[Senate Hearing 117-720]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




                                                        S. Hrg. 117-720

                           NOMINATIONS TO THE
                   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION,
                     THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,
                  AND THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

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

                                HEARING

                               before the

                         COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
                      SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                           NOVEMBER 17, 2021

                               __________

    Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
                             Transportation





                 [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
               





                Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov

                               ______
                                 

                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

53-126 PDF                WASHINGTON : 2023











       SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                   MARIA CANTWELL, Washington, Chair

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota             ROGER WICKER, Mississippi, Ranking
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut      JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii                 ROY BLUNT, Missouri
EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts         TED CRUZ, Texas
GARY PETERS, Michigan                DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin             JERRY MORAN, Kansas
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois            DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
JON TESTER, Montana                  MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona              TODD YOUNG, Indiana
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada                  MIKE LEE, Utah
BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico            RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Colorado          SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West 
RAPHAEL WARNOCK, Georgia                 Virginia
                                     RICK SCOTT, Florida
                                     CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming

                    David Strickland, Staff Director
                 Melissa Porter, Deputy Staff Director
       George Greenwell, Policy Coordinator and Security Manager
                 John Keast, Republican Staff Director
            Crystal Tully, Republican Deputy Staff Director
                      Steven Wall, General Counsel









                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Hearing held on November 17, 2021................................     1
Statement of Senator Cantwell....................................     1
Statement of Senator Wicker......................................     3
Statement of Senator Blumenthal..................................     4
Statement of Senator Lujan.......................................     5
Statement of Senator Klobuchar...................................    53
Statement of Senator Schatz......................................    57
Statement of Senator Fischer.....................................    59
Statement of Senator Moran.......................................    63
Statement of Senator Baldwin.....................................    65
Statement of Senator Thune.......................................    66
Statement of Senator Markey......................................    68
Statement of Senator Sullivan....................................    70
Statement of Senator Tester......................................    73
Statement of Senator Blackburn...................................    75
Statement of Senator Rosen.......................................    76
Statement of Senator Lee.........................................    78
Statement of Senator Warnock.....................................    80
Statement of Senator Cruz........................................    82
    Bedoya tweets................................................    84
Statement of Senator Lummis......................................    89
Statement of Senator Sinema......................................    90

                               Witnesses

Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel, Nominated to be Chair, Federal 
  Communications Commission......................................     7
    Prepared statement...........................................     8
    Biographical information.....................................     9
Alvaro M. Bedoya, Nominated to be a Commissioner, Federal Trade 
  Commission.....................................................    19
    Prepared statement...........................................    20
    Biographical information.....................................    21
Jainey K. Bavishi, Nominated to be Assistant Secretary for Oceans 
  and Atmosphere, U.S. Department of Commerce....................    31
    Prepared statement...........................................    32
    Biographical information.....................................    33
Arun Venkataraman, Nominee for Assistant Secretary for Global 
  Markets and Director General of the U.S. and Foreign Commercial 
  Service, U.S. Department of Commerce...........................    42
    Prepared statement...........................................    43
    Biographical information.....................................    44

