    [House Hearing, 117 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                       SUPPORTING SMALL ENTITIES THROUGH
                        INVESTMENTS IN THE NATIONAL INFRASTRUC-
                        TURE: BROADBAND

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

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                          SUBCOMMITTEE ON UNDERSERVED,
                      AGRICULTURAL, AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT

                                     OF THE

                          COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS
                                 UNITED STATES
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                  HEARING HELD
                                 JUNE 16, 2021

                                   __________

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                Small Business Committee Document Number 117-019
                 Available via the GPO Website: www.govinfo.gov

                                  __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    44-823                      WASHINGTON : 2021

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS

                     NYDIA VELAZQUEZ, New York, Chairwoman
                              JARED GOLDEN, Maine
                              JASON CROW, Colorado
                             SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas
                             KWEISI MFUME, Maryland
                            DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota
                             MARIE NEWMAN, Illinois
                           CAROLYN BOURDEAUX, Georgia
                             TROY CARTER, Louisiana
                              JUDY CHU, California
                           DWIGHT EVANS, Pennsylvania
                           ANTONIO DELGADO, New York
                         CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania
                              ANDY KIM, New Jersey
                             ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota
                  BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri, Ranking Member
                             ROGER WILLIAMS, Texas
                            JIM HAGEDORN, Minnesota
                            PETE STAUBER, Minnesota
                            DAN MEUSER, Pennsylvania
                            CLAUDIA TENNEY, New York
                           ANDREW GARBARINO, New York
                             YOUNG KIM, California
                             BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas
                             BYRON DONALDS, Florida
                             MARIA SALAZAR, Florida
                          SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin

                     Melissa Jung, Majority Staff Director
                Ellen Harrington, Majority Deputy Staff Director
                         David Planning, Staff Director

                                C O N T E N T S

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page
    Hon. Jared Golden................................................     1
    Hon. Jim Hagedorn................................................     2

                                   WITNESSES

    Ms. Peggy Schaffer, Executive Director, ConnectMaine Authority,
      Augusta, ME....................................................     5
    Mr. Dan Sullivan, President, Downeast Broadband Utility, Calais,
      ME.............................................................     6
    Mr. Matt Dunne, Founder and Executive Director, Center on Rural
      Innovation, Hartland, VT.......................................     9
    Mr. Tim Waibel, President, Minnesota Corn Growers Association,
      Burnsville, MN.................................................    10

                                    APPENDIX

    Prepared Statements:
        Ms. Peggy Schaffer, Executive Director, ConnectMaine
          Authority, Augusta, ME.....................................    30
        Mr. Dan Sullivan, President, Downeast Broadband Utility,
          Calais, ME.................................................    37
        Mr. Matt Dunne, Founder and Executive Director, Center on
          Rural Innovation, Hartland, VT.............................    46
        Mr. Tim Waibel, President, Minnesota Corn Growers
          Association, Burnsville, MN................................    54
    Questions for the Record:
        None.
    Answers for the Record:
        None.
    Additional Material for the Record:
        Missouri Farm Bureau Federation..............................    60
        SBE - Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council..............    62
        Statement of Ranking Member Jim Hagedorn.....................    65

                       SUPPORTING SMALL ENTITIES THROUGH
             INVESTMENTS IN THE NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE: BROADBAND

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, JUNE 16, 2021

                  House of Representatives,
                   Committee on Small Business,
                           Subcommittee on Underserved,
                  Agricultural, and Rural Business Development,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in
    Room 2360, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jared Golden
    [chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
        Present: Representatives Golden, Carter, Delgado,
    Luetkemeyer, Williams, Hagedorn, Stauber, Tenney, and Salazar.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Good morning. I call this hearing to
    order.
        Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
    recess at any time. Let me begin by saying standing House
    Committee rules and practice continue to apply during hybrid
    proceedings. All members are reminded that they are expected to
    adhere to these standing rules, including decorum. House
    regulations require members to be visible through a video
    connection throughout the proceedings so please keep your
    cameras on. Also, please remember to remain muted, unless you
    are recognized, in order to minimize background noise. And if
    you have to participate in another proceeding, please exit this
    one and log back in later.
        In the event a member encounters technical issues that
    prevent them from being recognized for their questioning, I
    will move to the next available member of the same party, and
    we will recognize that member at the next appropriate time
    slot, provided they return to the proceeding.
        For those members and staff physically present in the
    committee room today, we will continue to follow the most
    recent OAP guidance. Masks are no longer required in our
    meeting space for Members and staff who are vaccinated. All
    Members and staff who have not been are asked to wear masks and
    socially distance. I sincerely hope we all do our part to
    protect each other and our staff.
        In 2020, COVID-19 widened the digital divide and
    highlighted the importance of reliable and affordable broadband
    for American small businesses. Many small businesses shifted
    operations online to stay connected to their customers as
    people stayed home to slow the spread of virus. This digital
    adaptation proved to be crucial to small business success.
    According to a survey by the Connected Commerce Council, 72
    percent of small businesses increased their use of digital
    tools during the COVID-19 crisis. Unfortunately, small
    businesses without reliable broadband access proved to be at a
    significant disadvantage when it came to this digital
    transition.
        As a Representative of one of most rural districts in the
    country, I heard firsthand from many entrepreneurs about the
    struggles, the lack of access to high-speed broadband created
    during the pandemic. Although I would also note that that was a
    conversation that I had often with small business owners and
    many others around the district even prior to the pandemic.
        In my home State, roughly half of all road miles are
    considered unserved or underserved by broadband infrastructure.
    Statistics like these are not unique to Maine's Second
    Congressional District. Unfortunately, many communities across
    the country also struggle to access broadband at benchmark
    speeds. Broadband subscriptions continue to grow. However,
    rural and Tribal areas lag behind urban and suburban areas in
    broadband deployment. As a result, at least 25 million
    Americans still lack access to high-speed internet, many of
    which live in remote and rural parts of our country. This is
    known as the digital divide. Factors like low population
    densities, rugged terrain and fewer subscribers to spread
    deployment costs among have contributed to a lack of investment
    in broadband networks by private companies.
        Without access to high-speed broadband, small firms in
    these areas are at a significant disadvantage. From connecting
    with consumers to filling orders, a broadband connection is
    essential to the day-to-day operations of many Main Street
    businesses. This lack of access to high-speed broadband has
    proven to be an economic drain on many communities, impacting
    individual success in education, wealth, and access to
    opportunity.
        It is vital to the economic health of communities across
    the country and the Nation as a whole that we close the digital
    divide. As Congress considers legislative work to revitalize
    infrastructure, we have an opportunity to make the investment
    in broadband access.
        Meeting this opportunity will require Congress and the
    administration to work closely with State and local
    stakeholders and invest the resources necessary to make
    universally available broadband a reality. I hope that today's
    hearing marks the beginning of a good conversation between
    Committee members and stakeholders dedicated to closing the
    digital divide and empowering small businesses.
        I will now yield to the Ranking Member, Mr. Hagedorn, for
    his opening statement.
        Mr. HAGEDORN. Mr. Chairman, thank you for that.
        And it has been a few weeks, we have been on break. And on
    behalf of our members, we would just like to congratulate you
    and your wife on the birth of your new daughter and glad to
    hear everybody is healthy and doing well.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
        Mr. HAGEDORN. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for holding
    this hearing. It is very important. I am excited to hear from
    the witnesses, particularly Tim Waibel, who resident of
    southern Minnesota. And it is going to be a great hearing on an
    important issue.
        As a member of both the House Small Business Committee and
    Agriculture Committee, broadband infrastructure has been a top
    priority since being elected to Congress. According to USDA's
    Census of Agriculture, nearly 20 percent of the constituents in
    my congressional district lack reliable internet service.
    Unfortunately, without reliable high-speed internet, many
    constituents and businesses are at a disadvantage. Under the
    previous administration, significant investments were made,
    such as the American Broadband Initiative, which stimulated
    increased private sector involvement in broadband
    infrastructure, and it was a bridge to the gap in rural
    America. However, despite significant advances, many rural and
    Tribal areas still have limited or no access to broadband
    capabilities.
        The digital divide has only grown wider as broadband
    deployment in urban areas continues to outpace deployment in
    rural areas. Congress must work to find solutions to address
    this digital divide.
        While we can all agree that providing small businesses with
    the tools and resources necessary to thrive, examining policies
    to help businesses get back on their feet is a priority. One
    way that we can ensure that we meet this goal is to have better
    broadband connectivity, which has been found it be a key aspect
    in increased economic growth for rural businesses. In fact,
    according to a study by the Congressional Research Service,
    broadband access in adoption in rural areas is linked to
    increased job and population growth, higher rates of new
    business formation, increased home values, and lower
    unemployment rates. Industries, such as agriculture and
    healthcare, which are vital to rural America, have increasingly
    relied upon broadband connectivity as technology capabilities
    have developed. Telemedicine has provided many benefits to
    rural communities during the pandemic and also has become a
    reliable way to ensure rural areas receive timely quality
    healthcare. The continued expansion and modernization of
    telemedicine capabilities will be essential to ensuring rural
    communities that they have the equal access to high quality
    care.
        Additionally, many small businesses, farmers and ranchers
    in southern Minnesota are increasingly relying upon technology
    as they seek to strategically decrease input, such as
    fertilizer and fuel, while simultaneously increasing yields.
        Without the availability of high-speed internet, they would
    not be able to keep pace with modern technology. Programs such
    as the ReConnect Pilot Program, which was authorized in the
    2018 farm bill, have helped build out broadband infrastructure
    in rural areas that lack broadband access. This has helped make
    significant advancements in broadband infrastructure in my
    district and many others across the Nation. I was proud to
    support additional legislative efforts in the CARES Act and
    Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, which appropriated
    more dollars like ReConnect, and it helped to make progress.
        I am going to submit the rest of my statement for the
    record. I want to keep us on time. Thank you for holding the
    hearing. I look forward to hearing from the witnesses.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you, Mr. Hagedorn.
        Just a quick moment to explain how the hearing will
    proceed. Each witness has 5 minutes to provide a statement, and
    each Committee member will have 5 minutes for questions. Please
    ensure that your microphone is on when you begin speaking and
    that you return to mute when finished.
        Now we will introduce our witnesses. Our first witness is
    Ms. Peggy Schaffer, executive director of the Connect Maine
    Authority, located in Augusta, Maine. She previously served as
    the small business advocate for the Secretary of State's Office
    and served as the Co-Chair of the Maine Broadband Coalition, a
    statewide group advocating for high-speed broadband.
        On behalf of my district and the State of Maine, we thank
    you for your dedication and welcome you to the Committee.
        Our second witness is Mr. Dan Sullivan, president of the
    Downeast Broadband Utility located in Calais, Maine. Mr.
    Sullivan has more than 40 years of experience in information
    technology, including as a small business owner and IT director
    from one of the region's largest employers. Downeast Broadband
    Utility, also known as DBU, is the first and only operating
    municipal broadband utility in the State of Maine. The network
    is owned by the city of Calais and the towns of Baileyville and
    Alexander.
        Welcome, Mr. Sullivan.
        Our third witness is Mr. Matt Dunne, founder and executive
    director of the Center on Rural Innovation located in Hartland,
    Vermont. Launched in 2017, the center is a social enterprise
    committed to supporting resilient economic development in rural
    America. Their sister organization--I am sorry. CORI's sister
    organization, Rural Innovation Strategies, provides strategic
    consulting to bring prosperity and investment to rural areas in
    the digital age. Mr. Dunne served in the Vermont State
    legislature, AmeriCorps, and Google's Community Affairs
    Division. He holds is B.A. from Brown University and is a
    lifelong Vermonter who lives on a 100-acre farm where he was
    raised.
        Welcome, Mr. Dunne.
        And the Ranking Member, Mr. Hagedorn, will introduce his
    witness.
        Mr. HAGEDORN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Our fourth and final witness is Tim Waibel, president of
    the Minnesota Corn Growers Association, one of the largest
    grassroots farm organizations in the country. Mr. Waibel, who
    hails from Courtland, Minnesota, in our congressional district
    in southern Minnesota is also a farmer with his wife and two
    sons. They grow corn, soybeans, and they raise hogs. Mr. Waibel
    has been on the State board of directors for the Minnesota Corn
    Growers Association for 9 years, serving in a variety of
    leadership capacities, including first vice president,
    treasurer, secretary, and now president. I think he has
    cornered the market there on the corn growers. His lifelong
    experience is not only a producer but advocate for the
    agriculture industry in general. And he will be extremely
    beneficial to our hearing today. And thank you, Mr. Waibel, for
    testifying and sharing your experience with us.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you very much.
        We will now go to opening remarks from our witnesses.
        With that, I will recognize Ms. Schaffer for 5 minutes.

