest it is advisable to
suspend certain audits and investigations, I will recommend and
advocate doing so. As a commissioner, I would take seriously my
obligation to act against unfair results that are not in the public
interest.
Question 24. Will you commit to support suspending audits and
investigations, and extending deadlines for responding to FCC and USAC
inquiries? Will you commit to advocating for this with your fellow
commissioners?
Answer. The FCC has waived a number of rules due to impacts
associated with COVID-19. If confirmed, I would support continuing or
providing additional regulatory relief where compliance is not in the
public interest due to the demands of addressing COVID-19. If
confirmed, I would also advocate that my fellow commissioners do the
same. In addition, I commit to working with your office to obtain the
information necessary to acquire an informed judgment about the need to
suspend audits and investigations, and to extend deadlines for other
responses to FCC and USAC inquiries.
Question 25. Will you commit to support further waiving of the gift
rule for the RHC and E-Rate due to COVID-19? Will you commit to
advocating for this with your fellow commissioners?
Answer. In my opinion, waiving the gift rule during the COVID-19
pandemic has produced significant public interest benefits. Unless
there is evidence that I am currently unaware of, I do not see how the
public interest is supported by not further waiving the gift rule. If
confirmed, and based on the information currently available to me, I
would support further waiving of the gift rule.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
Nathan Simington
POLITICO Report. On November 23, POLITICO published a story by
reporter John Hendel titled ``Trump's FCC nominee sought to enlist
Fox's Laura Ingraham in anti-tech fight'' (https://www.politico.com/
news/2020/11/23/fcc-nathan-siming
ton-laura-ingraham-anti-tech-439806). The story stated the following:
Federal Communications Commission nominee Nathan Simington
reached out to Fox News this summer in an attempt at
``engaging'' host Laura Ingraham to support President Donald
Trump's quest to make it easier to sue social media companies
like Facebook and Twitter, according to e-mails obtained by
POLITICO.
Simington, a senior adviser in a key Commerce Department tech
agency, wrote that the popular Fox News host could help sway
the FCC to act on Trump's proposal before Election Day. He also
suggested that democracy hinged on the ability of the
commission--which has not traditionally regulated social
media--to target Silicon Valley companies.
``Any additional support we might be able to obtain could help
to get the FCC on board more quickly and thereby ensure a
freer, fairer social media landscape going into the elections
this fall,'' Simington wrote in a June 22 e-mail to a Fox News
staffer. ``This is of concern both to the presidency and also
down-ballot, and given the emerging role of social media as a
replacement for mass media, our democracy will be weakened if
we cannot respond to this issue quickly and effectively.''
Simington, who works for the Commerce Department's National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, wrote the e-
mail months before Trump nominated him for a five-year term on
the FCC.
Trump has spent the final months of his reelection campaign and
presidency feuding with the dominant social media platforms
after they started fact-checking his posts on topics such as
the pandemic and alleged election fraud. In a May executive
order, Trump asked the FCC to reexamine a congressionally
created liability shield that protects online companies from
suits over how they handle user-posted content.
Ingraham, whom Trump frequently has cited favorably, has echoed
the GOP's attacks on the tech industry and years earlier had
eyed joining the administration. Fellow Fox News host Tucker
Carlson publicly backed Simington's FCC nomination in an
October segment where he pressured Senate Republicans to speed
up.
During your testimony to the Committee at your confirmation
hearing, you indicated that you had a minimal role in developing and
advocating in support of the petition. This story suggests, Mr.
Simington, that you were less than truthful with the Committee about
your involvement with--and actions related to--NTIA's section 230
petition.
Question 1. Did you send e-mails to Fox News staff or staff for
other media organizations seeking support for the Section 230 petition?
Answer. Yes. I sent one e-mail to a Fox News staffer seeking to
raise awareness of the NTIA Section 230 petition. Other than that, I
did not communicate with any other media organization about the Section
230 petition. This e-mail was routine advocacy for earned media support
and as such was part and parcel of the role I serve at NTIA.
Question 2. With whom within NTIA, at the White House, or in the
Trump campaign did you consult in advance of sending the foregoing e-
mails?
Answer. I consulted with Adam Candeub, then Deputy Assistant
Secretary at NTIA. If there had been sufficient interest from Fox News,
I would then have spoken with NTIA's media communications personnel to
ensure proper content and presentation oversight and to receive overall
agency clearance. I did not consult with anyone at the White House or
President Trump's campaign regarding communication with Fox News either
in advance of sending the e-mail or subsequently.
Question 3. Please produce to the Committee copies of all e-mails
sent from your personal or professional e-mail accounts related to
NTIA's Section 230 petition. Please also produce records of any phone
calls, text messages, or other contacts you made with personal or
professional devices related to the petition.
Answer. Records generated in the course of my official duties are
agency records, not in my personal custody. I commit to working with
the NTIA's legislative affairs and general counsel's office to provide
the committee with responsive records, subject to Executive Branch
confidentiality interests.
Question 4. In what other activities did you engage to develop
support for the Section 230 petition? Please provide complete records
of all such activity.
Answer. Records generated in the course of my official duties are
agency records, not in my personal custody. I commit to working with
the NTIA's legislative affairs and general counsel's office to provide
the committee with responsive records, subject to Executive Branch
confidentiality interests.
To summarize in the interim, I communicated directly with a member
of the Fox News staff via one e-mail and one immediately subsequent
phone call. I communicated internally within NTIA about the text of an
op-ed to be proposed to the Wall Street Journal, but I had no
communications with the Wall Street Journal itself. I spoke briefly in
a regularly scheduled meeting of Digital Liberty's ``Friends of
Technology,'' as discussed in more detail in my letter of November 13,
2020, addressed to you, Chairman Wicker, and Senator Blumenthal. Other
than these listed activities, I engaged in no other activities to
develop support for the Section 230 petition.
Question 5. Did you have any conversations with staff of Fox News
or any other media organization seeking support for your nomination to
the FCC?
Answer. I had no such conversations.
Question 6. Please explain what you meant by your comment that the
Section 230 petition would ``ensure a freer, fairer social media
landscape going into the elections this fall. . . . This is of concern
both to the presidency and also down-ballot. . . .''
Answer. The petition describes NTIA's view that granting the
petition will ensure a freer and fairer social media landscape, which
in turn will enhance democratic dialogue. I was presenting the views in
that e-mail within the scope of my official duties.
Question 7. You were aware in advance of your nomination hearing
that various news organizations had filed FOIA requests for your
communications related to the Section 230 petition. The e-mail was sent
from your official account, and you knew that it would be disclosed as
part of any response to these FOIA requests. In light of those facts,
please explain why you refused to disclose this information to the
Committee either in advance of your hearing or in response to questions
from Committee members.
Answer. In the course of my official duties, I comply with all
Federal recordkeeping laws. That includes ensuring that all agency
records are maintained and accessible under the Freedom of Information
Act, subject to the statute's exemptions. I have disclosed to the
Committee all the information that was requested of me prior to,
during, and after the hearing. I did not refuse to disclose this
information, or any other information, to the Committee.
The video record of the hearing will show that, during the course
of Senator Blumenthal's questions about activities in support of the
petition, I answered completely, to the best of my ability, consistent
with the thrust of the Senator's questions and with respect for the
constraints on each member's allotted time. I have reviewed my
testimony before the Committee, and I confirm that my responses were
truthful and accurate.
Question 8. In light of this story, do you still maintain that you
had a minimal role in relation to the petition? If you answer in the
negative, please explain why you maintained in front of the Committee
that you had such a minimal role.