                                Appendix

Support letter for Jessica Rosenworcel dated July 19, 2021 to 
  Hon. Joseph Biden, President of the United States from Kimberly 
  J. Wagner, Executive Director, Major County Sheriffs of 
  America; Jonathan Thompson, Executive Director, National 
  Sheriffs Association; Fire Chief Kenneth W. Steubing, Acting 
  President and Chairman of the Board, International Association; 
  Don Lombardi, Fire Chief, West Metro Fire Rescue and President, 
  Metropolitan Fire Chiefs Association; Scott R, Miller, 
  Assistant Chief, Golder Ranch Fire District and President, 
  Western Fire Chiefs Association; Kyle Thornton, Bureau Chief, 
  New Mexico EMS and President, National Association of State EMS 
  Officials; and Derek K. Poarch, Executive Director and CEO, 
  APCO International.............................................    99
Support letter for Jessica Rosenworcel dated November 11, 2021 to 
  Senator Maria Cantwell and Senator Roger Wicker from Raymond 
  Hart, Executive Director, Council of the Great City Schools...   101
Support letter for Jessica Rosenworcel dated November 15, 2021 to 
  Hon. Maria Cantwell and Hon. Roger Wicker from Dan Mauer, 
  Director of Government Affairs, Communication Workers of 
  America (CWA)..................................................   102
Support letter for Jessica Rosenworcel dated November 15, 2021 to 
  Hon. Maria Cantwell and Hon. Roger Wicker from Fire Chief 
  Kenneth W. Steubing, BHSc, CCP(f), President and Board Chair, 
  International Association of Fire Chiefs.......................   103
Support letter for Jessica Rosenworcel dated November 16, 2021 to 
  Hon. Chuck Schumer, Hon. Mitch McConnell, Hon. Maria Cantwell 
  and Hon. Roger Wicker from: 18 Million Rising, Access Humboldt, 
  Akaku Maui Community Media, Alliance for Community Media, 
  American Library Association, Appalshop Community Media 
  Initiative, Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, Branford 
  Community Television, California Center for Rural Policy, 
  California Clean Money Campaign, Capital Community Media, CATS 
  Community Access Television Services, Center for Accessible 
  Technology, City of New Bedford Cable Access--New Bedford, MA, 
  Color of Change, Common Sense, Communications Workers of 
  America, Communities Closing the Urban Digital Divide, 
  Community Media Access Collaborative, Decode Democracy, Demand 
  Progress Education Fund, Democracy for America, Derry Community 
  Access Media, Duluth Public Access Community Television, 
  Electronic Frontier Foundation, Engine, FC Public Media, Fight 
  for the Future, Free Press Action, Friends of the Earth, Granby 
  Community Access and Media, Inc., The Greenlining Institute, 
  Greenpeace USA, Hawaii Consumers, Illinois for Educational 
  Equity, Indivisible Sacramento, Institute for Local Self-
  Reliance, Libraries Without Borders US, Local TV, inc, Lynn 
  Community Television, Massachusetts Community Media dba 
  MassAccess, Media Alliance, Media, Inequality & Change Center, 
  MediaJustice, Melrose Massachusetts Television, Movement 
  Alliance Project, Mozilla Foundation, National Association of 
  the Deaf, National Consumers League, Native Public Media, The 
  New Hampshire Coalition for Community Media, Newark for 
  Educational Equity & Diversity, North Shore TV, NTEN, OD 
  Action, The OMNI Centre for Public Media, Inc., OMNI 
  Productions, Open MIC (Open Media and Information Companies 
  Initiative), Open Technology Institute, OpenMedia, Orion 
  Neighborhood Television (ONTV), The Other 98%, Our Revolution, 
  PhillyCAM, Presente.org, Progress America, Public Knowledge, 
  Revolving Door Project, RootsAction.org, Salem Community 
  Television, Salem NH, Salina Media Connection; Community Access 
  TV of Salina, Inc., San Diego Futures Foundation, Tahoe Truckee 
  Media, Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, 
  Inc. (TDI), TURN--The Utility Reform Network, United Church of 
  Christ Media Justice Ministry, Valley Shore Community 
  Television Inc., Western New York Library Resources Council, 
  Winchester Community Access & Media, Inc., Writers Guild of 
  America West, X-Lab............................................   103
Support letter for Jessica Rosenworcel dated November 16, 2021 to 
  Hon. Maria Cantwell and Hon. Roger Wicker from Brenda Victoria 
  Castillo, President & CEO, National Hispanic Media Coalition...   106
Support letter for Jessica Rosenworcel dated November 17, 2021 to 
  Hon. Maria Cantwell and Hon. Roger Wicker from Chief Dwight E. 
  Henninger, IACP President, International Association of Chiefs 
  of Police......................................................   107
Support letter for Jessica Rosenworcel dated November 18, 2021 to 
  Chairwoman Maria Cantwell and Ranking Member Roger Wicker from 
  Russell Hollander, National Executive Director, Directors Guild 
  of America.....................................................   108
Support letter for Jessica Rosenworcel dated November 30, 2021 to 
  Maria Cantwell and Roger Wicker from Lou Fiore, Chairman, Alarm 
  Industry Communications Committee..............................   109
Support letter for Alvaro Bedoya to Senators and Senate Committee 
  from former Senate staffers: Elizabeth Taylor, Matthew Johnson, 
  Holt Lackey, Erik Jones, Jeff Zubricki, Craig Kalkut, Maggie 
  Whitney, Alexandra Reeve Givens, Sam Simon, Joshua Riley, Susan 
  Rohol, Kevin Cummins, Sam Ramer, Alpha Lillstrom, Albert 
  Sanders, Curtis LeGeyt, Emily Livingston, Chandler Morse, Sarah 
  Beth Jansen, Sarah Mills, Clete Johnson, Lara Flint, Hasan Ali, 
  Shanna Singh Hughey, April Carson..............................   110
Support letter for Alvaro Bedoya dated October 4, 2021 by Lacy 
  Crawford, Jr., Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights.............   111
Support letter for Alvaro Bedoya dated November 11, 2021 to Chair 
  Cantwell and Ranking Member Wicker from former leaders of the 
  Federal Trade Commission.......................................   112
Support letter for Alvaro Bedoya dated November 16, 2021 to Hon. 
  Maria Cantwell and Hon. Roger Wicker from Lisa Gilbert, 
  Executive President, Public Citizen............................   113
Support letter for Alvaro Bedoya dated May 10, 2022 from Chris 
  Jones, Senior Vice President of Government Relations & Counsel, 
  National Grocers Association...................................   114
Support letter for Alvaro Bedoya dated November 29, 2021 to Hon. 
  Maria Cantwell from Robert L. Purvin, Jr., Chair, Board of 
  Trustees, American Association of Franchisees and Dealers and 
  Keith R. Miller, Director of Public Affairs and Engagement, 
  American Association of Franchisees and Dealers; Principal, 
  Franchisee Advocacy Consulting.................................   115
Support letter for Alvaro Bedoya dated February 1, 2022 to 
  Majority Leader Schumer and Commerce Committee Chair Cantwell 
  from Wade Henderson, Interim President and CEO, The Leadership 
  Conference on Civil and Human Rights; and Janet Murguia, 
  President and CEO, UnidosUS....................................   116
Support letter for Alvaro Bedoya dated February 2, 2022 to 
  Senator Maria Cantwell and Senator Roger Wicker from Chris 
  Jones, Senior Vice President of Government Relations & Counsel, 
  National Grocers Association...................................   118
Support letter for Jainey Bavishi dated April 29, 2022 to Hon. 
  Chuck Schumer and Hon. Mitch McConnell from National Ocean 
  Protection Coalition, Azul, Brown Girl Surf, Continental Divide 
  Trail Coalition, Defenders of Wildlife, Earthjustice, 
  Environmental Defense Fund, Friends of the Earth, GreenLatinos, 
  Greenpeace USA, Healthy Ocean Coalition, Inland Ocean 
  Coalition, League of Conservation Voters, Monterey Bay 
  Aquarium, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources 
  Defense Council, Ocean Conservancy, Oceana, The Ocean Project, 
  Urban Ocean Lab................................................   119
Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Jessica 
  Rosenworcel by:
    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................   120
    Hon. Richard Blumenthal......................................   122
    Hon. Edward Markey...........................................   122
    Hon. Tammy Baldwin...........................................   123
    Hon. Raphael Warnock.........................................   124
    Hon. Roger Wicker............................................   125
    Hon. John Thune..............................................   138
    Hon. Roy Blunt...............................................   142
    Hon. Deb Fischer.............................................   144
    Hon. Jerry Moran.............................................   145
    Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................   148
    Hon. Marsha Blackburn........................................   149
    Hon. Mike Lee................................................   151
    Hon. Ron Johnson.............................................   155
    Hon. Shelley Moore Capito....................................   156
    Hon. Rick Scott..............................................   160
Response to written questions submitted to Alvaro Bedoya by:
    Hon. Kyrsten Sinema..........................................   160
    Hon. Gary Peters.............................................   161
    Hon. Edward Markey...........................................   162
    Hon. Richard Blumenthal......................................   162
    Hon. Roger Wicker............................................   162
    Hon. Jerry Moran.............................................   166
    Hon. Roy Blunt...............................................   166
    Hon. Marsha Blackburn........................................   168
    Hon. Mike Lee................................................   169
    Hon. Ron Johnson.............................................   172
    Hon. Rick Scott..............................................   173
Response to written questions submitted to Jainey K. Bavishi by:
    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................   174
    Hon. Roger Wicker............................................   175
    Hon. Rick Scott..............................................   176
Response to written questions submitted to Arun Venkataraman by:
    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................   176
    Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................   177
    Hon. Roger Wicker............................................   178
    Hon. Marsha Blackburn........................................   179
    Hon. Rick Scott..............................................   180








 
                           NOMINATIONS TO THE
                   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION,
                     THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,
                  AND THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

                              ----------                              


                      WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2021

                                       U.S. Senate,
        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:19 a.m., in 
room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Maria 
Cantwell, Chairwoman of the Committee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Cantwell [presiding], Klobuchar, 
Blumenthal, Schatz, Markey, Peters, Baldwin, Duckworth, Tester, 
Sinema, Rosen, Lujan, Hickenlooper, Warnock, Wicker, Thune, 
Cruz, Fischer, Moran, Sullivan, Blackburn, Lee, Capito, Scott, 
and Lummis.

           OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON

    The Chairwoman. Today, the Commerce Committee will consider 
very important nominees, and I want to thank them for their 
willingness to serve. First, we will consider the nomination of 
Jessica Rosenworcel to be Commissioner and Chair of the Federal 
Communications Commission. Senator Blumenthal will be providing 
a formal introduction, but I would like to say a few words. The 
pandemic has magnified the deep digital divide in our country, 
and if confirmed, Chairwoman Rosenworcel will be responsible 
for leading the agency's important work to ensure broadband 
accessibility for all Americans.
    All schools transitioned students to learning at home. Last 
year, 20 percent of students in Washington State did not have a 
reliable Internet connection that would have allowed them to 
participate in remote learning. Over 16 million K-12 students 
in the United States did not have access to reliable broadband 
at the beginning of the pandemic and over the past several 
years, I have heard many stories about students sitting in 
parking lots to access their Wi-Fi, do their homework, and 
concerned teachers whose students don't have the connectivity.
    The pandemic has made clear that the broadband access is no 
longer a luxury but a necessity to participate in nearly all 
aspects of society, including educating our children. 
Yesterday's historic $65 billion investment in broadband is a 
start, but obviously we need the mapping to go with this before 
we can get anything really done. The first--as the first woman 
to serve as its Chair, Ms. Rosenworcel brings nearly a decade 
of experience and an important role for the Commission.
    I look forward to hearing her thoughts on how the agency 
moves forward in our information age. Next, we will consider 
the nomination of Alvaro Bedoya to be Commissioner on the 
Federal Trade Commission, who will be joining us remotely. 
Senator Lujan will be introducing Mr. Bedoya later this 
morning, and we welcome him and his family who are 
participating. I also would like to take the opportunity to 
welcome a bipartisan group of Commissioners and the Chair of 
the FTC, who have joined us in support of him this morning.
    The Federal Trade Commission core mission is to protect 
consumers from unfair and deceptive practices in commerce and 
promoting competition by enforcing the Nation's antitrust laws. 
In today's information economy, the FTC's mission has never 
mattered more. In just the last several years, we have seen a 
45 percent increase in consumer fraud and deception complaints 
to the FTC, as well as a surge of merging filed--merger filings 
that are straining the agency's capacity to rigorously 
investigate mergers.
    The Committee has strongly advocated for significant new 
resources to create the staff, and a dedicated consumer privacy 
data and security bureau at the FTC and restore the FTC's 
ability to seek penalties from companies that violate the law 
and victimize consumers, as well as comprehensive Federal 
privacy legislation.
    We have also been exploring new legal authority to tackle 
privacy and data security and ways to prevent abuse that are 
all too common online. Mr. Bedoya will bring a wealth of 
experience and expertise to this role as a professor at 
Georgetown Law and founder of its Center on Privacy and 
Technology. He has dedicated his career to advancing the law 
and policy on privacy and surveillance.
    Mr. Bedoya has served as Chief Counsel on the Senate 
Judiciary Committee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law. So I 
believe he is the right person to carry out this mission and to 
ensure that consumers can harness the opportunities of the 
information age. Next, we will consider the nomination of 
Jainey Bavishi--Bavishi, sorry, to be the Deputy NOAA 
Administrator. Welcome to you and your family.
    Ms. Bavishi's nomination could not be more timely. The 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and hopefully soon the 
Build Back Better Act requires strategic leadership to help 
NOAA execute all its climate and coastal resiliency goods. So I 
am confident that she can provide that leadership. She has an 
impressive background, including leading climate resiliency 
programs for New York City's Mayor's Office of Climate 
Resiliency, the White House Council on Environmental Quality, 
and previously she served as--at NOAA where she was responsible 
for environmental justice and led the agency's policies and 
initiatives on the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
    Far too long, we have kept the environmental justice 
separate from climate change adaptation and mitigation at the 
expense of underserved communities of color and tribal 
communities, and these communities--should be at the forefront 
of adaptation and mitigation.
    This is particularly of concern to me in the State of 
Washington, where so many of our tribes are on our coastal 
communities and literally need to move to higher ground. 
Finally, we will hear from Arun Venkataraman--say your name for 
me, please. OK. Venkataraman. Thank you so much for your 
willingness to serve, to be Assistant Secretary of Commerce and 
Director of Commerce--General, Director General at the United 
States Foreign Commercial Service and Department of Commerce.
    If confirmed, he would play a key role in helping small and 
medium sized enterprises enter and compete in foreign markets. 
More than 80 percent of the world's purchasing power and 95 
percent of population resides outside the United States. In 
Washington state, one in three jobs depend on trade, and access 
to overseas markets is critical for small and medium sized 
manufacturers in my state and across the United States.
    These companies provide for one-third of U.S. merchandise 
exports. This is why we passed the United States Innovation and 
Competitiveness Act because it provides more funding for 
manufacturers' research funding and the manufacturing extension 
program to support supply chain resiliency. He has more than 20 
years of experience in advising companies on international 
organizations and the U.S. Government on international trade 
issues, and I look forward to hearing from him on the 
challenges he sees in facing American businesses and how we can 
address them.
    So thank you to all the nominees for your willingness to 
serve, and I now would like to turn to my colleague, Senator 
Wicker, for his opening statement.

                STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER WICKER, 
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI

    Senator Wicker. Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding this 
hearing to consider the nominations of Jessica Rosenworcel for 
a new term as Commissioner of the Federal Communications 
Commission, Mr. Alvaro Bedoya to be a Commissioner at the 
Federal Trade Commission, Ms. Jainey Bavishi to be Assistant 
Secretary for Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere, and Mr. Arun 
Venkataraman to be Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Director 
General of the U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service.
    And Madam Chair, it really speaks to the diversity of our 
great nation that we have so many last names that give you and 
me a bit of pause. But we are delighted to have them here today 
and I want to congratulate our old friend, Chairwoman 
Rosenworcel, on being the first woman to chair the FCC. She is 
well known to members of this committee, having served as 
professional staff member here, as well as being confirmed 
twice by the Senate for two terms at the FCC.
    Given the significant amount of broadband funding that will 
be made available through the recently enacted bipartisan 
infrastructure package, I am particularly interested in hearing 
the Chair's plan for ensuring that the FCC produces accurate 
coverage maps in a timely manner. I know she is astonished that 
I would mention that sort of thing. We cannot afford to repeat 
the mistakes of the past during which Government funding was 
used to overbuild in some areas while leaving many other 
communities unserved.
    The FCC is at the epicenter of a number of key 
communications policy issues, including spectrum policy for 5G, 
rural broadband subsidies, and Internet regulation. So I look 
forward to discussing these matters with Ms. Rosenworcel.
    Mr. Bedoya is a former professional staff member of the 
Senate Judiciary Committee, a position that afforded him the 
chance to work on important bipartisan initiatives. However, I 
have been concerned by the frequency with which he publicly 
expresses strident views on public policy matters that should 
be resolved through consultation and collaboration. I fear that 
this pattern calls into question his ability to work in a 
collaborative manner with the other FTC Commissioners on 
critical issues.
    For over 100 years, the FTC has been the chief consumer 
protection agency in the United States. Its core mission, to 
protect consumers from unfair or deceptive acts or practices 
and unfair methods of competition is essential to a well-
functioning economy. I look forward to hearing from Mr. Bedoya 
about how he plans, if confirmed, to enhance the privacy and 
security of Americans' personal data to combat fraud and scams 
and promote competition in today's information economy.
    Ms. Bavishi has been the Director of New York City Mayor's 
Office of Climate Resiliency since 2017, having previously 
served on the White House Council on Environmental Quality 
during the Obama Administration. I am keenly interested in 
hearing Ms. Bavishi's plans should she become Assistant 
Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere. I want to stress that NOAA 
should always be guided by scientific standards and never by a 
partisan agenda.
    And I anticipate that Ms. Bavishi will want to give the 
Committee her perspective on these fundamental principles. Mr. 
Venkataraman is quite familiar with the Department of Commerce 
since he currently serves as a Senior Adviser to Secretary Gina 
Raimondo and previously worked as the Director of Policy at the 
International Trade Administration during the Obama 
Administration.
    I hope he will share his goals for promoting trade and 
keeping U.S. companies, helping U.S. companies get started with 
exporting or increasing sales to new global markets.
    I thank all of these nominees for appearing before the 
Committee today. I understand Mr. Bedoya is not ill but is 
quarantined because he perhaps was exposed to COVID. And we 
look forward to a robust hearing. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    The Chairwoman. Thank you, Senator Wicker. Senator 
Blumenthal will be recognized to introduce or make further 
comments on Chair Rosenworcel, and Senator Lujan, following 
that, on Mr. Bedoya.

             STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNETICUT

    Senator Blumenthal. Thanks very much, Madam Chair. And 
thanks for your leadership on these nominations. And thank you 
to the nominees for your willingness to serve. The diversity 
and extraordinary qualifications of these nominees, I think, 
attest to the greatness of our country. And there would have 
been a time, I am absolutely sure, when members of this 
committee would have had difficulty pronouncing Blumenthal as a 
nominee. So we welcome you here and celebrate your nominations.
    I am particularly delighted and honored to introduce 
Jessica Rosenworcel as the President's nominee and the first 
female Chair of the Federal Communications Commission, equally 
importantly, as a daughter of Connecticut, specifically West 
Hartford and Wesleyan, although she went to New York University 
for law school. But I have worked with her closely, as have 
many members of our committee over the years, and I know that 
we are very familiar with her qualifications on this committee. 
She got her start at the FCC first as professional staff and 
then as a legal adviser to Commissioner Cobb.
    She worked for the Commerce Committee as Senior Counsel, 
two of the greats of this committee, Senator Jay Rockefeller 
and Senator Daniel Inouye. And she has really been a 
distinguished champion, an energetic and aggressive champion of 
consumers, of causes of privacy and net neutrality. I worked 
with her on fighting the abusive effects of robocalls and 
efforts to provide for spectrum coordination. But apart from 
all of those specific issues, she has a very extraordinary 
ability to put complex issues in terms that everyday Americans 
can understand.
    She invented the term homework gap to describe the 
increasing digital divide that unfortunately increasingly 
impedes children in their efforts to stay current in studies 
when they need broadband access. And her leadership and 
commitment to working on closing the digital divide and ending 
the homework gap, I think, have been extremely productive and 
significant. We have really a once in a lifetime opportunity 
here to confirm an FCC Chairman who will effectively implement 
the President's infrastructure law, which includes $65 billion 
as investment in expanding broadband.
    She has been a champion of making broadband more affordable 
and addressing that digital divide's impact on disadvantaged 
communities. Particularly, I have watched her in Hartford talk 
about this issue with passion and clarity that this moment 
really demands, and I know that she will make us proud as she 
has already of her public service when she is confirmed as the 
next Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. Thank 
you to you and your family, Commissioner Rosenworcel, and we 
wish you well. I know they are watching, and they are 
justifiably proud. Thank you.
    Senator Schatz [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. 
And now we will have Senator Lujan introducing Mr. Bedoya.

               STATEMENT OF HON. BEN RAY LUJAN, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO

    Senator Lujan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member 
Wicker, and fellow members of the Senate Commerce committee. It 
is my pleasure to introduce Mr. Alvaro Bedoya. His nomination 
to the Federal Trade Commission is a clear example of the 
Administration's commitment that the United States is at its 
strongest when our Nation's public servants reflect the full 
diversity of the American people.
    As a proponent for more Hispanic voices at the highest 
levels of Government, I am proud to introduce Professor Alvaro 
Bedoya. Mr. Bedoya is the founding Director of the Center on 
Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law, where he is a 
visiting professor.
    His research and advocacy centers on the idea that privacy, 
an essential civil right--that privacy is for everyone. As 
Senate counsel in the U.S. Senate from 2009 to 2014, Mr. Bedoya 
acted to protect victims of sexual assault, conducted oversight 
hearings of technology companies, and fought to protect the 
privacy of the public from Government overreach. A graduate of 
Harvard College and Yale Law School, Mr. Bedoya lives in 
Rockville, Maryland, with his two children and his wife, Dr. 
Sima Zadeh Bedoya, a pediatric psychologist at the National 
Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute. In 2020, 
Professor Bedoya delivered the United States Senator Dennis 
Chavez Memorial Lecture in Law and Civil Rights at the 
University of New Mexico School of Law.
    Many of you know that Senator Dennis Chavez, who was a 
fellow New Mexican, was the first United States born Latino to 
serve in the U.S. Senate. Senator Chavez understood that 
protecting privacy is critical to preserve equality. In that 
lecture, Bedoya quoted Senator Chavez's timeless words, ``I 
contend that we are a nation of dissenters.'' Privacy is 
critical to preserving that fundamental right to dissent in our 
democracy. The role Mr. Bedoya will play at the FCC to preserve 
privacy rights will ensure all Americans keep their fundamental 
right to public disclosure. But it is more than just words.
    Mr. Bedoya's work on privacy and facial recognition, both 
in his time as a staffer with the U.S. Senate and at 
Georgetown, has influenced how the technology is perceived and 
utilized. He recognized the importance of this issue from an 
early point and was part of raising it to a national 
significance. Just 2 weeks ago, Facebook announced that it 
would shut down its facial recognition system and delete data 
used to identify individuals. Such progress would not be 
possible without the work of Mr. Bedoya, who has shown the 
public, lawmakers, and private companies the serious dangers of 
such technology to all Americans.
    Today, Mr. Bedoya teaches in the same law school that 
accepted Senator Dennis Chavez when El Senador, as he was 
known, was 29 years old with only a 7th grade education. From 
our conversations, I know Mr. Bedoya understands the deep 
significance of this legacy.
    If confirmed, Mr. Bedoya will be the only Latino in a 
Senate confirmed position at the Federal Trade Commission, 
Federal Communications Commission, or the Consumer Financial 
Protection Bureau. And I look forward to working, Mr. Bedoya 
following his confirmation.
    And Mr. Chairman, since I have the time, I just want to 
also add words to support Commissioner Rosenworcel's 
nomination. My only frustration with Commissioner Rosenworcel's 
nomination is that it was not done in March. This was long 
overdue, and we are going to see with the strong bipartisan 
vote, this should have been done months ago.
    And so I look forward to the hearing. And since there are 
two FTC Commissioners here, I just want to bring to the 
attention of the Committee a letter that was sent by President 
Biden to the FTC regarding the concern that we all have, and 
that is the rising cost of gas prices. It is going to be 
important that the FTC do the work, as President Biden has 
asked.
    In this New York Times article, the President noted that 
prices at the pump have risen even as the costs of refined fuel 
have fallen, and industry profits have gone up. The two largest 
players in the industry, ExxonMobil and Chevron, have doubled 
their net income since 2019, while announcing billions of 
dollars in plans to issue dividends and buy back stock.
    If these prices would reflect the savings that we are 
seeing at the refineries, people would be saving $0.25 a gallon 
at the pump. I certainly hope that we can shed some light on 
this, bring attention to what is happening with the OPEC 
cartels and help bring relief to the American people. And I 
thank you for the time. Mr. Chairman look forward to the 
hearing.
    Senator Schatz. Thank you very much, Senator Lujan. We will 
now begin our testimony, starting with Ms. Rosenworcel.