    STATEMENTS OF PEGGY SCHAFFER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CONNECTMAINE
       AUTHORITY, AUGUSTA, ME; DAN SULLIVAN, PRESIDENT, DOWNEAST
        BROADBAND UTILITY, CALAIS, ME; MATT DUNNE, FOUNDER AND
     EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CENTER ON RURAL INNOVATION, HARTLAND, VT;
    AND TIM WAIBEL, PRESIDENT, MINNESOTA CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION,
                            BURNSVILLE, MN.

                      STATEMENT OF PEGGY SCHAFFER

        Ms. SCHAFFER. Good morning. I am Peggy Schaffer, executive
    director of Connect Maine Authority. And I wish to thank you
    for this invitation to testify in front of the Committee House
    Small Business Subcommittee on Underserved Agricultural and
    Rural Development to talk about supporting small industries
    through investments in broadband infrastructure.
        Congressional support for bringing high-quality broadband
    to everyone in this country, rural and urban, is central to
    solving this problem. Connect Maine is a quasi-independent
    authority charged with bringing broadband to everyone in the
    State of Maine and making sure they can use it. Connect Maine
    was created in 2007 with a budget of about $1.5 million. We
    have two grant programs. One is for community planning, and one
    is for infrastructure. Over the past 12 years, we have provided
    about $12 million in infrastructure grants to ISP, attracting
    about $15 million in match from companies and communities.
        Last summer, Maine voters approved a $15 million
    infrastructure bond, and just this past month, we awarded $8.6
    million of those funds to 20 projects that will serve 8,500
    households, matching $16 million in company and community
    funds.
        In 2016, we started our community planning process. These
    are small grants that help communities plan how to expand
    broadband service in their area. Over 160 communities engaged
    this in process so far. In Maine and nationally, broadband
    infrastructure is a road-by-road battle. Where you live really
    matters. A neighbor half mile from you might have good service,
    but bringing that same service to your end of the road might
    cost $30,000 or more. Identifying these gaps is an essential
    part of the community planning process.
        Because of the well-known problems with the accuracy of the
    FCC data, many States have undertaken their own efforts to get
    better data. Georgia, Pennsylvania, Alabama, Washington,
    Minnesota, Maine have all developed our own mapping and data
    layers. These are just the few States frustrated with the
    inability to understand who has service and who does not.
        Broadband is a very personal service. It is how you connect
    with your family, healthcare, education, grocery shopping, and
    work. Maine communities, in fact communities across the
    country, realize that high-quality broadband connection is
    central to their future. Broadband is the lifeline for every
    community in this country, large or small. Our planning grants
    act like sticky tape. It gives the community something to grab
    on to and helps the ISP see a viable business case to bring
    broadband to that area. Once people begin talking with their
    neighbors about this critical infrastructure, they realize that
    everyone in their community needs to have access to the service
    and they understand the importance of affordability. This deep
    granular drive into what communities want drives State plans
    and data. It is also why so many small ISPs have aggressively
    expanded their footprint with fiber. Providers and communities
    seek solutions that will outlive the costs incurred. No longer
    are we investing in infrastructure that will need to be rebuilt
    in 20 years. We have found several programs are ill-suited to
    meet community needs or interests in Maine. Examples of this
    are the USDA grants through ReConnect and the recent FCC Rural
    Development Digital Opportunity Fund.
        Four projects were awarded ReConnect grants in early 2020.
    These are small projects that should be a 6- to 8-month build.
    None of these projects have started because of the bureaucracy
    one the USDA. If these projects had been funded through a
    straight grant, they would have been lit and serving people
    right now, not some time in 2022. Projects all across the
    country are having similar unneeded delays. There is one small
    community in Lincoln County that was denied a USDA grant
    because their area was auctioned off in satellite service in
    the FCC's RDOF auction. They are now not eligible for any other
    Federal funding. The town has been working for 3 years to
    develop a solution to bringing affordable service to everyone.
    Federal funding should not block that effort.
        If broadband infrastructure is going to achieve its
    promise, we need to make sure Federal funds flow to the
    solutions these communities want. That is why the community--
    the Capital Projects Fund and the American Rescue Plan is so
    exciting. It puts the funds closest to community efforts
    through a State program. States have proven they are up to the
    task of efficiently and effectively delivering the use of these
    funds to build that infrastructure. Sixteen States awarded $644
    million in the Coronavirus Relief Fund to build out networks
    that were lit in under 6 months. The American Jobs Plan also
    offers great promise to close this connectivity and
    affordability gap, but it really, really matters how the funds
    for infrastructure are distributed and who owns the
    infrastructure. There are hundreds of successful models of
    public-private partnerships to build this infrastructure. There
    is no one model because there is no one solution. It requires a
    flexible strategy, and flexible strategies are just not what
    the Federal Government does well.
        State broadband programs have proven their worth. Our
    understanding of the problems, the locations, and our ability
    to craft solutions that fit our communities is central to our
    effectiveness. Funding for the infrastructure through the
    American Jobs Plan should flow through State and State programs
    to provide the greatest benefit and the fastest affordable
    connectivity to Maine people.
        Thank you for your time and consideration. I would be happy
    to answer your questions.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you, Ms. Schaffer.
        Mr. Sullivan, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