Answer. I had a minimal role in the petition. I believe my role in
the petition to be fully reflected in the documentary record, including
the e-mails you cite. In the context of the roles others played, my
role was indeed minor.
Question 9. In light of the questions that this report raises
concerning your candor with this Committee, would you agree to a
request that the majority hold your nomination in abeyance until such
time as you have produced the requested materials and made yourself
available for additional conversations with the Committee?
Answer. I believe that my answers to the Committee--during my
confirmation hearing and as set forth in my responses to questions for
the record--are sufficient for the Committee to determine whether to
advance my nomination.
Political Independence & FCC Section 230 Rulemaking. In response to
a decision by Twitter to mark two of his erroneous tweets with fact-
checking labels, President Trump issued an Executive Order ordering
your agency--the Department of Commerce--to file a petition with the
Federal Communications Commission to undercut Section 230 and punish
tech platforms for engaging in moderation activities.
According to your own testimony in front of the Committee (and
subsequent clarification), you had a role in preparing that petition
for filing, as well as promoting and defending that petition after
filing. And it has been widely reported that FCC Commissioner Mike
O'Rielly's re-nomination was pulled by the White House because he had
expressed concerns about the legality and propriety of the executive
order and the resulting NTIA petition.
Consumers deserve an independent FCC free from political
machinations. And it is equally important for Americans to have
confidence that appointees to these commissions act based on the law
and the record before them, not at the direction of the president or
with a presupposed determination on the outcome of a regulatory
proceeding.
Question 10. Do you acknowledge that it would be inappropriate for
the FCC to help the White House retaliate against those who express
their right to free speech in a manner that angers the President?
Answer. I acknowledge and fully agree that it would be
inappropriate for the FCC to help any party (whether the White House or
otherwise) to retaliate against any other party for any reason
whatsoever. I am not privy to President Trump's decision-making process
that led him to issue the Executive Order on Preventing Online
Censorship. I do know that I wholly embrace the opening paragraph of
that EO: ``Free speech is the bedrock of American democracy. Our
Founding Fathers protected this sacred right with the First Amendment
to the Constitution. The freedom to express and debate ideas is the
foundation for all of our rights as a free people.'' If I am fortunate
enough to be confirmed, I will be an impartial and independent voice on
the Commission and follow the law regardless of the political context.
Question 11. Did you make any commitments to the White House about
your ultimate decision in the Section 230 proceeding or any other
proceeding before the agency?
Answer. I have made no commitments to the White House or anyone as
to my ultimate decisions on any matter if confirmed.
Question 12. How can this Committee be assured that you will act in
a fully impartial and independent manner as an FCC commissioner?
Answer. I believe my experience and past record demonstrate my
impartiality and independence. I commit to act in a fully impartial and
independent manner as an FCC commissioner, if confirmed.
Question 13. How would you respond to those that claim that your
role in developing and defending the petition shows that you have a
closed mind on this issue, or would approach it predisposed to reject
arguments against the FCC acting on the petition?
Answer. First, I refer you to my answer in question 12. Second, I
must note that my job as a senior advisor at NTIA was to advocate on
behalf of that agency. My job as a commissioner, should I be confirmed,
will be to exercise independent judgment--regardless of whether my
judgment conforms to that of the Executive Branch and regardless of the
party in power. In short, I commit to act in a fully impartial and
independent manner as an FCC commissioner.
Recusal. It is standard practice for FCC commissioners--especially
newly-confirmed commissioners--to recuse themselves from any proceeding
in which they have personally engaged in a substantive manner in their
previous role. Previous reports indicated that you played a central
role in developing the petition NTIA filed at the FCC proposing changes
to section 230 sought by the administration, while more recent reports
indicate that you had a key role in developing public and political
support for the petition, including by tying the petition to the 2020
presidential election.
Your personal role in advocating changes to the FCC's rules raises
serious concerns about your ability to weigh the record in this matter
on an impartial basis. Already, a wide cross-section of stakeholders
have raised questions about the legal authority of the FCC to adopt
rules under Section 230, as well as the appropriateness of the FCC's
actions in this matter. But many have doubts whether you will credit
these arguments, given that refuting them was central to the petition
that you helped craft and promote.
Question 14. Will you commit to this Committee that you will recuse
yourself in the pending Section 230 rulemaking, especially in light of
the evidence of your efforts to build public and political support for
that petition?
Answer. If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed, I pledge to defer
to the advice I will receive from appropriate counsel at the FCC on
whether I should recuse myself from further participation in the
Section 230 proceeding.
Question 15. Mr. Simington, you indicated that you would consult
with relevant ethics officials about recusal on this issue. Have you
had any such discussions with any relevant ethics officials, including
at the White House and the FCC? Would you agree that Congress and the
public deserves clarity on this matter prior to this Committee acting
on your nomination? Would you request that the majority delay
consideration of your nomination until the ethical questions
surrounding your role in the section 230 petition are resolved?
Answer. I have not yet discussed recusal with the relevant ethics
officials, as such discussions would be premature. I trust that my
answers to the Committee--during my confirmation hearing and as set
forth in my responses to questions for the record--are sufficient for
the Committee to determine whether to advance my nomination.
General Spectrum Policy. The FCC's spectrum decision-making process
may be irreparably broken. Time and time again, the agency has run
roughshod over other Federal agencies and key stakeholder communities
in its quest to hand more spectrum over to commercial wireless
companies.
We all understand the importance of making spectrum available for
mobile services, including 5G. But the public interest in spectrum
cannot always bend toward the wireless companies and away from public
safety, national security, science, space, and other essential spectrum
uses.
As I said a few months ago when the current members of the FCC
appeared before us, the Federal government needs a better process for
making these spectrum decisions.
And if the FCC cannot be a cooperative part of that process, then
Congress may have to think about changes to how spectrum policy is
developed.
Question 16. Mr. Simington, given that you claim to have
significant experience with Federal spectrum issues at NTIA and that
agency has questioned several of this FCC's spectrum moves, do you
agree that the consultation process between the FCC and the Federal
government is broken?
Answer. The relationship between the FCC and the Executive Branch
should certainly be improved. I pledge to work with your office and
this Committee to improve this process going forward. For example, the
memorandum of understanding (``MOU'') between the NTIA and FCC in
regard to spectrum management decisions could be updated and clarified.
A more robust MOU to address this point could be helpful in assisting
the FCC and the Executive Branch agencies in resolving conflicts.
Question 17. You indicated during your confirmation hearing that
you believed that the spectrum coordination process could be improved.
How would you propose that we fix this process to make sure that public
safety, national security, science, and other essential stakeholders
have a real voice at the table in these decisions?
Answer. The FCC faces conflicting imperatives, as Congress has
directed it to continue commercializing spectrum even as much of the
most viable spectrum for commercialization remains committed to public
safety, national security, science and other vitally important
applications. It should be incumbent upon the FCC to develop a complete
record before it makes a decision. I will fully support all efforts by
the Commission to make sure that public safety, national security,
science, and other essential stakeholders have a real voice at the
table in these decisions and that decisions are made that balance these
interests in a prompt but thoughtful manner.
Ligado. This is a unique and unprecedented moment for spectrum
policy. NTIA--the agency for which you work--along with the entirety of
the Executive Branch believe that the FCC's approval in April 2020 of
Ligado's terrestrial wireless plans threatens the Nation's GPS system.
I joined a bipartisan letter with 31 of my fellow senators urging
the FCC to reconsider and stay its decision given the threat to GPS.