 STATEMENT OF HON. JESSICA ROSENWORCEL, NOMINATED TO BE CHAIR, 
               FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

    Ms. Rosenworcel. Good morning, and thank you to the Chair, 
the Ranking Member, and the other members of this committee. It 
is a tremendous honor to be nominated and designated the first 
permanent chairwoman of the Federal Communications Commission. 
This is historic and I would like to thank President Biden for 
the opportunity. I also would like to thank my husband, Mark, 
and my children, Caroline and Emmett.
    And while we are at it, the newest member of my family, our 
pandemic rescue pup, Bo. It has been a privilege to lead the 
FCC in an acting capacity during these past 10 months. So much 
about the last year has been new and complex as this strange 
virus has changed our lives. But it has demonstrated with total 
clarity that we need modern communications to reach us all.
    That is because more than ever before, Americans count on 
the FCC to support the connections they need to work, to learn, 
to access health care, and access the information we all need 
to make decisions about our lives, our community, and our 
country. I know the FCC staff are up to this task. They are an 
exceptional group of public servants and I think public service 
is a special calling. I also like to think it runs in my 
family.
    My father served in the Air Force and later went on to a 
career as a nephrologist in Hartford, Connecticut. For three 
decades, he ran the city's clinic for hypertension and kidney 
failure. My mother spent over two decades helping run a soup 
kitchen in Hartford. And my grandfather before them served in 
the United States Customs Service right here in Washington, but 
my great grandfather before them also served the public just in 
a different way, he swept the streets of New York.
    I think communications technologies are the infrastructure 
of opportunity. These are the connections, physical and 
digital, that can strengthen our mutual bonds that can grow our 
economy and create new jobs. They help us work, learn, be 
informed, enlightened, and entertained.
    And we also need these connections to break down barriers 
that for too long have held too many back. I think the FCC does 
all of this best when its work honors the essential values in 
our communications laws. That means public safety is paramount. 
New technologies touch every aspect of our lives. We need them 
to be secure and resilient. That means universal service, no 
matter who you are or where you live in this country, urban, 
rural, or anything in between, you need access to modern 
communications to have a fair shot at digital age success. That 
means competition because it is the most effective way to 
foster innovation and make sure the public reaps its benefits.
    And it means an absolutely fierce commitment to consumer 
protection. I think at the FCC, we have put these values into 
practice over the last 10 months. With the support of my 
colleagues, we have worked on a bipartisan basis to set up the 
Nation's largest ever broadband affordability program, known as 
the Emergency Broadband Benefit, which now has 7.5 million 
households enrolled. We worked together to launch the Emergency 
Connectivity Fund, the first nationwide effort to close the 
homework gap so no child is left offline.
    We have made historic investments in telehealth technology 
all across the country. And we have kicked off a major auction 
of mid-band spectrum in the 3.45 gigahertz band, which is vital 
for our leadership in 5G wireless service. And to ensure that 
our networks now and in the future are secure, just a few weeks 
ago, we successfully started the Nation's first ever secure and 
trusted communications networks reimbursement program so that 
network providers can remove and replace vulnerable equipment. 
This is a lot, but there is more work to do. We need to make 
sure 100 percent of this country has access to fast, 
affordable, and reliable broadband.
    That means every household, every business, every consumer, 
everyone, everywhere. And to do this, we will need greater 
coordination across Federal, state, local, and tribal 
Governments. We need a renewed vigilance to make sure our 
communications networks are safe and secure. We also need to 
foster innovation across the board to ensure that the 
technological leadership of the United States continues on a 
global stage. If confirmed, it will be an honor to lead this 
charge.
    And if confirmed, I pledge to listen to this committee, 
which not that long ago I had the great honor of serving as 
counsel. So I know deep in my bones how important it is for 
each of you to have a good relationship with the agency. And if 
confirmed, I pledge more broadly to listen to the Congress, 
those with business before the FCC, and above all, the American 
people. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement and biographical information of Ms. 
Rosenworcel follow:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel, Nominated to be Chair, 
                   Federal Communications Commission
    Good morning, Chair Cantwell, Ranking Member Wicker, and members of 
the Committee. It is a tremendous honor to be nominated and designated 
as the first permanent Chairwoman of the Federal Communications 
Commission. This is historic and I would like to thank President Biden 
for the opportunity. I also would like to thank my husband Mark and my 
children Caroline and Emmett--and while we're at it, the newest member 
of my family, our pandemic rescue pup Bo.
    It has been a privilege to lead the FCC in an acting capacity 
during these past ten months. So much about the last year has been new 
and complex as this strange virus has changed our lives. But it has 
also demonstrated with total clarity that we need modern communications 
to reach us all. That's because more than ever before, Americans count 
on the FCC to support the connections they need for work, learning, 
healthcare, and access to the information we require to make decisions 
about our lives, our communities, and our country.
    I know the FCC staff are up for this task. They are an exceptional 
group of public servants and I think public service is a special 
calling.
    I also like to think it runs in my family. My father served in the 
Air Force and later went on to a career as a nephrologist in Hartford, 
Connecticut. For three decades he ran the city's clinic for 
hypertension and kidney failure. My mother spent over two decades 
helping run a soup kitchen. And my grandfather before them served in 
the United States Customs Service right here in Washington. My great 
grandfather before that served the public in a different way--he swept 
the streets of New York.
    I think communications technologies today are the infrastructure of 
opportunity. These are the connections--physical and digital--that can 
strengthen our mutual bonds. They can grow our economy and create new 
jobs. They help us work, learn, be informed, enlightened, and 
entertained. And we also need these connections to break down barriers 
that for too long have held too many back.
    I think the FCC does all of this best when its work honors the 
essential values in our communications laws.
    That means public safety is paramount. New technologies touch every 
aspect of our lives. We need them to be secure and resilient. That 
means universal service. No matter who you are or where you live in 
this country--urban, rural, or anything in-between--you need access to 
modern communications to have a fair shot at digital age success. That 
means competition. Because it is the most effective way to foster 
innovation and make sure the public reaps its benefits. And it means an 
absolutely fierce commitment to consumer protection.
    We have put these values into practice over the last ten months.
    With the support of my colleagues, we've worked on a bipartisan 
basis to set up the Nation's largest-ever broadband affordability 
program--the Emergency Broadband Benefit--which now has 7.5 million 
households enrolled. We worked together to launch the Emergency 
Connectivity Fund, the first nationwide effort to close the Homework 
Gap so no child is left offline. We have made historic investments in 
telehealth technology across the country. We kicked off a major auction 
of mid-band spectrum in the 3.45 GHz band which is vital for our 
leadership in 5G wireless service. And to ensure that our networks now 
and in the future are secure, just a few weeks ago we successfully 
started the Nation's first-ever Secure and Trusted Communications 
Networks Reimbursement program so that network providers can remove and 
replace vulnerable equipment.
    This is a lot. But there is more work to do. We need to make sure 
100 percent of us in this country have access to fast, affordable, and 
reliable broadband--every household, every business, every consumer, 
everyone, everywhere. To do this, we need greater coordination across 
federal, state, local, and Tribal governments. We need a renewed 
vigilance to make sure our communications networks are safe and secure. 
We also need to foster innovation across the board to ensure that the 
technological leadership of the United States continues on a global 
stage.
    If confirmed, it will be an honor to lead this charge. If 
confirmed, I pledge to listen to this Committee, which not that long 
ago I had the great honor of serving as counsel. So I know deep in my 
bones how important it is for you to have a good relationship with the 
agency. And if confirmed, I pledge more broadly to listen to the 
Congress, those with business before the FCC and above all--the 
American people. Thank you.
                                 ______
                                 