                       STATEMENT OF DAN SULLIVAN

        Mr. SULLIVAN. Good morning, Congressman Golden and Ranking
    Member Hagedorn. Thank you very much for this opportunity to
    discuss the DBU project.
        My name is Dan Sullivan. As mentioned, I was former IT
    director at the Woodland Pulp and St. Croix Tissue pulp mills
    in Baileyville. I have also been in technology for 40-plus
    years and now presently am the president of Downeast Broadband
    Utility.
        Calais and Baileyville had a problem: terrible expensive
    broadband options. The towns agreed to ban together by way of
    the local agreement to explore economic development ideas, and
    fiber came to the forefront. We had discussions with local
    leaders and our citizens, rotary clubs, chambers of commerce,
    town meetings. We hung posters. We did everything we could
    think of to bring people into the room to discuss what could or
    could not be done.
        It was the overall decision by all these groups that we
    would look, search out a fiber-to-home solution for our two
    towns. So the two towns agreed to fund a feasibility study to
    see if this was even possible. The results came back and said,
    yes, it indeed was. So the towns again funded the cost to build
    the construction to see how much it would cost to do it. We had
    unanimous support from both the towns.
        The network is paid for by subscribers to the network, not
    taxes raised. That is the beauty of this financial model. The
    need in these towns is so great and people want it so bad that
    our subscriber rate is going through the roof. So this will be
    paid for by the people who buy the service, not by the citizens
    of these towns. But, uniquely, the citizens of these towns will
    actually own the infrastructure.
        We began construction in 2018 and completed in 2020. Then
    the town of Alexander--which is next to Alexander, asked to
    join us. We approved them. They are now being constructed. They
    will probably be completed the end of December. Just last week,
    I met with Indian Township, our local Indian reservation. They
    have too voted to join DBU and are now proceeding with that.
    Construction will begin shortly.
        On top of that, 2 days ago, Princeton contacted me. I had a
    meeting with them. They too have voted unanimously to try to
    join DBU, and the town of Cooper will be doing the same thing
    in July. So you can obviously see there is an awful lot of
    demand out.
        So why did we do this? We did it because our existing ISP
    options were insufficient, unreliable, expensive, and in many
    cases not even available. We approached the existing ISPs and
    offered to help them fund a buildout to bring fiber to our
    towns, businesses, and homes. They refused. They weren't
    interested. So local businesses and residents universally
    complained about how slow and expensive broadband was.
        And Washington County's largest employer, St. Croix Tissue
    and Woodland Pulp, where I worked for many years, was very
    interested in this solution. And I would like to read a brief
    statement by the mill's manager. He said, quote: Affordable
    access to symmetrical broadband via fiber is a game changer for
    our area. It has increased property values, facilitated remote
    work and learning, while attracting new residents to our
    communities. From my perspective as an executive at Washington
    County's largest employer, fiber-based broadband has proven to
    be a valuable recruiting tool to attract technical talent to
    our area and business. In addition, it has helped our employees
    to effectively work remotely through this pandemic. Prior to
    the founding of the Downeast Broadband Utility, our area's
    access to this vital service was completely insufficient,
    unquote.
        We knew from our research that a fully fiber network was
    what we needed to do here to build a future-proof solution for
    our area. And Maine's home rule provision in Maine's
    Constitution allowed us to proceed with that. So we tapped into
    our Yankee spirit, and DBU was born.
        What did we build? This is a mouthful, but we built an open
    access, dark fiber, home-run network. Each subscriber receives
    a single dedicated fiber to their home or business. This
    ensures had a 100-plus year future-proof solution. Science has
    not yet reached fiber's capacity limits. They don't know how
    fast they can make it work. And once the fiber is installed on
    these poles when technology changes, and the technology
    improves, only the laser equipment in our communication
    cabinets have to be upgraded. The existing fiber cable will be
    viable for those 100-plus years.
        As a contrast, cell towers need to be climbed and
    satellites relaunched to keep up with changes in technology.
    These technologies do not provide a future-proof model, are
    impractical, expensive, contribute to mountains of space junk.
    And all these costs are passed down to the consumer.
        Now our network is open to all ISPs, even the ones that
    turned us down. We basically turned their argument of low-
    density population not being an affordable way to do this
    upside down because we paid for the construction, the
    maintenance, and the operating costs. We have taken three legs
    off their stool to provide this service, and they are welcome
    to join us, and I hope they do.
        DBU is a utility much like roads, water, sewer. And it is
    owned by citizens of these towns. We determined about a 30
    percent tick rate from Calais and Baileyville will make the
    plan viable. We are presently at 23 percent in the midst of the
    pandemic and soon expect to pass 30 percent and beyond. We
    estimate Alexander and Indian Township to a 80 to 90 percent
    tick rate as their broadband situation is more dire. And here
    is the real caveat to all of this, the caveat to the ability of
    benefits, the base fiber internet package for the by 100/100
    megabit connection is $59.95 with no set up fees, no router
    fees, no contract fees. And no data caps. In the poorest county
    in the State of Maine, we have the fastest internet in the
    world at the most reliable cost.
        So, in conclusion, I would like to say, Maine and our
    Nation have paid for inadequate solutions to our country's
    dismal broadband for decades, only to be still treading water
    and, in some instances, drowning. An undeniable fact is that
    fiber is the most future-proof, cost-effective way to build
    ubiquitous broadband for our Nation for the next 100-plus
    years. Municipalities owning that physical network not only
    ensures competition but lowers cost, provides faster, more
    reliable speeds, and it solves the problem. The backbone of the
    internet is fiber. The middle mile is fiber. It has only been
    this last mile to the business and consumer that has been
    relegated to copper or, even worse, wireless, and only because
    it is more profitable for cable and phone companies to keep
    using their 19th century technologies rather than investing
    completing this fiber network. These companies are private and
    deserve to invest their dollars as they see fit.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Mr. Sullivan.
        Mr. SULLIVAN. We have no argument with that. It is our
    position that taxpayer funds need to be--I am almost done--need
    to be 100 percent directed towards finishing the home solution.
    We really appreciate your Subcommittee's work on this. We hope
    that we can contribute with you to help solve this problem for
    Maine and the Nation.
        I will take any questions that may be out there. Thank you.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Perfect. Thank you.
        Next we will recognize Mr. Dunne.
        Mr. Dunne, you are muted still.

                        STATEMENT OF MATT DUNNE

        Mr. DUNNE. Apologies.
        Chairman Golden, Ranking Member Hagedorn, and members of
    the subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity. My name is
    Matt Dunne, and I am the founder and executive director of
    Center on Rural Innovation, known as CORI, a nonprofit action
    tank started in 2017 to close the rural opportunity gap. Today,
    we are working with a network of small towns across the country
    to help them become successful in economic development and
    entrepreneurship in the 21st century. This ranges from helping
    communities build world-class broadband, facilitating
    technology training, supporting accelerator programs, and
    investing in scalable small businesses.
        The rural urban divide that has emerged since the Great
    Recession was driven by automation, globalization, and a
    decline in rural entrepreneurship. By January of 2020, before
    the pandemic, less than half of all rural counties had returned
    to their pre-recession employment levels as rural businesses,
    large and small, struggled to regain solid footing. The COVID-
    19 shutdown only exacerbated the problem for many rural small
    businesses, particularly those dependent on tourism.
        Driving this divide was the fact that high-paying,
    resilient digital economy jobs like computer programmers,
    cybersecurity analysts, IT specialists, and others are not
    distributed equally across the country. Rural America
    represents 15 percent of our nation's workforce but only 5
    percent of the digital economy jobs. It doesn't have to be this
    way. In the age of the internet, there should be no limit to
    where digital economy jobs and startups can take place.
        The pandemic has only reinforced what we in rural America
    already knew: Broadband is critical infrastructure. It is as
    vital to equity and prosperity as electricity and
    transportation. For businesses, it was nothing short of a
    lifeline as Main Street companies tried to quickly shift to
    online ordering and delivery. While some businesses and workers
    could pivot to e-commerce or transition to remote work, unequal
    broadband access left the rest, so many of them in underserved
    rural areas, struggling to get by. But our awareness of the
    issue has created a moment in time that resembles one our
    nation faced nearly a century ago, when leaders realized that
    unequal access to electricity prevented regions of the country
    from being able to thrive.
        The good news is that like the rural electrification
    effort, there are models for bringing world-class broadband to
    rural places like the one that Mr. Sullivan has been so deeply
    involved with. In fact, at least 10 million rural Americans
    already live in Census tracts with gigabit-speed broadband.
    These communities built networks well beyond the FCC minimum
    standards for broadband because they understood that level of
    service is already on its way to becoming obsolete. As a
    result, they are ready to participate in the digital economy of
    today and meet the demands of the future. They invested in the
    infrastructure that can do both.
        The question before us now is, are we going to go do what
    is necessary to generate broadband that supports the businesses
    of today and tomorrow? Without it, millions of underserved
    rural Americans and small businesses can't engage with
    streaming content, cloud-based services, and video conferencing
    applications that have become part of everyday life. That is
    why it is critical that future funding should prioritize
    delivering a minimum of 100 megabits per second upload and
    download speeds and building networks capable of scaling to a
    gigabit or more. To do otherwise is only setting ourselves up
    for a rural-urban divide that reemerges 5 years from now
    despite a massive infrastructure investment.
        COVID has opened people's eyes to the possibility of
    working where they want to live rather than living where they
    need to work, including an incredible return to small-town
    America. But this is only possible if rural areas can achieve
    the same internet speeds as their urban counterparts. Doing so
    would enable entrepreneurs and small businesses in rural places
    to access markets anywhere in the world and be resilient to
    events like the pandemic that forced so much activity online.
        We at CORI know plenty of small towns that are proving this
    is possible, places that invested in gigabit-speed internet
    broadband or are leveraging their current broadband to make
    successful businesses emerge. In Taos, New Mexico, a program to
    help local businesses build e-commerce websites during the
    pandemic helped some see revenue increases by 10 percent. In
    Wilson, North Carolina, a former auto repair specialist
    developed a software platform called Shyft Auto to solve the
    inefficiencies he knows plague the service shops everywhere.
    They are receiving investment and are growing. In Red Wing,
    Minnesota, the robotics company Poultry Patrol was able to test
    its prototype in the field thanks to the upload and, download
    speeds possible with the region's high-speed broadband network.
        This is a moment unlike any we have seen before in the
    internet age. The funding currently being considered to boost
    broadband deployment expansion is vital to ensure every
    innovator and small business person can take part in the
    digital revolution and reach their full potential wherever they
    live.
        Thank you for your time and consideration of this important
    issue. And I am happy to take any questions you may have.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you.
        And, finally, Mr. Waibel, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