NTIA has formally asked the FCC to pause, rethink, and reconsider its
decision in light of the significant threat it poses to our Nation's
safety and security. And I have received a commitment from two of your
potential colleagues at the Commission--Commissioners Rosenworcel and
Starks--that they would support a pause on Ligado, as well as the
Commissioner that you would replace.
Question 18. Given the unprecedented pushback and the high stakes
involved for public safety and the larger economy, would you agree the
right course of action is for the FCC to halt Ligado's plans to deploy
its network until these serious concerns about harmful interference to
GPS are satisfactorily resolved?
Answer. This is a perfect example of the coordination problems
between the FCC and the NTIA. On my review of the Ligado decision, I
believe that I have identified process and communication errors that
led to the present state of uncertainty. I note that a number of
Executive Branch agencies are subject to statutory constraints
requiring them, based on their understanding of the Ligado decision, to
oppose its outcome. For example, the Defense Department is subject to a
statutory prohibition on allowing the GPS network to come to harm. As
such, if confirmed, I would immediately undertake such research,
outreach, and actions, subject to FCC legal obligations and
restrictions, as I would determine to be necessary to address Executive
Branch agency concerns.
5.9 GHz and Auto Safety. As I'm sure you're aware, the FCC's action
to open up the 5.9 gigahertz band to unlicensed uses has generated
significant controversy. While I recognize that demand for wireless
spectrum is only growing, the FCC must ensure that we protect critical
transportation safety use of this band. It is a key band supporting
technologies reducing vehicle-related crashes and potentially saving
thousands of lives each year. In fact, the Department of Transportation
strongly opposes the FCC action to allow unlicensed use of this band,
and had asked the agency to pull the item from its November agenda.
Question 19. Mr. Simington, would you agree that Federal spectrum
policy is stronger when it is the result of cooperative decision-making
between the FCC and impacted Federal agencies.
Answer. Yes, I agree. The FCC is subject to the Communications Act
in ways that other agencies are not, which may lead to conflicting
imperatives between the FCC and such agencies as the Department of
Transportation. However, the FCC cannot operate effectively without
cooperating to the maximum extent possible with other Federal
agencies--particularly those impacted by FCC decisions. Federal
spectrum policy is greatly harmed when agency conflicts cannot be
resolved via interagency process and coordination.
Question 20. Given the controversy surrounding this proposal, would
you favor taking a step back on this proceeding and reconsidering the
FCC's recent decision until such time as the Department of
Transportation's concerns can be adequately addressed?
Answer. I do not have access to the FCC's internal deliberations.
However, if confirmed, I would consult with the staff and the other
Commissioners in order to formulate a definitive view of the question.
I would, of course, be willing to consider any petition for
reconsideration that is appropriately before the Commission. I believe
that petitioners are entitled to a timely response to their petitions,
and that disposing of such petitions--one way or the other--is simply
good governance. Once I have an opportunity to examine the record, I
would support staying these rules pending action on the petitions for
reconsideration where good cause has been shown.
Question 21. The FCC's recent decision in the 5.9 GHz proceeding
represents yet another example of the FCC moving forward over the
objections of another agency. In this case, it was the Department of
Transportation. If confirmed, what would you do to improve the Federal
spectrum management process and ensure that the FCC conducts spectrum
policymaking in a cooperative and collaborative manner?
Answer. This question is important because it speaks to the
different statutory standards of accountability between the FCC and the
Executive Branch agencies. Ultimately, the FCC is accountable to its
statutory standards under the Communications Act. These statutory
standards may be incompatible with those of other agencies; as such,
the FCC may be legally required to act in a way that is unacceptable to
other Executive Branch agencies. This issue highlights the importance
of improving legal and technical communication between the FCC and the
NTIA and of having the NTIA serve as a greater clearinghouse for
Executive Branch concerns. In immediate furtherance of this goal, I
would support taking a fresh look at the FCC-NTIA Memorandum of
Understanding and of building out institutional and personal
communications between the two agencies.
Weather Spectrum. Last year, FCC Chairman Pai chose to move forward
on a plan to put spectrum in the 24 gigahertz band to market that
failed to adequately protect weather spectrum immediately adjacent to
that band. He moved ahead over the objections of the Department of
Commerce, NASA, NOAA, and the American Meteorological Society.
This very public, intra-government squabble demonstrated how little
Chairman Pai respects the role of other agencies, and specifically the
expert science agencies, in the broader Federal spectrum management
process and how broken that process is. More importantly for this
particular slice of spectrum, Chairman Pai's move put critical
operations that are key to vital weather forecasting operations at
risk.
At the International Telecommunications Union's World Radio
Conference in 2019, the international community disagreed with Pai's
move and adopted more stringent protections based on sound science and
analysis.
But even those more stringent standards may cause damage to
important weather forecasting data--as NOAA concluded in a study it
recently submitted to congressional appropriators.
Question 22. If confirmed, would you support the FCC immediately
adopting the more stringent interference standards agreed to by the
international community?
Answer. I do not have access to FCC internal deliberations on this
matter. As such, I am not yet in a position to provide an informed
judgment on what constitutes a reasonable set of interference standards
in this area. I do commit to seeking to obtain that information and
taking such steps as are necessary to ensure the adoption of reasonable
interference standards.
Question 23. Will you also commit to working collaboratively with
NASA and NOAA to find ways to deploy 5G that will minimize the damage
to critical weather safety data?
Answer. Yes.
Question 24. Will you also commit to encourage industry to work
collaboratively with NOAA and NASA on these issues?
Answer. Yes.
Serving the Public Interest. Mr. Simington, a significant amount of
the FCC's work concerns weighing how the proposed action serves the
public interest. For example, the FCC uses a public interest standard
to determine whether to approve mergers--small and large. The previous
FCC based the Open Internet rules--in part--on a public interest
analysis. This public interest standard, in my view, is critical to the
FCC's work. The current FCC has contorted this standard to allow for
corporate interests--and mega mergers--to prevail.
Question 25. Mr. Simington, what does the public interest standard
mean to you and how will it guide you in your decision-making processes
as an FCC commissioner, if confirmed?
Answer. If I am confirmed, I will be a strong advocate for the
FCC's public interest mandate. As I discussed during my confirmation
hearing, the public interest is where telecom's rubber meets the road.
For example, I will ensure that the FCC continues to fulfill its
obligation to prevent illegal marketing, keep 9-1-1 up to date, improve
spectrum management, and restrain unwanted robocalls. Applications to
transfer control of licenses and authorizations, like all actions of
the FCC, should be reviewed with our public interest mandate at the
center of our inquiry.
Question 26. If confirmed as an FCC commissioner, will you pledge
to protect the interests of American consumers instead of corporate
interests?
Answer. Yes. I pledge to act in the public interest, including
protecting consumers, promoting economic growth, and connecting all
Americans.
Local News. I released a report a few weeks ago about the decline
in local news in the United States, and possible actions policymakers
can take to bolster local journalism.
Question 27. The FCC has a role in ensuring the health of the
broadcast industry and making sure broadcasters operate in the public
interest. In my mind, that public interest obligation should include
making investments in truly local journalism. Should you be confirmed,
how would you propose to help ensure the health of local broadcast news
operations?
Answer. Local broadcasting is a critical component in our media
landscape. Promoting competition, diversity and localism are
fundamental commission mandates. I am deeply committed to ensuring our
policies are consistent with these goals and will do my best to ensure
that they are, if confirmed.