                      a. biographical information
    1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): Jessica 
Rosenworcel.
    2. Position to which nominated: Federal Communications Commission, 
Chair.
    3. Date of Nomination: October 28, 2021.
    4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):

        Residence: Information not released to the public.
        Office: 45 L Street, NE, Washington, DC 20554.

    5. Date and Place of Birth: 7/12/71; Boston, Massachusetts.
    6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your 
spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including 
stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).
    Spouse: Mark Bailen, Baker Hostetler, Counsel.
    7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school 
attended.

        Wesleyan University, BA, 1993.
        New York University School of Law, JD, 1997.

    8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all 
management-level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to 
the position for which you are nominated.

        Acting Chairwoman and Commissioner, Federal Communications 
        Commission.

        Senior Communications Counsel, U.S. Senate Committee on 
        Commerce, Science and Transportation.

        Senior Legal Advisor, Office of Commissioner Michael J. Copps, 
        Federal Communications Commission.

        Legal Advisor to the Bureau Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau, 
        Federal Communications Commission.

        Attorney, Drinker Biddle & Reath.

    9. Attach a copy of your resume.
    Attached.
    10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time 
service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other 
than those listed above, within the last ten years.
    Not applicable.
    11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee, 
partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any 
corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise, 
educational, or other institution within the last ten years.
    Not applicable.
    12. Please list each membership you have had during the past ten 
years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable, 
educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or 
religiously affiliated organization, private club, or other membership 
organization. (For this question, you do not have to list your 
religious affiliation or membership in a religious house of worship or 
institution.). Include dates of membership and any positions you have 
held with any organization. Please note whether any such club or 
organization restricts membership on the basis of sex, race, color, 
religion, national origin, age, or disability.

        Federal Communications Bar Association

        Chair, Cable Practice Committee (2007-2008)

        Chair, Legislative Practice Committee (2009)

    13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office 
(elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any 
campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are 
personally liable for that debt.
    No.
    14. List all memberships and offices held with and services 
rendered to, whether compensated or not, any political party or 
election committee within the past ten years. If you have held a paid 
position or served in a formal or official advisory position (whether 
compensated or not) in a political campaign within the past ten years, 
identify the particulars of the campaign, including the candidate, year 
of the campaign, and your title and responsibilities.
    None.
    15. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign 
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar 
entity of $500 or more for the past ten years.
    $2700, Hillary Victory Fund, 2016
    16. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary 
society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition 
for outstanding service or achievements.

        White Prize for Excellence in Economics, Wesleyan University 
        (1993)

        Special Act Award for Contributions to Common Carrier Bureau, 
        Federal Communications Commission (1999)

        Women Who Represent Award, Alliance for Women in Media (2013)

        Leadership in Advancing Communications Policy Award, 
        Association of Public Safety Communications Officials 
        International (2013)

        Impact Award for Public Service, National Hispanic Media 
        Coalition (2013)

        Federal Policymaker Award, State Education Technology Directors 
        Association (2013)

        Award for Excellence in Public Service, Consortium for School 
        Networking (2014)

        Special Recognition Award, CEF Gala (2015)

        Award for Outstanding Achievement, Family Online Safety 
        Institute (2014)

        Broadband Hero of the Year, National Association of 
        Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (2016)

        Community Builder Award, National Coalition for Technology in 
        Education (2017)

        Advocacy Award, CUE (2017)

        Congressional Service Award, Association of Educational Service 
        Agencies (2021)

        Leadership Honoree, Crittenton Services of Greater Washington, 
        for Teen Girls (2021)

    17. Please list each book, article, column, Internet blog posting, 
or other publication you have authored, individually or with others. 
Include a link to each publication when possible. Also list any 
speeches that you have given on topics relevant to the position for 
which you have been nominated. Do not attach copies of these 
publications unless otherwise instructed.

        Articles: https://www.fcc.gov/about/leadership/jessica-
        rosenworcel#link-0

        Blog postings: https://www.fcc.gov/about/leadership/jessica-
        rosenworcel#notes

        Speeches: https://www.fcc.gov/about/leadership/jessica-
        rosenworcel#speeches

    18. List all digital platforms (including social media and other 
digital content sites) on which you currently or have formerly operated 
an account, regardless of whether or not the account was held in your 
name or an alias. Include the name of an ``alias'' or ``handle'' you 
have used on each of the named platforms. Indicate whether the account 
is active, deleted, or dormant. Include a link to each account if 
possible.