                        STATEMENT OF TIM WAIBEL

        Mr. WAIBEL. Thank you, Chairman Golden, Ranking Member
    Hagedorn, and the members of this subcommittee. Thank you for
    holding this hearing and letting me testify.
        My name is Tim Waibel. I am a farmer from Courtland,
    Minnesota. It is a town of 611 in Representative Hagedorn's
    district. My wife and I have raised five children. We have six
    grandchildren and are looking forward to three more coming in
    2021. My wife and I both feel blessed that we have been raised
    in rural America, and we want them same blessings for future
    generation. I know that many of you share this feeling.
        The pandemic has taught us a lot of lessons. One is that
    people living in the cities grew to appreciate the advantages
    of living in rural America, and many picked up stakes and moved
    here. Over the years, I have been saddened to see our
    communities raise wonderful kids only to see them go off to
    college and never return to raise their families here, instead
    moving to the cities and suburbs. A town like Courtland has
    suffered due this and not just economically; we have lost a lot
    of talent. And I think that those of us who have lost--excuse
    me. I think that those who have lost to the cities we have also
    been deprived of some life-enriching experiences that only a
    small town can provide. So the thought that at least some
    silver lining might come with this tragedy of the pandemic may
    be a rebirth of towns like Courtland, which brings me to my
    second lesson.
        We have all heard stories remote learning. While there is
    more of it, I am speaking here on the issue on the heart of
    availability of broadband. Kids growing up in rural areas who
    do not have access to decent internet service are at a
    disadvantage. Senator Klobuchar mentioned that one student went
    to a local liquor store parking lot because that was the only
    place that they could get internet service. This is not an
    isolated problem. It is a problem for anyone who lives and
    works in rural American communities because it impacts
    education, business, healthcare, and even farming. Lack of
    high-speed internet access is a serious obstacle to the rebirth
    of rural America I am hoping for. I am gratified at this time
    when there is so much partisanship, that there is a bipartisan
    consensus on the need to look into significant new investment
    in broadband.
        But as you know, throwing money at a problem doesn't always
    fix it. Billions of dollars have been spent on expanding
    broadband internet, but efforts have still come up short. So I
    hope that you will take into account a few points from my
    perspective as a lifelong rural resident. First, it matters who
    is providing the broadband to our rural communities? Do they
    have a real stake in rural America? Do they have a proven track
    record in serving rural America? And do think have boots on the
    ground to get the job done?
        From my vantage point, the Department of Agriculture and
    rural electric cooperatives and similar entities with a long
    history of working with the USDA check these boxes. But that is
    not where the lion's share of the Federal dollars have gone.
    Billions have gone to other Federal agencies to stand up
    programs using other broadband providers that are often
    protected from competition, even if they provide substandard
    service. My understanding is that there is an interest by some
    in standing up another Federal program, but I do not believe we
    are going to get any different results than we have had going
    down the same path.
        There is fierce competition amongst various agencies and
    providers in regard to who gets to carry the important mission.
    But addressing the needs of rural America, including broadband,
    is a mission of the USDA, rural electrics, and the like. And,
    yet, the dollars that we have spent have paled in comparison to
    the dollars under other programs where the providers do not
    check all the boxes that I mentioned earlier. Had FDR taken
    this approach for rural electrification, God knows how long it
    would have taken to get power to our farms.
        I would like to recognize Representative G.T. Thompson, who
    has brought a very thoughtful bipartisan broadband bill that is
    worth your consideration because it recognizes the points that
    I am making here today. The second point is there are gaping
    holes on the map in terms of people with zero service. But
    there are also even more holes in the map where people have
    terrible broadband service and pay an arm and a leg. I feel I
    fit in that category. Both problems need to be addressed.
    Setting high goals for service in this process will be
    important. And if the providers are not meeting the goal, they
    ought to open it up for competition.
        And, finally, in my perspective as a farmer, remember that
    it is not just about location served, but it is areas served.
    Why is that important? Because my farm not only needs the kind
    of internet that a business needs in town, we also have mobile
    offices. My tractor, combines, and so on and so forth talk back
    and forth where I need to be able to upload data as I work the
    fields. This is a vital efficiency in providing food, fuel, and
    fiber, but is also critical in caring for the natural resources
    promoting soil health, clean air, water, and the reduction of
    CO2. Agriculture amounts for a very small percentage of CO2
    emissions and is already sequestering carbon, but we are glad
    to help sequester carbon using tools voluntary incentive-based
    tools. One such tool is high-speed internet.
        So, as you carry out the important work in this issue, I
    hope my perspectives are helpful. Thank you for letting me
    testify. If you have any questions, I can try and answer.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you, sir.
        And I appreciate each of you for being here today to talk
    about connecting rural America.
        We will now move to 5-minute questions. And I will begin by
    recognizing myself.
        Mr. Waibel, I would just point out, I think you probably
    have a lot in common with Mr. Sullivan, who also talked about
    the high cost of some of these programs that have not been
    nearly as effective as they should be in delivering good
    access, the kind of access that you have spoken about and that
    Mr. Sullivan has also talked about.
        I had to note too, sitting here, Pete, thinking last
    Congress, we held a field hearing--you held in Minnesota, and
    Jim joined us. I forget the town. What town were we in?
        Voice. [Inaudible.]
        Chairman GOLDEN. Stauber. That is hilarious.
        The economic case for doing something here speaks for
    itself. I will just say we were at a machine precision--
    precision machining shop there where they were talking about
    how they couldn't really expand the business and in fact might
    have to move it into a more suburban or rural area if they
    didn't have access to broadband. So it is about protecting jobs
    and creating the opportunity to expand.
        And then Congressman Stauber came up to Maine. And we had
    very similar conversations about how important this is in rural
    Maine. So a lot of similarities between the two.
        Mr. Sullivan, I thought I would just start with you. Maybe
    you could take a little time and get more indepth about what
    are the issues that we came across in your community in looking
    at some of the Federal programs that are out there, Federal
    dollars, grants, and other things that just weren't workable in
    Calais and Baileyville, and as a result, why did you end up
    going with this very local solution?
        Mr. SULLIVAN. I think it was alluded to by some of the
    other speakers. Some of the Federal programs are quite onerous
    and time-consuming in order to be able to make something
    happen. And there is a lot of abilities to trip along the way.
    And the need was so dire in our area that we decided to--we had
    such unanimous support from the citizens to be able to go and
    finance this operation; we decided to proceed ahead with it,
    rather than wait out the infrastructure rules. To Peggy's
    point, there is a lot of roadblocks in the way there that kind
    of slow these projects down.
        And also I will say that the Federal description of
    broadband, for years, they have been at this 25/3 number, which
    is completely inaccurate. That is not broadband by any stretch
    of the imagination. So we decided to try to step over those
    hurdles, if possible, and we were able to do it.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you. I appreciate that.
        I don't know if was you, Ms. Schaffer, who had in your
    written testimony or maybe it was someone else, the example of
    Cranberry Isles, where there is such a--first, a Federal agency
    comes and announces that there is going to be broadband brought
    to the community through a grant, and then, years later, it is
    not there. I think Senator Collins from Maine has been working
    on finally getting a solution. But in the interim, they took it
    upon themselves to fix it, I am sure working with the State.
    But could you talk a little bit about that but also just think
    about what Dan said? What other examples do you have out there
    of inefficiencies or just bureaucracy of those programs being
    unworkable, and how have you helped?
        Ms. SCHAFFER. Well, I think one--the place you went to
    visit when you did your field visit was Roque Bluffs, and they
    got a USDA grant in I think it was December of 2019, official
    announcement in early 2020. They still have not built a thing.
    It is not that big a town. I think the bill was under a million
    dollars. They have been hit by roadblock by roadblock. And it
    is just when you look at--if you compare that, for instance, to
    Cranberry Isles, who really started out on their own, and then
    USDA came in late with the funding. Cranberry is built. It was
    built before the USDA funding came through. And now there is
    this discussion about who pays for what. But the process of the
    USDA does not really work for small towns. It really doesn't
    work for municipal networks. It doesn't work. And part of that
    is it is a one-size-fits-all solution. So, whether you are
    building a $20 million grant network or whether you are
    building a million-dollar network, they don't downsize it in a
    way that makes it or right size it in a way that makes it work
    for small towns. And so that for us has been a major barrier.
        The other barrier for the USDA funds is they have been--you
    have to have a service of under 10/1 to be qualified. And one
    of the things I frequently say is you have to go through the
    willies to get to the wags (ph). So sometimes you have to serve
    people who have some level of service before you get to people
    who have gotten little service. And the USDA's standard of 10/
    1, which is lower even than the FCC, which is just
    unacceptable, it doesn't recognize that. And it also sentences
    people who have--who are just a little better than 10/1 to
    nothing, to no support and no help. And that kind of structure
    doesn't work when you are trying to bring service to rural
    America.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you. So we will dig in a little
    further on some of these things, but it sounds like you are
    calling for greater flexibility in these programs at the very
    least.
        With that, I will turn it over for 5 minutes to Mr.
    Hagedorn.
        Mr. HAGEDORN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I agree with you.
    And this is just basic infrastructure issue. It is quality of
    life for the folks in rural areas. We need to make sure all
    Americans have the same access and opportunities.
        And my friend Mr. Waibel from southern Minnesota makes a
    good point. I mean, if we don't have these types of services,
    it is going to be hard to retain the folks in our rural
    communities and certainly to attract them in, even if we have
    great jobs and that type of thing.
        Mr. Waibel, really quickly if you could help some of the
    folks understand exactly what the farmers go through and their