Broadcast Consolidation and Deregulation. The current FCC has
systematically eliminated a number of longstanding rules designed to
preserve the ``local'' in local broadcasting. For example, it threw out
the rule requiring broadcasters to have a studio in their local
community, allowing for the nationalization of local news. And it
abandoned decades-old limits on broadcast consolidation based on legal
analysis so thin that a court called it effectively non-existent.
Question 28. Mr. Simington, localism and diversity have been core
tenants of broadcast policy at the FCC. Do you believe that these
decisions by the FCC actually further those goals? Are rampant media
consolidation and nationalization of broadcast operations truly
consistent with the public interest?
Answer. I have not had an opportunity to review the record in those
proceedings, but I share your goals of promoting a vibrant local
broadcasting marketplace in all parts of the country.
Tribal Issues. Mr. Simington, our Nation's Tribal communities lag
far behind everyone else in access to communications services,
especially broadband. According to a report issued by the FCC in May
2019, less than half of households in Indian Country have access to
high-speed broadband service. This represents a nearly 27-point gap
compared to non-Tribal rural areas. According to the same report, this
gap only widens when compared to the country-wide average; 31 percent
of households on Tribal lands lack access to high-speed broadband
service compared to seven percent of Americans in non-Tribal areas.
Indian Country has waited long enough for broadband. The FCC needs to
do better.
Question 29. Mr. Simington, how would you propose the FCC improve
its coordination and consultation with Tribal nations on issues under
its jurisdiction?
Answer. I commit to fully engage with the FCC's Office of Native
Affairs and Policy and the Native Nations Communications Task Force,
and such other assets as are appropriate and necessary, to improve the
agency's coordination and consultation with Tribal nations on issues
under its jurisdiction.
Question 30. Mr. Simington, Tribal stakeholders have complained for
years that the FCC's universal service programs consistently
underinvest in improving communications networks on Tribal lands.
Legislation that I crafted with Senator Udall, which just advanced
through the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, would help rectify this
underinvestment by dedicating at least five percent of universal
service funds to Tribal lands. Do you support this legislation? What
steps should the FCC take to make sure that move universal service
money is dedicated to the needs of our Tribal communities?
Answer. The FCC has provided increased support on tribal lands,
through increased Lifeline subsidies and through the Rural Tribal
Priority Window in the 2.5 GHz band, but clearly more support is needed
considering the persistence of a severe digital divide in Indian
Country. I fully support further efforts--whether through legislation
or action at the FCC under existing authority--to ensure that Tribal
communities bridge the digital divide.
Question 31. Mr. Simington, the Government Accountability Office
issued a report a few years ago noting that one of the reasons the FCC
has underinvested in Tribal lands is the poor data it collects on
broadband availability and the maps it generates as a result. As you
know, Congress just passed legislation to reform the FCC's broadband
data collection and mapping. Would you agree that the FCC should pause
distribution of a significant portion of its universal service Connect
America Fund money until its maps are reformed and we better understand
the broadband gap in this country?
Answer. I believe that closing the digital divide is one of the
most pressing issues facing our Nation today. I further believe that
the current Commission has struck an appropriate balance between the
need to move quickly and the need to gather more accurate data. I will,
if confirmed, support all efforts the Commission may make to gather
complete and accurate data to support efforts to close the broadband
gap. The situation on Tribal lands illustrates the tension between
speed and accuracy. It is almost certainly the case that fewer people
on Tribal lands will gain connectivity if Connect America Fund monies
are distributed on the basis of current mapping than they would be on
the basis of improved mapping. However, improved mapping will delay
buildouts, meaning that no one will gain connectivity during the
interval in which improved maps are prepared.
E-Rate and Rural Health Care Programs. Mr. Simington, as I hope you
are aware, the FCC's E-Rate and Rural Health Care programs have been
very successful in connecting the Nation's schools, libraries, and
rural healthcare facilities to broadband. In fact, I and my colleagues
have argued that the FCC needs to leverage the success of these two
programs to further expand broadband connectivity during the ongoing
COVID-19 crisis for remote learning, telehealth, and to help close the
digital divide in many of our communities.
Question 32. Mr. Simington, in the information you provided to the
Committee, you have suggested that one of the major contributions you
think you can make to the FCC is to help better manage universal
service. Many of us in Congress believe, however, that the E-Rate and
Rural Health Care programs are highly successful now. Would you commit
to taking no steps as a Commissioner that would undermine, undercut or
underfund these two programs?
Answer. Yes.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to
Nathan Simington
Accessible, Affordable Internet for All Act. A recent study found
that 17 million K-12 students do not have access to high-speed Internet
and 7 million do not have computers at home. My bill--the Accessible,
Affordable Internet for All Act--includes dedicated funding to enable
schools and libraries to make use of Wi-Fi hotspots and devices (such
as laptops and tablets) to help students learn from home.
Question 1. Do you believe the FCC is doing enough to ensure that
students are connected to high-speed Internet during the pandemic?
Answer. I believe there is always room for improvement in
government programs, E-Rate included. The pandemic has only underscored
the importance of keeping students connected. If confirmed, I look
forward to working with this Committee and my fellow commissions to
looking at ways to modernize the program.
Question 2. If confirmed, what would you do to ensure we connect
every student to high-speed internet, and will you commit to supporting
efforts to improve the E-Rate program?
Answer. I commit to supporting efforts to improve the E-Rate
program. I will support such actions as are authorized under the
Communications Act to ensure that that students are connected to high-
speed internet, during the pandemic and beyond.
T-Mobile/Sprint Merger. Last October, the FCC voted along party
lines to approve the proposed merger of T-Mobile and Sprint. As Ranking
Member of the Antitrust Subcommittee and a member of this Committee, I
repeatedly raised concerns about the harmful effects of eliminating one
of the only four nationwide wireless network operators. The Trump
Administration's settlement with T-Mobile recognized that the
transaction posed a threat to mobile competition and required the sale
of certain assets to Dish Network, a satellite television provider with
no existing mobile network.
Question 3. In your view, what impact will having only three
nationwide wireless carriers have on our country's ability to deploy
5G?
Answer. I believe the FCC and the DOJ correctly assessed that Dish
has every incentive, and the ability, to enter the U.S. wireless market
as a fourth nationwide facilities-based network competitor. I strongly
believe in facilities-based competition and fully intend to support
policies that drive investment, innovation, and competition in the
wireless market.
Question 4. If confirmed, what actions will you take to ensure that
T-Mobile and Dish honor their commitments to the FCC and that Dish
actually emerges as a viable mobile network operator?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure, to the extent of my ability as
an individual Commissioner, that T-Mobile and Dish honor their
commitments to the FCC. The public interest would be well served by the
emergence of Dish as a full-fledged facilities-based network
competitor.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Richard Blumenthal to
Nathan Simington
Section 230. During your November 10 nominations hearing, I asked
you whether you had presented at Americans for Tax Reform in defense of
the NTIA's petition on Section 230. Your response at the time was:
``No, I've never presented, I've never given any kind of formal
presentation or address to the Americans for Tax Reform.''
Additionally, you stated that you had ``played a minor role in drafting
the petition.''
In a November 13 letter, you acknowledged that you had spoken at an
event put on by Digital Liberty on August 7 (after the petition was
sent to the FCC), indicating that you spoke ``for five minutes on the
topic `NTIA's CDA 230 Petition'. . .to outline the rulemaking requested
under the NTIA petition.'' You wrote that you were ``unaware that
Digital Liberty is affiliated with ATR.'' The first sentence of the
``About Us'' page of Digital Liberty is ``Digital Liberty is a project
of Americans for Tax Reform that advocates for free market technology,
telecommunications, and media policy.''