        Work Twitter: @JRosenworcelFCC (Active)
        https://twitter.com/
        JRosenworcelFCC?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%
        5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

        Work Instagram: @JRosenworcelFCC (Active)
        https://www.instagram.com/jrosenworcelfcc/?hl=bn

        Personal Twitter: @JRosenworcel (Active)
        https://twitter.com/
        JRosenworcel?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%
        5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

        Personal Instagram: @JRosenworcel (Active)
        https://www.instagram.com/jrosenworcel/?hl=en

    19. Please identify each instance in which you have testified 
orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
governmental capacity and specify the date and subject matter of each 
testimony.

        Testimony:
        https://www.fcc.gov/about/leadership/jessica-
        rosenworcel#testimony

    20. Given the current mission, major programs, and major 
operational objectives of the department/agency to which you have been 
nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you 
believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for 
which you have been nominated, and why do you wish to serve in that 
position?
    I have two decades of experience in communications policy. I have 
worked on communications and technology matters from a wide variety of 
positions--both in the private and public sector. This includes 
positions in a law firm, as Acting Chairwoman and Commissioner at the 
Federal Communications Commission, and as Senior Communications Counsel 
at the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.
    I believe that I have used this background to make a positive 
contribution to communications policy--and hope to be able to continue 
to do so by protecting consumers, expanding access to services to help 
close the digital divide, and fostering investment and innovation.
    21. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to 
ensure that the department/agency has proper management and accounting 
controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large 
organization?
    All government officials operate in positions of trust and have a 
duty to ensure that the organization where they work has proper 
management and accounting controls.
    I have experience managing the agency as the Acting Chairwoman, 
managing an office at the agency as a Commissioner; managing policies 
involving communications at the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science 
and Transportation; and managing client matters at a private law firm.
    22. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the 
department/agency, and why?
    Protecting consumers. As technologies evolve, one thing is 
paramount--consumers should be the ultimate beneficiaries of policy 
choices by the Federal Communications Commission.
    Securing universal access and closing the digital divide. As 
technologies evolve, it is imperative that all people in this country, 
no matter who they are or where they live, have access to the 
communications services that are necessary for 21st century 
opportunity, safety, and economic security.
    Growing economy. Digital services are now a vital feature of our 
economy, providing certainty to companies is an essential part of 
promoting investment, fostering innovation, and creating jobs.
                   b. potential conflicts of interest
    1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation 
agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates, 
clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement 
accounts.
    None. My financial interests are disclosed on my SF-278.
    2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal, 
to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business, 
association or other organization during your appointment? If so, 
please explain.
    None.
    3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other 
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in 
the position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will 
resolve each potential conflict of interest.
    My husband is counsel at Baker Hostetler. His practice involves 
commercial litigation and does not include advocacy before the Federal 
Communications Commission.
    In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with 
the U.S. Office of Government Ethics and the Federal Communication 
Commission's Designated Agency Ethics Official to identify potential 
conflicts of interest. If confirmed, any potential conflicts of 
interest will be resolved in accordance with the terms of the ethics 
agreement that I have entered into with the Commission's Designated 
Agency Ethics Official. I am not aware of any other potential conflicts 
of interest.
    4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial 
transaction which you have had during the last ten years, whether for 
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in 
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the 
position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will resolve 
each potential conflict of interest.
    Not applicable.
    5. Identify any other potential conflicts of interest, and explain 
how you will resolve each potential conflict of interest.
    In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with 
the U.S. Office of Government Ethics and the Federal Communication 
Commission's Designated Agency Ethics Official to identify potential 
conflicts of interest. If confirmed, any potential conflicts of 
interest will be resolved in accordance with the terms of the ethics 
agreement that I have entered into with the Commission's Designated 
Agency Ethics Official. I am not aware of any other potential conflicts 
of interest.
    6. Describe any activity during the past ten years, including the 
names of clients represented, in which you have been engaged for the 
purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or 
modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and 
execution of law or public policy.
    I presently serve as Acting Chairwoman at the Federal 
Communications Commission and previously served as a Commissioner. In 
these positions, from time to time, I am asked my thoughts on 
legislative matters pending before the Congress.
    I also previously served as Senior Communications Counsel at the 
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. In this 
capacity I regularly advised Senate offices on communications policy 
and legislation.
                            c. legal matters
    1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics, 
professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a 
complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special 
Counsel, professional association, disciplinary committee, or other 
professional group? If yes:
    No.
    a. Provide the name of agency, association, committee, or group;
    Not applicable.
    b. Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, 
or personnel action was issued or initiated;
    Not applicable.
    c. Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or 
personnel action;
    Not applicable.
    d. Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action, 
complaint, or personnel action.
    Not applicable.
    2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by 
any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal, 
State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic 
offense? If so, please explain. No.
    3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were 
an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency 
proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please 
explain. No.
    4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo 
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic 
offense? If so, please explain. No.
    5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual 
harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or 
any other basis? If so, please explain. No.
    6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information, 
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in 
connection with your nomination. None.
                     d. relationship with committee
    1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with 
deadlines for information set by congressional committees, and that 
your department/agency endeavors to timely comply with requests for 
information from individual Members of Congress, including requests 
from members in the minority? Yes.
    2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can 
to protect congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal 
for their testimony and disclosures? Yes.
    3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested 
witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with 
firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes.
    4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly 
constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be 
reasonably requested to do so? Yes.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]



    Senator Schatz. Thank you very much. We will now proceed to 
Mr. Bedoya. Please proceed with your testimony.

STATEMENT OF ALVARO M. BEDOYA, NOMINATED TO BE A COMMISSIONER, 
                    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