    needs are in the digital age. I know for instance, hog
    operators might have an automated system to feed their hogs
    which would obviously require a lot of work on the internet.
    But when you do your duties, your planning and things like
    that, can you kind of fill us in about what is going on out
    there and why you need a good broadband connection?
        Mr. WAIBEL. Certainly. Thank you will for the question. So,
    in the fall, when we harvest, we work with certain vendors,
    fertilizer people, so on and so forth, that they can follow us
    in the field, and they know exactly when we are done harvesting
    a field so they can come and spread fertilizer and so on and so
    forth. There is no phone calls. They know exactly what needs to
    be spread because of prior meetings and so on and so forth. So
    it just saves a lot of time in that aspect. And the same way
    with information shared by our harvesting machines, it goes
    directly to people that we work with. They know exactly what we
    have seen and they can dig deeper into it. So certainly if we
    need to change something for the coming year on an application
    we can do so real quick and a lot of things. Everything is
    connected now on the farms. It is amazing. I never thought I
    would witness something like that in my lifetime.
        Mr. HAGEDORN. I agree with you. When you talk about,
    especially in rural communities, you trust the USDA, you trust
    the local companies, the REAs and others to deliver the
    services that has been your experience. Do you want to go
    further on that, or has enough been said?
        Mr. WAIBEL. I do believe the reason why I am a big fan of
    the REAs is because of the fact we have local boards, local
    people that we know that serve on these boards. And they are
    going to look out for, number one, the most cost-effective ways
    to deliver that service and, number two, what is good for the
    community.
        Mr. HAGEDORN. Ms. Schaffer, if I understand you, you are
    criticizing USDA and others because they are trying to focus
    most of their attention on making sure everybody is at a basic
    level so they have some level of service. I think if you take
    the moneys and start spreading them around in order that
    everybody has 100/100 or whatever before people can get to some
    decent level of line speeds, that wouldn't seem fair to me.
    What do you say to that?
        Ms. SCHAFFER. You know, there is--so you can figure this
    out through scoring on a grant process. So, instead of defining
    in the application of who is eligible and who is not, you can
    give extra points to a project that starts at essentially
    nothing and brings them up to something. And that kind of
    process allows for you to actually build out to more of the
    communities and make sure that all the communities are on an
    equal footing.
        And so I think when you define it in your eligibility
    standards, you limit who is eligible. But if you can do it
    through a scoring process of giving more points in an
    application for people who are serving people who have worse
    service than others, then you can accomplish the same thing,
    but you also get to serve more of that community. So, instead
    of bringing a tiny little piece of that community to the modern
    world, you can bring the entire community up. And I think to
    me, that is the important piece thinking about, not just in the
    eligibility but really looking at how you score these projects.
    And that gets rid of some of this concern about what is
    traditionally called overbuilding.
        I will say, in this country, we have much more interested
    policywise in preventing people from getting two kinds of
    service than making sure everybody has a service. So that is
    what when you limit it to 25/3 or 10/1, that is what you end up
    doing.
        Mr. HAGEDORN. It just seems to me that people who have no
    service--I mean, this is why the government is involved in
    this. This is why we are all together in a bipartisan fashion,
    we want to make sure people have some level of basic service.
    And I think that is where we should focus our attention. If we
    can get people to higher speeds down the road, that is all well
    and good. And maybe a private sector and others will help us
    out a little bit more, but I think what Mr. Waibel and others
    have been saying, and I agree with, that we should focus on
    those who have no connectivity or have speed so slow, that they
    really aren't able to compete and participate like the vast
    majority of the people across the country.
        So, with that, I yield back. Thanks, sir.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you.
        Next, we will recognize Representative Roger Williams, Vice
    Ranking Member of the Committee.
        Mr. WILLIAMS. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Throughout my district in Texas, I constantly hear from
    constituents about unreliable or complete lack of internet, and
    that is in Texas. Unfortunately, many of the Federal broadband
    dollars are invested in the areas with the lowest cost of
    deployment, rather than the areas most in need. This has led to
    many rural areas of the country continually being left behind
    in the digital economy as we have heard this hearing. That is
    why I have introduced the bipartisan Eliminate the Digital
    Divide Act, that would give money directly to the States to
    decide where the greatest need is for their constituents.
        So, Mr. Waibel, thank you for being here. I too, I don't
    have an operation as large of yours, but we have calf, cow in
    Texas and a few pigs so I appreciate what you are doing. In
    your testimony, you discussed the disparities between urban and
    rural areas relating to access to high-speed internet. Can you
    discuss the challenges your community--and you have done that a
    little bit today--your community faces due to the lack of
    connectivity and how it puts them as an economic disadvantage
    compared to your urban counterparts?
        Mr. WAIBEL. Certainly. So, if I would go 30 miles to the
    east of here, we have a community of about 60,000 people. And
    certainly the businesses, when I go down there for whether it
    be parts or questions at my local FSA office, their internet
    service is just boom. And it is there whereas when I am at home
    here with my service, it--a lot of folks know that that there
    are times it will take me an hour to get an email into my
    computer at home here. And that is extremely frustrating. And I
    think, when we look at rural America, we need to be on a level
    playing field. This to me is the most important thing for the
    future of my boys farming with us or all my kids and my
    grandchildren to stay up to speed with whether it be a town of
    60,000 people or whether it be a town of 611 people, we need to
    be on the same playing field. This is going to set the future
    growth for our areas and the businesses that will hopefully
    establish and stay here in these small communities.
        Mr. WILLIAMS. Thank you. I agree with that.
        When we hear about small businesses adjusting to the
    digital economy, many of us think about brick-and-mortar retail
    stores creating an Online presence. However, one of the
    greatest beneficiaries of connected technology has been the
    agricultural industry. We have seen new innovations that have
    the potential to increase harvest yields, make watering
    schedules more efficient, and can update machinery
    automatically. All these advancements can help us better secure
    our food supply chain and properly feed our Nation.
    Unfortunately, if we continue to leave the rural parts of our
    country behind as we have heard, our farmers will not be table
    to experience the benefits of these new technologies.
        So, Mr. Waibel, again how does access to broadband improve
    your day-to-day business as a farmer? And what concerns do you
    have in the future of farming, if the divide is not closed? You
    touched on that a little bit, but I think that is important.
        Mr. WAIBEL. Yes, correct. You know, so, when I look at the
    whole operation, we are moving, we are in this digital age, and
    I think we are probably more--even though it seems like we are
    into it a long ways, I think the future is only going to demand
    more of it. And we use it just for everything. And it is only
    going to get more and more.
        For those of you that aren't that familiar with farming,
    when we go into the field, we push a button, our boundaries are
    in the field, and the tractor takes over and does what it needs
    to do. You are just in there for the ride basically and so on
    and so forth. So these types of situations, the more advanced
    our implements get and the more advanced our suppliers are, the
    more we are going to need to continue to have these high-speed
    updates that it doesn't take us an hour to get something; it
    takes us a minute, a second to get it. And that is where I
    think we really lack in rural America is the fact that we
    really need to get this sped up.
        Mr. WILLIAMS. Thank you.
        Real quick, access to broadband is no longer a luxury but a
    necessity. Big corporate providers have shown that the
    economics of connecting some of the most rural communities
    simply do not work. If we want to provide internet to these
    communities, we need to look for ways the Federal Government
    can better utilize the public-private partnerships. By
    leveraging public funding through private execution, we can
    tackle rural broadband infrastructure and close the digital
    divide.
        So, Mr. Sullivan, real quick, what barriers typically keep
    private citizens from entering into these partnerships? And how
    can we incentivize them to participate in Federal grants such
    as the USDA ReConnect Program to build out broadband
    infrastructure in rural communities?
        Ms. SCHAFFER. What has basically been happening is it is
    very difficult with some providers to work with them. In that
    type of arrangement, which is basically what has been happening
    in Maine and across the Nation now for quite some time is a lot
    of the existing providers have been receiving Federal and State
    subsidies to improve broadband. But they are not improving it
    to the level that it will in my 5 minute speech here about
    trying to make it future proof so that when we do these
    investments once, we don't do them multiple times because that
    is what has been happening. The existing ISPs are only going to
    put as much of their money in as they can keep their costs as
    low as possible to keep their stockholders happy. We understand
    that. That is how America works. But by investing public
    dollars with these partnerships without having minimums. They
    ought to have some standards that say we aren't going to give
    money unless you can provide a 100/100 fiber connection because
    we know that connection can be upgraded, as others have said,
    to a gig, to 10 gig, to 100 gig. I mean, that piece of
    investment will always be there. So it is important that when
    these ISPs are brought into a room, that they understand that.
    This is how we need to focus the dollars that are coming from
    the public because it should be there to serve the public.
        Mr. WILLIAMS. All right.
        Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. My time is up. I turn to
    you.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you, sir.
        We will next recognize Representative Troy Carter from
    Louisiana too.
        Mr. CARTER. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for
    the opportunity. And either of you can take a stab at the
    question. I hail there Louisiana where we have a fairly
    substantial amount of our rural areas that are in fact
    challenged as relates to broadband. And we know that, under the
    current guise of COVID, COVID taught us that we will be relying
    much more on distant learning in classrooms, technology for
    businesses. And that necessity brings the real attention to the
    fact that many parts of our State and our country, but
    particularly the Second Congressional District, we have issues
    with access to broadband from a basic standpoint, but then when