Additionally, according to e-mails obtained by Politico through a
Freedom of Information Act request, you also coordinated outreach to
Fox News, attempting to encourage host Laura Ingraham to support the
order, writing ``this is of concern both to the presidency and also
down-ballot'' and to push the FCC. Finally, in another e-mail, Deputy
Assistant Secretary Adam Candeub described your role as ``instrumental
in drafting these regs.''
Question 1. Please describe in full your role with respect to the
NTIA's petition and subsequent engagements on Section 230, including in
drafting, outreach, media, agency coordination, and other
participation, before and after submission of the petition.
Answer. Beginning in June 2020, the Deputy Acting Secretary of the
NTIA informed me that I would be working on the petition. He furnished
me with his initial draft about two weeks after I joined the NTIA. My
assignments consisted of sourcing and identifying items in the news
regarding relevant complaints about the restriction of speech on social
media; researching the cost structures, information content, and
moderation policies of proprietary online services of the 1990s;
reviewing drafts for completeness, consistency, and correctness; and
reviewing sources cited in order to ensure that they were characterized
fully and correctly.
Question 2. During your nomination hearing, in response to a
question from Chairman Wicker, you stated that you would ``estimate
that the number of words actually written by me in the petition would
be on the order of 5 percent to 7 percent.'' What is the 5-7 percent of
the petition that you wrote?
Answer. The material in the petition originally drafted by me is
found primarily on pages 6-7 (current controversies over content
moderation on social media,) 9-13 (characterization of proprietary
online services and contemporary social media company business models,)
and 43-44 (examples of inconsistent and unpredictable standards for
content moderation on contemporary social media.)
Question 3. Given that you told Chairman Wicker, ``I didn't draft
any of the original versions of the petition,'' when Mr. Candeub wrote
that you were ``instrumental in drafting these regs,'' was he wrong?
Answer. I would like to think that I was a valued contributor to
the team that produced and managed that petition, but I did not draft
the original version either of the petition or of the regulations. My
job at NTIA was to advance the policy views of the Administration. That
is what I did on Section 230, just as with all other matters that I
worked on.
Question 4. What was the purpose behind participating in the
Digital Liberty roundtable, given that the NTIA's petition had already
been submitted to the FCC?
Answer. I engaged in limited advocacy in the ordinary course for
general support of the petition. Such advocacy is part and parcel of
the role I serve in at NTIA.
Question 5. Please list all meetings, whether public or private,
that you have solicited or held with non-Federal government entities
regarding the NTIA petition on Section 230.
Answer. The only such meeting I have to report is the Digital
Liberty roundtable previously discussed.
Question 6. Why did you seek to promote the NTIA petition on
Section 230 on the Wall Street Journal and Fox News, and did you
approach any other media outlets in this effort?
Answer. I engaged in limited advocacy in the ordinary course for
general support of the petition. Such advocacy is part and parcel of
the role I serve in at NTIA. I did not approach the Wall Street Journal
myself, and other than these two media outlets, I did not approach or
discuss approaching any others.
Question 7. Based on FOIA requests, Politico has portrayed you as
having been actively involved in the drafting of the Op-Ed that was
written for the Wall Street Journal. Please provide the draft Op-Ed,
describe your involvement, and explain why the Op-Ed wasn't placed.
Answer. Records generated in the course of my official duties are
agency records, not in my personal custody. I commit to working with
our agency's legislative affairs and general counsel's office to
provide the committee with responsive records, subject to Executive
Branch confidentiality interests. I have no information as to why the
Op-Ed was not placed.
Question 8. You stated that you had ``not discussed plans, [or] any
contemplated future action of the FCC on the part of 230 with the White
House'' but acknowledged discussing Section 230 with members of the
Presidential Personnel Office while you were under consideration for
the FCC nomination. Please describe the conversations regarding Section
230 you had with the White House or these members of the Presidential
Personnel Office specifically.
Answer. I had a conversation about a variety of topics with members
of the Presidential Personnel Office, including about my work at NTIA.
Section 230 was part of that discussion. I told the Presidential
Personnel Office that Section 230 was an important part of America's
online freedom regime and that any legislative and regulatory reforms
must be thoughtful and careful so as not to undermine the positive
aspects of Section 230 as a law. However, this conversation was limited
to my general views on Section 230. It did not include any discussion
of plans or contemplated future action of the FCC relating to Section
230.
Question 9. According to the e-mail you sent to Fox News, you
believe that the Section 230 petition was important for the electoral
prospects of the President and Republican candidates. Please explain
why the NTIA, a Federal agency responsible for telecommunication
policy, acted to specifically benefit Republican electoral prospects.
Answer. The petition describes NTIA's view that granting the
petition will ensure a freer and fairer social media landscape, which
in turn will enhance democratic dialogue. I was presenting the views in
that e-mail within the scope of my official duties.
Question 10. During the hearing, you declined to commit to recusing
yourself from any matters involving the NTIA Petition on Section 230.
Do you maintain the position that you will not commit to recusal?
Answer. If fortunate enough to be confirmed, I pledge to defer to
the advice I will receive from appropriate counsel at the FCC on
whether I should recuse myself from further participation in the
Section 230 proceeding.
Question 11. One of the most important duties of a commissioner on
an independent regulatory body is to approach issues with an open mind,
and to make decisions based upon the record before the agency (not
one's predisposed position). Given your role at NTIA--and now
acknowledged commentary and potentially advocacy on behalf of the
petition and its partisan political implications--how can the public be
assured that you can approach the FCC rulemaking on this matter in an
open and neutral manner consistent with the duties of a Commissioner?
Doesn't that fact alone suggest that you should recuse yourself from
this matter?
Answer. My answers to this Committee, verbally and in writing, have
been complete and correct to the best of my knowledge and ability. I
must note that my job as a senior advisor at NTIA was to advocate on
behalf of that agency. My job as a commissioner, should I be confirmed,
will be to exercise independent judgment--regardless of whether my
judgment conforms to that of the Executive Branch and regardless of the
party in power. In short, I commit to act in a fully impartial and
independent manner as an FCC commissioner.
Question 12. In the Restoring Internet Freedom Order, the FCC twice
stated ``we also are not persuaded that section 230 of the
Communications Act is a grant of regulatory authority that could
provide the basis for conduct rules here.'' Given the legal argument
you have represented in the NTIA petition, why would the FCC not have
the authority to write rules for net neutrality and other matters
involving Title I services under Section 230?
Answer. The General Counsel of the FCC has outlined the FCC's view
as to why it is proper to accept jurisdiction. If confirmed, I would
examine the record and reach my own conclusions about the proper role
of Section 230 as to the petition and any other FCC proceedings.
Rivada Networks. On September 18, the Department of Defense
released a request for information (RFI) on ``innovative solutions and
technologies for dynamic sharing of the department's current spectrum
allocation to accelerate spectrum sharing and 5G deployment.'' This RFI
has raised concerns that the DOD is considering a proposal by the
company Rivada Networks to create a wholesale 5G network using DOD
spectrum holdings.
Question 13. What discussions have you had within the NTIA or with
other government agencies, including the Office of the President,
regarding the Rivada Networks' proposal to use, wholesale, or share DOD
spectrum holdings for commercial wireless purposes?
Answer. None.