    we juxtapose that with the reality of poor people throughout
    our State, throughout our country that will in fact--and I have
    heard the word several times ``left behind'' mentioned by some
    of my colleagues. What are the plans for obviously making sure
    that we have access to broadband in those areas where there is
    no infrastructure? But, additionally, your thoughts on how we
    level the playing field for our impoverished areas as well. I
    am going to pick somebody, if somebody doesn't jump in.
        Ms. SCHAFFER. I think the piece we that do around on
    community planning is a central element of this because it
    allows the community to understand the importance of
    affordability. I think broadband has four pieces to it: the
    wire run by your house; can you afford to connect to that wire;
    do you have a device; and do you know how to use it? And when
    you began those community conversations, those last three
    pieces come in as a critical element of it. And then you can
    design a network and pick a provider and pick a partner that
    can give you that kind of connectivity. I think Danny talked
    about how Downeast they have, they are providing a high-quality
    service for about $60 per month. That is still unaffordable to
    some families, but it begins to address sort of that issue. And
    I think that that, to me, the critical piece about the
    community understanding and working with the provider and
    helping to underwrite some of the infrastructure costs helps
    some of those equations. But affordability is a key issue in
    this puzzle.
        Mr. CARTER. And what would you determine or think would be
    the greatest barrier, from an educational standpoint, of
    informing the public of their duty or their participation?
        Ms. SCHAFFER. So do you mean participation in a planning
    process or participation in getting internet?
        Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, you mentioned that a part of it was
    them understanding and participating. So what is the greatest
    barrier to that?
        Ms. SCHAFFER. Some of that is really--and I think COVID has
    resolved a little of this, is understanding what the internet
    can bring to you. I mean, Tim has talked about farming. The
    USDA estimates that the farms with high-quality internet have
    about an 18 percent increase in capacity. So they are able to
    produce a lot more. And that kind of activity can happen, as
    Matt talked about, on just about every business level for
    tourism, businesses in those. And so part of these
    conversations in the community is understanding the needs of
    all of those businesses and making sure that the business and
    people can engage in this understanding of what this service
    can bring to your area.
        Mr. WILLIAMS. And I will tell you from Louisiana's
    standpoint, and I don't think it is any different from many
    other places, but certainly Louisiana we know now that
    broadband is a way of life. It is not a luxury. It is not
    something you have as a one off. It is essential. Yet we know
    that large swaths of our country, large swaths of Louisiana do
    not have access to broadband, not just for education but also
    for daily use. We know that broadband in many ways fuels our
    whole economy. It connects our world.
        So, as we go on through this discussion, Mr. Chairman, I
    would Love to have further discussions on how we can advance
    those discussions, particularly around areas in those rural
    areas that have really suffered. And COVID has taught us
    significantly what that means to our economy and what it means
    it our world. So I thank you all for your testimony and look
    forward to further discussion.
        I yield back.
        Mr. SULLIVAN. I would like to weigh in on that for a
    second, if possible.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Who was that?
        Mr. SULLIVAN. I would like to weigh in on that point for
    just a moment.
        Chairman GOLDEN. He is out of time, but we will find a way
    to work it in, Mr. Sullivan. The second round of questions, I
    will just make a note.
        Next, we will recognize Representative Pete Stauber from
    Minnesota, Eighth District.
        Mr. STAUBER. I thank you, Chair, and thank you, Ranking
    Member Hagedorn, for holding this hearing. And, to all the
    witnesses who gave us their testimony, it is very, very
    valuable.
        I just have to reiterate what Mr. Waibel said a couple
    minutes ago. He said, ``Rural America must be placed on a level
    playing field.''
        Rural Representatives on both sides of the aisle have had
    it right up to here with the lip service we have been given on
    expanding broadband to rural communities. It is the time to do
    it right now. We have the opportunity for investment, and rural
    America especially, as Congressman Carter just stated, has been
    extremely devastated because of the lack of connectivity.
        Our hospitals need to be connected--our schools, our small
    businesses, and so many others in our rural communities--to get
    us on that level and fair playing field so we can be connected,
    so we can bring businesses to rural America.
        Mr. Waibel, in your testimony, you highlighted something
    that is critical for people to understand. Our small towns and
    communities in rural America have sat at a stark disadvantage
    for way too long. It has left our kids at a disadvantage, and
    the studies--our seniors at a disadvantage in their healthcare
    when we talk about telehealth and telemedicine. And, for
    certain, our farmers are at a disadvantage for optimizing their
    yield.
        You also mentioned that not only do rural Americans lack
    access to broadband; where some are lucky enough to have
    service, it is inconsistent and expensive, and lack of
    competition means there is nowhere else to turn.
        When we here in Congress are considering broadband
    investments and deployment options, we must be effective.
    Unfortunately, in President Biden's proposal, he prioritizes
    municipal broadband networks or government-owned networks.
        In my home State of Minnesota, however, we have
    restrictions against municipal broadband networks. In fact, 18
    States total have restrictions against such networks. I guess
    my constituents in Minnesota's Eighth Congressional District
    and Mr. Hagedorn's constituents, like Mr. Waibel in Minnesota's
    First Congressional District in Minnesota, and many other rural
    Americans take a back seat under this piece of legislation. We
    count, and rural America matters.
        So what is the good news? In the CARES Act and the
    consolidated appropriations signed into law by President Trump,
    we were able to get a lot of money out the door to help bridge
    the gap in rural America. The money was unfettered by
    burdensome regulation and helped stimulate private investment.
    This was a step in the right direction.
        In these packages, a lot of different Federal agencies had
    been tasked with the broadband deployment mission. This can be
    tricky for some small businesses to navigate as we all know.
    That is why I will soon be introducing the Small Business
    Broadband and Emerging Information Technology Enhancement Act.
        This legislation will direct the Small Business
    Administration to create a broadband coordinator position that
    will serve as the primary liaison to other Federal agencies
    involved in broadband deployment and would identify and catalog
    tools, training, and best practices for small businesses as it
    relates to broadband implementation and usage.
        It is my hope that legislation like mine and others will
    help bring broadband investment to our rural communities, to
    that last mile for economic development. The CARES Act gave us
    a great start, and I think we need to take advantage of it.
        I know that Chair Golden and Ranking Member Hagedorn
    understand that. They both represent rural districts. And,
    Chair Golden, as you alluded to, we did hear that we had a
    field hearing on broadband development and deployment a year
    and a half ago. In northern Minnesota and in upstate Maine, it
    was the same concerns by our small businesses, our families,
    our family farmers, and we have the opportunity right now to do
    it right.
        And, Mr. Waibel, I want to repeat what you said earlier.
    Rural America must be put on a level and fair playing field
    now, and we have the opportunity. And I know we have bipartisan
    support in the Congress to do that, and I am looking forward to
    that.
        Mr. Chair, I yield back.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you.
        Next, we are going to recognize Representative Antonio
    Delgado from New York 19. I see him on the screen. I am not
    sure if he has questions. We will give him 2 or 3 seconds here.
        All right. We will come back to him.
        Why don't we move to another part of New York, Rep. Claudia
    Tenney.
        Ms. TENNEY. Thank you so much, Chairman Golden and Ranking
    Member Hagedorn, for holding this important meeting today, and
    thank you to the witnesses for your time and your insight.
        As we have we have heard today, the internet connection can
    determine your destiny, and nothing shapes our ability to
    access education, healthcare, and employment opportunities like
    access to rural broadband. The COVID-19 pandemic has only
    driven home this point.
        Americans have never relied more heavily on reliable,
    accessible, and affordable internet than they do today.
    Throughout New York's 22nd Congressional District, there are
    far too many communities who do not have access to reliable
    broadband.
        The digital divide is even more great when you consider our
    children have less access to education, our seniors have less
    connectivity with their doctors, and our business meetings are
    few and far between because we are always spooling on our lack
    of access to the internet.
        And, to make matters worse--this, I think, is a critical
    issue--upstate New York is subject to a broadband monopoly in
    New York. New York State, under Governor Andrew Cuomo and the
    State legislature, agreed to a cable consolidation plan under
    an agreement with Spectrum, which they claimed that expanded
    improved service. However, the State and New York State's
    Public Service Commission have absolutely failed to enforce the
    agreement.
        This has left too many rural customers in my district with
    nonexistent broadband service or service that is far too
    expensive. Just this week alone, Spectrum has raised their
    rates seven times in just a few years on New Yorkers.
        The only solution is to increase competition in our
    internet marketplace. This means enacting policies that steer
    investment to smaller upstart providers and reducing barriers
    to entry.
        We must also encourage networks that can host multiple
    internet service providers so someone's geography does not
    limit their choice. I think we can work on closing this
    internet gap and provide choice once and for all to upstate New
    Yorkers.
        One thing I wanted to ask, I know, Ms. Schaffer, I wanted
    to ask you this because you pointed out a couple important
    things about getting access to internet. I just first wanted to
    ask you about how the FCC data can--the data on broadband
    coverage and how it speeds--affects speeds is inaccurate. These
    maps are often pivotal to determine if a project is eligible
    for Federal funding.
        This was raised to me in a recent broadband hearing I had
    in my own town of Sherburne, New York, where our business is
    located. From what your experience is, can Congress work with
    the FCC to resolve this, and can we give some of this
    determination on where we are going to allow speeds--can we
    give that back to our local communities?
        Ms. SCHAFFER. Yes and yes.
        So the FCC map is based on advertised speed by Census
    block, where one home in a Census block is served, then the
    entire Census block is considered served. So that gives--you
    know, there are Census blocks in rural America that are many
    hundreds of miles, and if one location is served or could
    reasonably be served, then that entire Census block is served,
    and it is no longer eligible for any Federal funding.
        That really puts a--you know, it--that shuts off an
    opportunity for those--that area to get funding. They have to
    then rely on either local funding or State funding to fill that
    hole. And really to get these projects done, you need a capital
    stack. You need some Federal money, you need some State money,
    you need some local money, you need ISP money. That is really
    how rural America is going to get served.
        And, you know, one of the things that I recommended in my
    testimony is moving this new Federal funds directly to State
    programs because State programs are much more responsive to
    what is happening.
        Our State has a standard--broadband standard of 100 over
    100 and an unserved standard of 50 over 10. So we have
    recognized the importance of connectivity. And, if Federal
    funding flows to States, then States can really craft projects
    and with the local people that meets the local solutions and
    deals with----
        Ms. TENNEY. Let me just----
        Ms. SCHAFFER.--many of these issues.
        Ms. TENNEY. Let me just reclaim my time for a minute,
    because I am running short.
        I wanted to emphasize I am concerned about the situation in
    New York State where we continue to put millions of dollars
    into providing a virtual monopoly to Spectrum Cable, which has
    been a huge problem. When I served in the State Assembly, there
    was a former Congressman named Chris Gibson in my other
    district.
        We put tons of money into broadband, and it didn't go
    anywhere but to these large entities, and now we have a
    problem--continuing to have a problem with rural broadband. My
    question is, how do we get the local governments to be able to
    participate in this?
        And, also, the village of Sherburne has been designated as
    a test site to allow this municipal concept that is part of the
    bill that--the infrastructure bill President Biden has
    proposed, but also give choice and an opportunity for our
    consumers to choose their internet and to have actually access
    to broadband with minimal rates of speed as determined by the
    last farm bill?
        I have run out of time. I apologize. I have to catch up
    with you on another question.
        I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you.
        With that, I think we are going to move to a second round.
        Mr. Hagedorn, do you have further questions?
        Mr. HAGEDORN. Yeah, sure.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Okay. Go ahead. I am going to ask some,
    too, but I will let you go first.
        Mr. HAGEDORN. All right. Thank you, Chairman.
        I think I want to associate myself with Congressman
    Stauber's comments and, to a degree, also Representative
    Tenney's comments on the Biden proposal.
        I mean, from my standpoint, if you are going to have 18
    States that just can't participate because they already have
    restrictions on these municipal broadband networks, that is
    pretty darn serious. I don't know why they would put that
    forward when basically a third of the country is shut out. I
    guess they are trying to be a little top-down on that one. I
    disagree. So I think what Congressman Stauber said there was
    right on target.
        And, also, the telemedicine, I mean, really, if we have
    seen anything here in the last year, it is how that has
    expanded and the need for it. And the hospitals and providers
    have really dug in, and I think the people have accepted it.
    And so, from the standpoint of Congress, we need to make sure
    that those reimbursements are there. I think this is one of the
    few good things that came out of the coronavirus situation, is
    the advent of telemedicine.
        In the State of Minnesota, every once in a while, we have
    inclement weather, believe it or not. What about Maine? I think
    same thing in Maine, right? And so, when that happens, it is
    easy to still go see your doctor, but also makes it more
    efficient for them, seniors, disabled, you name it.
        Mr. Waibel, what do you think about telemedicine? Has it
    taken off a little bit in your community? Are you seeing more
    and more of it? Will it help the people in the rural areas?
        Mr. WAIBEL. Absolutely. So one of my daughters is an RN at
    a local senior citizens' living place. And, anyway, you know,
    so that was used quite a lot during the pandemic for her
    patients and clients where she works. And I think, you know--I
    even actually used it, too, one time. And it is certainly--it
    is a great option to have and something that, again, is going
    to be used more and more in the future, I believe.
        Mr. HAGEDORN. Thank you.
        Mr. Dunne, in your studies and the work that you are doing,
    do you see job migration going from urban areas to rural areas
    if we can have them on par as far as digital connectivity?
        Mr. DUNNE. We absolutely have. There was a lot of movement
    pretty early in the pandemic, and, as I think another witness
    mentioned, people realized, boy, you know, going back to small
    towns might be a lot better than being shoehorned into larger
    cities.
        But they need to be able to continue their aspirational
    jobs. Many times, unfortunately, the narrative has become, if
    you want to stay in your, you know, the community that you
    love, you have to give up that aspiration and those goals to be
    able to do things on a national or global basis.
        If you have broadband, that is not the choice you have to
    make. You know, the young people who have been supported by
    those communities to be able to go off to college can come home
    and participate and sometimes bring their jobs with them or
    create new businesses based on the experiences that they have
    had both in that community and in their experiences outside of
    it.
        So we do see this as a moment to reverse the population
    decline that really we only saw for the first time in a
    generation in 2011, 2012, and 2013. Even the farm crisis didn't
    lead to a net population loss.
        So we are at a moment where we need to move quickly. COVID
    has created that opportunity, but we need infrastructure like
    future-proof broadband in order to make that a reality.
        Mr. HAGEDORN. I appreciate that.
        Mr. Sullivan, I want to ask you just a little bit more
    about your experience. It is pretty fascinating.
        You are serving some rural communities, but what about the
    outlying areas where you may have farms. Are you also able to
    run the fiber to those locations?
        Mr. SULLIVAN. Yes. When we started this project, we made
    the commitment or the towns made the commitment that every
    single person who had a telephone pole within reach of their
    home would be served. So, right now, we have got about 99
    percent of both those towns are served. We have got two
    outlying areas similar to what you are talking about that we
    are working on right now. So, by the end of this year, they
    will be connected as well.
        So we have got some stretches where we go 6, 7, 8 miles to
    get one house.
        Mr. HAGEDORN. Well, if Congress wanted to help and make
    what you do a demonstration project or expand it, what could
    the Federal Government do in order to be helpful, other than
    maybe get out of the way?
        Mr. SULLIVAN. I think a better understanding of, you know,
    what is actually happening out there. And I am going to pick up
    a couple of points, one from the Representative in New York
    about the cable monopoly there.
        That situation is--was allowed to happen. Cable companies
    don't compete with anybody. They have got their own highways.
    They just basically do what they want, so that is difficult for
    other ISPs to come in. So competition doesn't exist.
        That is another piece that is another important aspect to
    this, is the--to the ranking committee member's comment there
    about getting some service to somebody or to everybody, I have
    been teaching old and young and rich and poor for over 45
    years, and I can tell you, once you drag them over the digital
    divide, you get them working, if you build them a network that
    doesn't work, they are frustrated, they are angry, and they
    won't use it.
        It will cause more issues by giving them just something
    because the way it works now, without symmetrical connections
    up and down--there is more and more stuff being done with
    cloud-based computing; you have got to have those uploads. And
    those copper-based networks of cable, fixed wireless, satellite
    don't have the capacity to do that, and you will basically be
    wasting money after money has already been wasted.
        Mr. HAGEDORN. Thank you. My time has expired. Appreciate
    it.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you. I think Mr. Sullivan has talked
    about that a lot. Nothing more frustrating than seeing your tax
    dollars get put to some kind of internet solution, and then you
    still get the spinning wheel, whether you are a student or a
    small business owner.
        So, Representative Williams, did you want to ask further
    questions?
        Mr. WILLIAMS. Sure.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Ms. Schaffer, a recent article by the Technology Policy
    Institute pointed out that, as the bar gets higher, more areas
    become eligible for subsidies while the costs of serving the
    truly unserved increases.
        Do you agree with this statement?
        Ms. SCHAFFER. Well, no. Actually, I mean, I think that--you
    know, this is infrastructure that is going to last 50 years, so
    we should build infrastructure that is going to meet the
    demands of people for 50 years. And, as I said, when you look--
    you know, we run a grant program, and, when you are looking at
    providing grants, there are many, many ways through scoring
    that you can really give advantage to areas that have really
    bad broadband.
        But it is important when they build it, that they bring it
    up to a standard that is going to be essentially future-proof,
    and that is what we try to do with our grant program. So I
    think you can manage this pretty easily through a grant process
    to make sure that the people who have the worst service have
    the best opportunity in a competitive grant to get better
    service.
        Mr. WILLIAMS. Let me have a followup to you.
        How do we ensure that we continue to focus deployment for
    unconnected areas rather than upgrading systems that are
    already in place?
        Ms. SCHAFFER. So, you know, one of the definitions of--when
    you--even when the FCC defines 25/3 as served, people who have
    less than 25/3, you know, are still eligible for that Federal
    funding. So you are going to overbuild that network because we
    know it doesn't meet today's standards.
        And so I think it is important when we look at this to
    understand that, first off, the incumbent provider is the most
    likely to build--to rebuild their network because they are
    there already. So they have the customers, they have the
    structure, and so providing opportunities for the incumbent
    provider to improve their service, by overbuilding their own
    network, shall we say, with better service, is really critical.
        And so that is part of trying to figure out how we get
    better service to these people. It is not just--every time we
    are building networks, it is not like we are bringing--we are
    not often bringing in a new provider. We are usually providing
    the small local incumbent provider who has been there for a
    long, long time the ability to upgrade service that they
    already have to the customers they already have.
        So overbuilding is really about improving service to
    customer bases. Sometimes that is the existing provider that
    does it. And, if the existing provider doesn't want to do it,
    then sometimes it is bringing in a new provider. But it is
    making sure, at the end, with Federal dollars and State
    dollars, taxpayer money, that you are providing a service that
    can meet the needs of that area for now and into the future.
        Mr. WILLIAMS. Okay. Thank you for your testimony, and I