Question 14. Do you support Rivada Networks' calls for the creation
a wholesale 5G network based on DOD spectrum holdings? Do you support
DOD issuing a Request for Proposals that would facilitate DOD utilizing
Rivada's approach to spectrum sharing?
Answer. I support the auction regime that has been legislated by
Congress. Some sort of grant regime to establish a nationalized network
would contradict the manner in which the U.S. won the race to 4G. It is
also unclear how a DOD 5G network could be commercialized, legally
speaking. Spectrum is not a network; I am not sure the prospects of
nationalizing 5G is a real threat, but we should not create uncertainty
in the marketplace by leaving the idea out there.
Question 15. Do you believe that it is appropriate for DOD spectrum
assets to be leased or reused for a commercial wholesale network by a
private sector company? Do you believe that DOD has the legal authority
to engage in such activity without NTIA or FCC authorization?
Answer. I think the idea of some sort of nationalized commercial
network using DOD spectrum is a distraction from the important work
that the FCC and the rest of government needs to do to give American
industry the tools they need to lead the world in 5G.
Question 16. Please describe any work you have done on this matter
at the NTIA.
Answer. None.
C-Band. On February 28, the FCC voted on a 3-2 basis to reallocate
and auction 280 Megahertz of the 3.7-4.2 GHz Band for the purpose of
commercial wireless services. This C-Band spectrum is currently used
for satellite transmissions, and satellite companies have opposed plans
to move or repack their operations.
As a part of this transition, the FCC proposed to offer incumbent
satellite operators the option to accelerate their move in exchange for
payment of their relocation costs--as much as $5.2 billion--plus a $9.7
billion accelerated relocation payment. Critics of this arrangement
have questioned the legal basis for and appropriateness of such
transactions. I would appreciate your view and expertise given your
background in telecommunication regulations and procurement law.
Question 17. Do you believe that the FCC has the authority to
require in auction rules that winning bidders financially remunerate
incumbent satellite operators over and above their relocation costs, as
required under the February Order?
Answer. I have not had an opportunity to review the record on this
complex matter, nor have I had the benefit of briefings from
stakeholders on these issues. If confirmed, I would educate myself on
all of these matters and render an independent and impartial judgment
if this issue is placed before me.
Question 18. Do you believe that the decision to pay incumbent
satellite operators nearly $10 billion dollars is an appropriate use of
revenue that would otherwise go to rural broadband deployment or to the
U.S. Treasury?
Answer. I have not had an opportunity to review the record on this
complex matter, nor have I had the benefit of briefings from
stakeholders on these issues. If confirmed, I would educate myself on
all of these matters and render an independent and impartial judgment
if this issue is placed before me.
Question 19. Please describe any work you have done on this matter
at the NTIA.
Answer. I have not worked directly on the C-Band auction. Most of
the NTIA's policy work on this matter was complete prior to my joining
the NTIA. I have not worked on the very recently-arising matters
involving concerns about altimeters relating to C-Band interference.
Ligado Networks. On April 20, the FCC unanimously approved an
application by Ligado Networks to deploy a low-power terrestrial
nationwide network in the band used by GPS operators. The Department of
Defense and other Federal agencies opposed this decision, citing
concerns about interference with existing GPS receivers. In response to
a question from Senator Lee, you stated that the FCC followed its
statute and obeyed its legal standard. I appreciate your background
knowledge on this matter, and willingness to discuss it with the
Committee.
Question 20. Do you support the FCC's unanimous approval of the
Ligado Networks petition or would you act to stay the Ligado decision?
Answer. Serious potential real-world harms have been credibly
alleged regarding implementation of the systems permitted by the
license revisions granted under the petition. I have not had the
opportunity to review FCC internal deliberations and engage with FCC
technical experts. Considering the seriousness of the alleged harms, if
confirmed, I would make review of the full Ligado record a top
priority.
Question 21. Do you believe that the standard of ``harmful
interference'' used in the FCC decision was the correct standard for
evaluation of the petition?
Answer. The ``harmful interference'' standard used by the FCC is
found in 47 CFR Sec. 2.1(c). This definition is identical to that found
in the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Radio Regulations.
It is possible that the FCC's standard could be further refined in the
future.
Question 22. Do you believe the mitigation measures required by the
FCC are adequate toward addressing concerns related to interference
with GPS receivers?
Answer. I do not have a settled view of the technical questions
raised--and indeed, there appears to be a split among U.S. Government
technical experts on this question. If confirmed, I will make it a
priority to require U.S. Government technical experts to further
develop the record so that Congress and the FCC do not have to pick
sides in a politicized conflict.
Question 23. How would you propose to resolve the disagreement
between the DOD and the FCC?
Answer. I have spoken to senior DOD figures at some length about
both revisions to their testing regime and potential legal strategies
to employ. I believe that ultimately, there must be a meeting of the
minds among technical experts, which must be reflected by legal and
policy decisions informed by both technical information and respect for
the mandates given to the respective agencies by Congress.
Question 24. Please describe any work you have done on this matter
at the NTIA.
Answer. Ligado was the first item that I reviewed and briefed upon
joining the NTIA. I read the report and order, the publicly available
technical materials, and relevant procedural materials in order to
explain the ruling and its significance to the Office of the Assistant
Secretary. Subsequently, I did a further technical and legal review in
order to develop recommendations for the Department of Defense on legal
and evidentiary strategies for the currently pending petitions for stay
and reconsideration.
Lifeline. The Coronavirus pandemic and social distancing are a
resounding demonstration of the importance of Lifeline. In normal
times, Lifeline is underutilized--and those that depend on the program
say that the benefits are not as robust as they should be given the
pressing need for broadband in our daily lives. During a pandemic--when
schools are shut down, businesses are limited, and thousands of
families face new economic challenges--a robust Lifeline program is
more essential than ever so that people have the ability to communicate
and stay connected.
As a result of a Wireline Competition Bureau order released on
November 18, Lifeline's Minimum Service Standards will now increase by
1.5 Gigabytes per month. Chairman Pai has supported such an increase in
the standard, but other Commissioners have supported a pause-and-study
approach out of concern about the impact of such an increase. There is
a real possibility of Lifeline becoming unsustainable or less
competitive if assumptions, possibly made based on poor data, prove to
be inaccurate.
Question 25. Do you support increasing the minimum service
standards as the Wireline Competition Bureau did on November 16?
Answer. I do not have sufficient information to provide an informed
judgment on the appropriate minimum service standards. I do understand,
however, that absent WCB action on November 16, the minimum service
standards would have been significantly more difficult for non-
facilities-based providers to meet. I fully support any effort to
improve the Lifeline program as a means of closing the digital divide.
Question 26. The FCC established the National Verifier to cut down
on waste, fraud, and abuse--and to make it easier for those who do need
Lifeline to access it. This is a goal I think we all share. However,
the Verifier still lacks access to key eligibility databases and needs
urgent support. How would you fix the Verifier system?
Answer. I fully support the National Verifier system, and look
forward to reviewing and, to the extent necessary, developing the
record to improve its functionality. I will support any effort to
reduce waste, fraud and abuse in this critical program.
Question 27. Unfortunately, many eligible subscribers who could
benefit from the Lifeline program are unaware that it exists. Only 7
million subscribers are enrolled in Lifeline while approximately 38
million are eligible. Please list three steps you would take to improve
Lifeline to meet the needs of those families who need it.
Answer. I am deeply committed to closing the digital divide. I will
support and actively advocate for any Commission efforts to improve
Lifeline to meet the needs of those families who need it.
1. I support efforts by the FCC and other parts of government to
publicize the availability of Lifeline-supported services.
2. I support ensuring that Lifeline providers meet their obligations
to advertise their Lifeline services.
3. I support efforts the Commission may take to close the digital
divide and improve awareness of the Lifeline program.
E-Rate. On March 16, Senator Markey, myself, and sixteen Senate
colleagues wrote to the FCC asking the Commission to help provide
connectivity under the agency's E-Rate program for students engaged in
remote learning during the pandemic. We asked the FCC to temporarily
allow E-Rate funding to be used to provide home wireless devices and
hotspots to students. Chairman Pai, however, has refused to interpret
the Communications Act to allow schools to support their students in
these challenging times--taking an unnecessarily limited view on the
agency's authority that is not shared by all Commissioners.
Question 28. What is your position on whether the FCC can re-
interpret the definition of ``classroom'' under the statute, or
otherwise waive rules under emergency authorities, in order to allow
schools to use E-Rate funding to provide devices and broadband Internet
access services to students learning from home?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the record and
the law on the question of whether Section 254 precludes using E-Rate
funding for that purpose. Learning in the home is more important than
ever. I commit to engaging with my colleagues and the staff at the FCC
to determine what our statutory authority is in this area.
Question 29. Please list three steps that the FCC should take right
now to address the Homework Gap--to support Connecticut families who do
not have broadband due to its high cost.
Answer. I have clearly stated my commitment to closing the digital
divide. I will support and actively advocate for any Commission efforts
to improve E-Rate--and Lifeline--to meet the needs of those families
who need it.
1. Applicants are entitled to clear and timely determinations
regarding their eligibility for funding. It's critically
important that applicants and providers understand the rules of
the game up front, and that those rules not be changed
midstream.
2. I support improving the administration of the E-Rate program
through improved oversight of USAC.
3. I support efforts by the Commission to close the digital divide,
including efforts to raise awareness and the effectiveness of
Lifeline and E-Rate.
5.9 GHz. In September 2020, the NTIA filed a letter with the FCC
supporting the FCC's concept of reallocating parts of the 5.9 GHz band
for use in Wi-Fi networks. The Department of Transportation opposed
this proposal, arguing that the 5.9 GHz Band should be reserved for
existing automotive safety purposes. On November 18, the FCC decided to
move forward with plans to reallocate more than half of the 5.9 GHz
band over the concerns of the DOT.
Question 30. Do you agree with the FCC's decision to open up the
5.9 GHz band for Wi-Fi use based on its proposed arrangement?
Answer. As discussed above, I would, of course, be willing to
consider any petition for reconsideration that is appropriately before
the Commission. I believe that petitioners are entitled to a timely
response to their petitions, and that disposing of such petitions--one
way or the other--is simply good governance. Once I have an opportunity
to examine the record, I would support staying these rules pending
action on the pending petitions for reconsideration where good cause
has been shown.
Question 31. Please describe any work you have done on this matter
at the NTIA.
Answer. I have not worked on this matter. The affected spectrum is
not allocated to the Federal government, so it is not regulated by the
NTIA.
24 GHz. The FCC auctioned licenses to the 24 GHz band during its
``Spectrum Frontiers'' proceeding in early 2019, describing the
auctions as important for the race to 5G. Since then, the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and NASA have complained
that the FCC's plan could severely interfere with weather satellite
transmissions. The dispute between NASA, NOAA, the Department of
Commerce, and the FCC brought in the NTIA to mediate between different
positions.
Question 32. Do you believe the 24 GHz auction will cause harmful
interference to weather satellites?
Answer. I do not have sufficient information to provide an informed
judgment on what constitutes a reasonable set of interference standards
in this area, but commit to seeking to obtain that information and
taking such steps as are necessary to ensure the adoption of
appropriate standards.
Question 33. What steps do you think the FCC should have taken to
avoid conflict between weather forecasters, Federal agencies, and
commercial spectrum needs?
Answer. I am not familiar enough with the record in this proceeding
to identify specific steps the FCC might have taken, but I pledge to
work with your office and this Committee to improve this process going
forward. For example, the MOU between the NTIA and FCC in regard to
spectrum management decisions could be updated and clarified. A more
robust MOU to address this point could be helpful in assisting the
agencies in resolving these types of conflicts.
Question 34. Please describe any work you have done on this matter
at the NTIA.
Answer. None.
USF Reform. You state in your questionnaire that ``My expertise in
telecommunications finance will help the FCC in its mission to make the
most of the [Universal Service Fund] in order to benefit all Americans,
including those whose communities are currently underserved or for whom
access is prohibitively expensive.''
USF reform is likely to come up soon. The USF Contribution Factor
is now 27 percent (and is projected to exceed 30 percent in the first
quarter of next year), a dramatic increase in the past four years. At
the same time, demand for these programs is increasing--especially
during this national crisis.
Question 35. What specific steps would you propose to reform the
USF contribution mechanism and make sure programs like E-Rate and rural
healthcare have the funds they need to meet demand?
Answer. The USF Contribution Factor is not sustainable over the
long term. If confirmed,I look forward to working with Congress and my
potential colleagues at the FCC and on the Joint Board to determine
what specific steps we need to take to ensure the FCC fulfils its
obligations under section 254 of the Communications Act.
Question 36. Do you support expanding the Rural Healthcare Fund
and, if so, how do you plan to fund such expansions?
Answer. I support the Rural Healthcare Fund and commit to determine
what specific steps we need to take to ensure the FCC fulfils its
obligations under section 254 of the Communications Act.
Question 37. Do you believe the FCC has appropriately overseen and
taken proper enforcement actions within the Rural Healthcare Fund to
protect against waste, fraud, and abuse by carriers?
Answer. I support the Rural Healthcare Fund and commit to determine
what specific steps we need to take to ensure the FCC fulfils its
obligations under section 254 of the Communications Act, including
prevention of waste, fraud, and abuse. I support greater transparency,
responsiveness and expeditiousness in adjudicating such cases so that
enforcement actions are more effective in cases of waste, fraud, and
abuse and so that carriers are not disincentivized from participation
out of fear of becoming embroiled in a lengthy and uncertain dispute
process.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jon Tester to
Nathan Simington
Question 1. If confirmed, you will serve in the minority at the
FCC, a position that demands collaboration and compromise. Describe a
policy achievement from your time at NTIA that faced initial opposition
from your leadership.
Answer. The NTIA is one of many peer organizations worldwide
involved in the Government Advisory Committee (GAC) of the Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Recently, the GAC
found itself confronted with a proposed governance change at ICANN that
would make the process of determining website ownership much slower,
much more burdensome, and much less certain. However, there was
significant concern within NTIA leadership about the difficulties of
building international consensus against these changes, because they
were motivated by compliance concerns with the European Union's General
Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Therefore, in order to resist the
proposed ICANN changes, I had to build consensus within the NTIA and
within the U.S. government that vital national interests were at stake
and that non-American members of GAC would support our proposed
approach in defending them.
I took the lead role in analyzing the changes and their likely
implications for a long list of concerned American parties, including
individual plaintiffs, national security, law enforcement, child
welfare organizations, intellectual property owners, technology-sector
companies, and pharmacy boards. After drawing together the excellent
work in identifying and publicizing these concerns that had already
been done by members of Congress and representatives of Federal
agencies, the NTIA decided that national and international consensus
was a strategy that could win and needed to be attempted. NTIA
succeeded first in building internal consensus within the U.S.