    yield the remaining time back to the Chairman.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you, sir.
        Representative Carter, I think you want to give Mr.
    Sullivan a little more time.
        Mr. CARTER. Yeah. Sorry. I think Mr. Sullivan indicated he
    wanted to respond to one of my questions, but we were out of
    time.
        Mr. SULLIVAN. Right. I was going back to the--to the idea
    about--I kind of answered some of this previously, but we were
    speaking about the rural areas and the poor areas where people,
    you know, can't afford the service even if it is there. It is
    important that the service we do provide everybody in America
    is one that works, and that is what I mentioned previously.
        That is what I was--kind of shoehorned in my answer to your
    question when you ran out of time. But basically my answer to
    that is that we need to build networks that work and that will
    work for the next 50-plus years, as Peggy said. Doing something
    less than that will just frustrate us 5 years down the road.
        Mr. CARTER. But would you not agree that, in 2021, the
    infrastructure for broadband is as essential as water,
    plumbing, electricity? I think we have to be realistic and talk
    about those things that are meritorious of funding. And I don't
    think we have the luxury. This is not Republican or Democrat.
    If there is anything that has ever been bipartisan, broadband
    for our country is certainly a bipartisan issue that we can no
    longer afford to kick the can down the road.
        I feel the frustration of many of my colleagues who have
    had it up to their ears with shoddy broadband or no broadband
    at all.
        Mr. SULLIVAN. Well, that is what we did with the Downeast
    Broadband Utility, is we built a utility that is similar to
    roads, you know, sewer, water. It is a piece of infrastructure
    that we know is not going away. It is only going to get more
    and more used. It is going to need more and more robust nature
    where--fiber will do that. That is why we are such big
    proponents.
        And, if you look here in Maine--and this isn't just Maine.
    I have been contacted across this entire country by people that
    want to set up competitive municipal networks where multiple
    ISPs come in and fight for your business. It drives costs down.
    It improves service. I mean, it is basically the American
    competitive way.
        We have allowed forever cable companies to monopolize. We
    have enabled phone companies to monopolize. You know, we--the
    cable company that--we have Spectrum in Maine. We don't have
    Comcast. They don't fight with each other. Comcast says:
    Listen, you take New Hampshire; and, Spectrum, you can have
    Maine.
        That doesn't bring, you know, good service to our citizens.
    And I--again, I said in my testimony, a private business should
    be allowed to do what they want with their own money, but we
    are talking about our money, everybody in this room and
    everybody across this country. And I think it is incumbent on
    all of us to be in the room when these dollars are being talked
    about and not just have the existing ISPs in there pulling the
    ears on legislators and people who make the decisions.
        You have got to get the rank and file. Bring those farmers
    in.
        Mr. CARTER. Thank you.
        I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you.
        Mr. Sullivan, I was actually going to ask just a followup
    on Mr. Hagedorn. You talked about how you are getting service
    to every door in your community, including, you know, the ones
    down the long dirt driveways in the most rural of areas. But
    what about the technology Mr. Waibel was talking about with
    tractors and such?
        Can we provide that type of coverage with fiber like what
    you talk about, or is that a satellite-only solution?
        Mr. SULLIVAN. Oh, wouldn't I--oh, I am so glad somebody
    asked that question. I have been spouting this forever.
        If America put fiber on the telephone poles like we did
    electricity to every single pole in this country, we could
    probably eliminate 80 percent of your ugly cell towers out
    there. You can run little mini antennas. Cell towers always
    have to connect back to a fiber connection. That is how it
    works. There is a few that use microwave, but, by and large, it
    is all going back to fiber.
        You can put the ubiquitous coverage all over your farms.
    You could put them in your distant forests. You could put it
    across this entire Nation. We just--we need to have a focus
    that says, Let's look at this like electricity. I know that is
    like--everybody is bored to death with hearing that analogy.
    But it basically is it. We have got to hang these fiber cables
    across the entire Nation, and we will solve a multitude of
    problems.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you.
        You know, this is a great--really is, I think, a helpful
    hearing. There is a lot of proposals out there. I know--you
    know, there has been some discussion about the Jobs Plan put
    out there by the White House, but there is also some work being
    done in the Senate, and I think recently they announced--Mr.
    Waibel, you talked about Representative Thompson's bill. I
    haven't seen it, so I will have to look at that.
        And then I am a member of the Problem Solvers Caucus, and
    we have got a different infrastructure proposal that includes
    some broadband as well.
        So plenty of room for good compromise.
        Some of the stuff, like today, I mean, through what I have
    seen in Calais and Baileyville, Maine, I have become a great
    believer in what Mr. Sullivan has worked on with trying to
    empower localities to take--empower themselves, owning that,
    you know, fiber for themselves. And you have done it in a
    really unique way, like you said, without raising taxes and
    without Federal dollars. It is locally owned.
        Ms. Schaffer, I am impressed by the way that your
    organization works with the State to leverage private and local
    matches, getting the most out of the Federal dollars that are
    being sent into Maine. So I think that is something important
    for us to look at as well.
        And I just had to quickly comment. When you were talking
    about advertised speed, man, that is an old problem and one we
    talked about in the last Congress, and hopefully we can
    continue to improve upon that.
        I don't--what is the solution there? Is it--I mean,
    obviously just one firm, one house is the problem. Is it a
    percentage of people served in the Census block have to have
    true access to advertised speed? I mean, how would you unravel
    that problem?
        Ms. SCHAFFER. Well, first, I wouldn't use advertised speed.
    I would use actually delivered speed, because there is a big
    difference. What people can advertise and what they can deliver
    are two--often two different numbers.
        And, really, one of the things that we know about broadband
    is it is--you really need granular data. You need it down to
    the street level. And Census block level is just not enough.
        One of the things that we are doing in Maine and they are
    doing in Minnesota is we are doing a crowdsource speed testing
    to help inform our data decisions as well as the other data
    that we are collecting. The FCC is starting to do that kind of
    work, but it is really important that you--when you look at
    that kind of data, you are including a customer's voice, you
    are including what they are actually getting at their house in
    the larger picture of what the data--what the service is
    available.
        So I would not do--I would not do advertised speeds. I
    would do it at a--the closest you can get to the street level.
    And the other piece is that you should really audit what
    companies are telling you that they are--can provide. So they
    say they can provide X. Are they actually providing it? And
    crowdsource speed testing is one way you can do that.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you.
        You know, one thing I have to say about Maine that is
    unique is, when we talk about small towns, like, we are talking
    about very small towns. As you know, the largest community in
    Maine's Second Congressional District is Lewiston. That is, you
    know, about 30,000 people. That is our biggest population
    center.
        But there are, you know, 350 other towns, and some of them
    are very small. So that is why we need that flexibility, I
    think. And some of these programs are why, as you said, your
    organization can be a good approach, or the one like Mr.
    Sullivan's community has taken upon themselves.
        But I wanted to ask quickly, last question for me anyway,
    Mr. Dunne, I see that you--CORI is looking at doing work in
    Waterville, Maine. How do you find and invest in communities as
    part of the Rural Innovation Network, and as, I guess, a good
    example, why Waterville?
        Mr. DUNNE. Sure. So Waterville is an extraordinary
    community, as you know, that has gone through a transition from
    being a manufacturing community to something else. And it was a
    tough transition when the textile mills closed and the like.
        But a group of leaders, including the Central Maine Growth
    Council and some unofficial leaders who just redeveloped some
    of those old mill buildings, created cowork spaces, and just
    started making things happen on their own. And there has also
    been some real leadership from Colby College. And your small,
    4-year, you know, liberal arts colleges don't always step up to
    be engaged in their community.
        Colby College really is, because they know it is critical
    to their future, their ability to attract faculty in the future
    and to be a world-class college.
        So, when we saw all those things coming together and the
    beautiful cowork spaces, the redeveloped mill building that is
    where Bricks is located, we saw an opportunity. We partnered
    with them to help them put together a real strategy plan and to
    be able to then apply for federal EDA funding through the Build
    to Scale program, which they received.
        And so they got some state funding help. They got some
    federal funding help. They got local energy that is happening,
    and they are in the process of building a high-tech accelerator
    program for new businesses. They are doing training programs.
    They are engaging students and faculty and folks locally who
    are looking for new economic opportunities.
        So they found us, and we have just been delighted. We are
    also continuing other conversations with communities in Maine
    as well.
        Chairman GOLDEN. Thank you. I appreciate that.
        Any further questions? All right.
        Well, I want to thank all of our witnesses again for
    joining us today. Your testimony has highlighted how crucial
    reliable broadband access is just critical to the small
    businesses all over the country, particularly in our rural
    areas. So the internet has revolutionized the way that many
    small businesses operate. It has allowed them to reach
    customers in new markets and save money via new technologies.
        The longer certain small businesses don't have reliable
    internet access, unfortunately, the further they fall behind.
    That is why, here in Congress, we need to work together to find
    solutions that facilitate the expansion of broadband
    infrastructure.
        As we consider broadband infrastructure proposals, we have
    got to look to update our digital infrastructure for the 21st
    century.
        I look forward to working with my colleagues in Congress on
    closing the digital divide and evening the playing field for
    small businesses.
        With that, I would ask unanimous consent that members have
    five legislative days to submit statements and supporting
    materials for the record.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        If there is no further business to come before the
    Committee, we are adjourned.
        Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 11:29 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

                               A P P E N D I X

    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]