Government, then international consensus among non-American members of
GAC, to obtain a forceful and detailed denunciation of the proposed
changes. These criticisms now have the imprimatur of the international
community as a whole and are part of the permanent decision record.
They will be the basis for further American resistance and have
preserved our non-consent as a basis for future American policy.
Question 2. I am pleased to see the FCC is waiting for updated
Broadband Data Maps before distributing $9 billion with the 5G Fund.
What does the FCC need from Congress to ensure that the Fund proceeds
as accurately and expeditiously as possible?
Answer. Consistent with FCC requests, Congress must provide the FCC
funding sufficient to fulfill its obligations under the Broadband DATA
Act.
Question 3. I am concerned that it will be far easier to upgrade 4G
infrastructure than to build 5G from scratch in places without service.
When carrying out the 5G Fund, what will you do to ensure that carriers
prioritize unserved areas over places that already have decent 4G
coverage?
Answer. In my view, the 5G Fund appears to be structured to address
exactly this question because of its prioritization of areas lacking
coverage. Between the 5G Fund, the merger conditions set forth in the
T-Mobile/Sprint order, and Dish Network's obligations, we expect that
5G coverage will be nationwide in reasonably short order.
Question 4. Indian Country is far behind the rest of the Nation
when it comes to connectivity: according to a 2019 FCC study, just 47
percent of households in rural Tribal areas have access to a home
broadband Internet connection, compared to 94 percent of Americans
overall. The FCC's Tribal broadband factors and set-asides in the
universal service programs have made little meaningful progress toward
closing the Tribal digital divide. What new ideas will you bring to
this challenging problem?
Answer. I commit to fully engage with the FCC's Office of Native
Affairs and Policy and the Native Nations Communications Task Force,
and such other assets as are appropriate and necessary, to improve the
agency's coordination and consultation with Tribal nations on issues
under its jurisdiction.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Kyrsten Sinema to
Nathan Simington
Broadband Mapping. Earlier this year, Congress passed the Broadband
DATA Act to address issues with broadband data collection and mapping
efforts. According to a GAO report published on October 1, FCC
officiates noted the FCC could not begin collecting new data until
Congress appropriates funding for this work. Recently, the FCC
established rules for its 5G Fund for Rural America, which will
distribute up to $9 billion over the next decade and the FCC has moved
ahead in the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund auction to award up to $16
billion.
Question 1. What will you do to ensure mapping data used by the FCC
adequately reflects broadband availability prior to distribution of
this funding?
Answer. The difficulty with mapping has come from the fact that
responsibility for mapping efforts has resided in different agencies.
There has not been a uniform clearinghouse or even a uniform set of
standards for defining what service levels constitute broadband. I hope
that, with its new mandate under the Broadband DATA Act, the FCC can
serve as the clearinghouse for precise and accurate broadband
deployment data to inform the appropriate priority distribution of USF
funding.
Question 2. Have you previously worked on issues concerning
broadband mapping? If so, please explain.
Answer. The OTIA office at NTIA coordinates and manages the ABI
relationship and the National Broadband Availability Map (NBAM). I have
worked on analysis and evaluation of mapping policy to explore ways of
using NBAM, which is a unique Federal resource. My work on this
includes looking at mapping best practices to coordinate mapping
through the Federal Funding Workstream's Mapping Subgroup to assess and
integrate Federal information from a variety of sources, including the
DOI Bureau of Land Management and the USDA Forest Service, and to
provide NBAM data to such recipients as the USDA Rural Utilities
Service, the DOC Economic Development Administration, and the
Appalachian Regional Commission.
Tribal Broadband. 18 percent of tribal reservation residents have
no Internet access at home, wireless or land-based. Further, 33 percent
rely on Internet service from a smartphone at home. I worked with the
FCC to ensure the tribal priority filing window for the 2.5GHz band.
This was an opportunity never before offered to Tribes and was a great
step in the direction to address the broadband gap that has existed in
Indian Country for far too long. Ultimately, 12 of the 22 Tribes in
Arizona received licenses.
Question 3. Will you utilize priority filing windows for Tribes in
future spectrum auctions? If so, how will you determine which spectrum
auctions will have a priority filing window for Tribes?
Answer. I would be delighted to explore ways to utilize a Tribal
priority window going forward. There has also been controversy over the
length of the priority window. The tradeoff is between shorter windows
to allow quicker building and longer windows to allow more
participants. We should do better outreach to Tribes earlier in the
process to maximize the impact of this program and allow shorter
windows to be more effectively used.
Question 4. How will you and the Office of Native Affairs and
Policy (ONAP) work with tribal communities eligible for spectrum band
auctions to provide robust consultation with Tribes and ensure Tribes
have all needed resources to apply to these licenses?
Answer. I commit to fully engage with the FCC's Office of Native
Affairs and Policy and the Native Nations Communications Task Force,
and such other assets as are appropriate and necessary, to improve the
agency's coordination and consultation with Tribal nations on issues
under its jurisdiction.
Question 5. Have you previously worked to help close the digital
divide in Indian country? If so, can you discuss specifically how you
worked with tribal governments and tribal communities to ensure robust
consultation?
Answer. In my current position, I have advised on facilitating
Tribal collaborations with middle mile broadband service providers and
improving the application process for the FCC's 2.5 GHz spectrum
license auctions.
Homework Gap. In Arizona, as many as 350,000 households--13 percent
of all households in the state--don't have an Internet subscription.
The Internet is a necessity for Arizona students to access online
learning, especially during the COVID-19 crisis. The E-rate program
works to ensure students have equal access to education and
communication networks throughout this national emergency.
Question 6. Do you believe E-Rate can help tackle the Homework Gap
for students that lack reliable Internet access?
Answer. I have clearly stated my commitment to closing the digital
divide. I will support and actively advocate for any Commission efforts
to improve E-Rate--and Lifeline--to meet the needs of those families
who need it.
Question 7. What, if any, changes would you make to the E-Rate
program to help the program advance its mission?
Answer. I am deeply committed to closing the digital divide. I will
support and actively advocate for any Commission efforts to improve E-
Rate--and Lifeline--to meet the needs of those families who need it.
Section 230. As you know, in May, the Administration ordered NTIA
to file a petition with the FCC, requesting the FCC to moderate online
content through Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. On July
27, 2020, NTIA filed a petition requesting the FCC initiate rulemaking
to clarify provisions of Section 230.
Question 8. You started as a Senior Advisor for NTIA in June 2020.
What was your involvement with this petition and with other NTIA
activities related to Section 230?
Answer. As stated during my confirmation hearing, I played a minor
role in drafting the petition. The substantial legal arguments had been
outlined before I joined NTIA, but I helped finalize the petition. I
also engaged in routine advocacy for earned media support of the
petition, including the e-mails cited by other senators. Such advocacy
is part and parcel of the role I serve in at NTIA, and in the context
of the roles others played, my role was minor. Once it became clear I
would be considered for this nomination, I ceased any active work on
the petition.
Question 9. In your view, what is the extent of the FCC's authority
to enforce or interpret Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act?
Answer. If confirmed, I would examine the record and reach my own
independent and impartial conclusions about the proper role of Section
230 in any proceedings that come before me. In particular, I would want
to be certain that there are no compelling objections to the FCC's
rulemaking authority. I note that the FCC's General Counsel has
determined that rulemaking is permissible, but considering the
complexity and contentiousness of the question, and continued
opposition to rulemaking, I would want to have absolute certainty on
the matter myself prior to considering the substance of any such items
as might arise on the FCC's agenda.
[all]