    Mr. Bedoya. Thank you, Senator. Thank you, Madam Chair, 
Ranking Member Wicker, and members of the Committee, I 
appreciate the ability to testify remotely due to our families 
COVID exposure. Senator Lujan, Dennis Chavez is a hero of mine, 
and so what you said means the world to me. I want to thank 
President Biden for the trust he has placed in me. I want to 
thank Chair Khan, Commissioner Slaughter, Commissioner 
Phillips, and Commissioner Wilson for being there today. I wish 
I could be there with you.
    I want to thank my family, in particular my wife, who I am 
so proud of, who is a psychologist for the kids at the National 
Cancer Institute at the NIH, as Senator Lujan mentioned. My 
mother, who teaches community college in Richmond, Virginia. My 
dad, who is watching us in Lima, Peru. My brother and sister in 
law and my mother and father in law who are watching us from 
Louisiana.
    And last, I want to tell my daughter, Liana and my son Kian 
that I love them. I have been working on privacy and consumer 
protection for over a dozen years. But for me, my work really 
began around May 2011, and that was when the subcommittee I 
served as Chief Counsel, the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on 
Privacy, called its first hearing, and it was a hearing on 
smartphone geolocation technology. And right after we announced 
that hearing, one of the first messages we got wasn't from a 
privacy group or a consumer group, it was from the Minnesota 
Coalition for Battered Women. And they told us that oftentimes 
when women arrived in their shelters, they were actually being 
tracked by their abusers through secret spyware known as 
stalking apps. And this message was eye-opening because here we 
were about to hold a hearing on global positioning systems and 
cell site location, and here was the shelter saying, this is 
about safety.
    This is about a woman's ability to live her life in peace. 
And ever since then, I have tried to think about consumer 
protection, and I have tried to think about privacy, not in 
terms of data, but in terms of people, real people suffering 
real harm. And I have tried to work across the aisle to help 
them. And indeed, by focusing on that issue, the issue of 
stalking apps, our coalition, which included Senator Klobuchar 
and Senator Blumenthal, we were able to get the support of the 
offices of Senator Grassley, Senator Cornyn, Senator Graham. 
And together we were able to successfully press the Department 
of Justice to bring its--one of its first major prosecutions of 
one of these stalking app developers.
    This is what I hope to focus on, if I am confirmed. I want 
to make sure the Commission is helping the people who need it 
the most. Health care workers being sold fake N95 masks. People 
fighting opiate addictions are being sold scam treatments. 
Parents trying to make sure that the apps their kids use online 
aren't hurting them. Small business owners who are struggling 
in the face of unprecedented consolidation.
    On this last point, I will just share one example. We spent 
a lot of time with our family in Louisiana, and a lot of them 
work in health care, and what they will talk about is when a 
hurricane comes through, the last pharmacies to close and the 
first ones to reopen are the independent pharmacies, community 
pharmacies. These community pharmacies are critical not just to 
rural America, but also urban America. And yet it is exactly 
these pharmacies who are shutting down in the face of 
unprecedented consolidation. And the thing is, you could tell 
slightly different versions of the same story for almost any 
other sector of small business, independent grocers, online 
merchants, cattlemen, you name it. I think things are not 
normal. I think we are in a crisis, a COVID crisis, a privacy 
crisis, a crisis for small business.
    I believe my 5 years in the Senate have prepared me for 
that crisis, and that time I helped run some of the first major 
oversight hearings into tech giants, tech giants who are 
logging our movements and scanning our faces. I helped protect 
small businesses from Federal bureaucracies.
    And I helped negotiate the bipartisan law that forced the 
NSA to be more transparent. What I learned from the Senate is 
that we may disagree profoundly, even passionately, but we 
can't let that get in the way of serving the American people. I 
am grateful for your time. I am deeply grateful for this 
nomination. And I am grateful for this country, my country, 
which has given me and my family so much. When we landed at JFK 
Airport 34 years ago, I don't think this is what any of us 
expected. Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement and biographical information of Mr. 
Bedoya follow:]

Prepared Statement of Alvaro M. Bedoya, Nominated to be a Commissioner, 
                        Federal Trade Commission
    Thank you, Madam Chair, Ranking Member Wicker, members of the 
Committee. I want to thank President Biden for the trust he has placed 
in me. I want to thank Chair Khan and Commissioners Slaughter, 
Phillips, and Wilson, for joining me today.
    I want to thank my family. With me here today are my wife, Dr. Sima 
Zadeh Bedoya, a psychologist who counsels kids at the National Cancer 
Institute at the NIH, my mother, who teaches community college in 
Richmond, along with our dear friends Tom Olson and Thomas Dotstry. I 
also want to thank our families watching online, especially my mother- 
and father-in-law in Louisiana, my brother and sister-in-law in 
Virginia, and my dad who is watching from Peru.
    Finally, I want to tell my daughter Liyana and my son Kian, who may 
or may not be watching from home, that I love them.
                                 * * *
    I've been working on privacy and consumer protection for the last 
dozen years. But for me, my work really began in May 2011, when the 
subcommittee I served as chief counsel, the Senate Judiciary 
Subcommittee on Privacy, announced its first hearing on smartphone 
geolocation technology.
    Soon after that, one of the first groups we heard from wasn't a 
privacy group or a consumer group. It was the Minnesota Coalition for 
Battered Women. They told us that the women who arrived at their 
shelters were often tracked by their abusers through secret spyware 
known as stalking apps.
    The message was eye-opening. Because here we were about to hold a 
hearing about ``global-positioning systems'' and ``cell-site 
location.'' And here was this shelter saying: This is about safety. 
This is about a woman's ability to live her life in peace.
    And ever since then, I've tried to think about privacy not in terms 
of data, but in terms of people. Real people suffering real harm. And 
I've tried to work across the aisle to help them.
    Indeed, by focusing on this problem of stalking apps, our 
coalition, which included Senator Klobuchar and Senator Blumenthal, was 
able to team up with the offices of Senator Grassley, Senator Cornyn, 
and Senator Graham to successfully press the Department of Justice to 
run one of its first major prosecutions of one of these stalking app 
developers.
    This is what I hope to focus on, if I'm confirmed: I want to make 
sure that the Commission is helping the people who need it the most.
    Health care workers being sold fake N-95 masks. People fighting 
opiate addictions being sold scam treatments. Parents trying to make 
sure their kids aren't hurt by the apps they use online.
    I want to help small business owners across the country who are 
struggling to compete on their merits, without a bigger company using 
its power to stifle that competition. I'm not just talking about one 
industry in one state. I'm talking about people across the country--
from grocers to pharmacists to online merchants.
    Things are not normal. We are in a crisis. A COVID crisis. A 
privacy crisis. A crisis for small business.
    I believe my five years here in the Senate prepared me for this 
crisis. In that time, I helped run some of the first major oversight 
hearings into tech giants. Tech giants who were logging our movements, 
scanning our faces, scanning teenagers' faces. I worked across the 
aisle to protect small businesses from Federal bureaucracies. And I 
helped negotiate the bipartisan law that forced the NSA to be more 
transparent.
    What I learned from the Senate is that we may disagree, profoundly, 
even passionately. But we cannot let that get in the way of helping the 
American people.
                                 * * *
    I'm grateful for your time. I'm deeply grateful for this 
nomination. And I'm grateful for this country, my country, which has 
given me and my family so much. When we landed at JFK airport 34 years 
ago, this was never what we expected. I look forward to your questions.
                                 ______
                                 
                      a. biographical information
    1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): Alvaro M. 
Bedoya.
    2. Position to which nominated: Commissioner, Federal Trade 
Commission.
    3. Date of Nomination: September 20, 2021.
    4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):

        Residence: Information not released to the public.
        Office: Center on Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law, 600 
        New Jersey Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20001.

    5. Date and Place of Birth: February 21, 1982 (Lima, Peru).
    6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your 
spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including 
stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).
    Spouse: Dr. Sima Zadeh Bedoya. Pediatric psychologist at the 
National Institutes of Health's National Cancer Institute.
    7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school 
attended.

   Yale Law School, 2004-2007, J.D.
   Harvard College, 1999-2003, A.B. summa cum laude, Social 
        Studies.

    8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all 
management-level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to 
the position for which you are nominated.

   Center on Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law/Georgetown 
        University Law Center. New Jersey Ave. NW, Washington, DC.

     Founding Director & Visiting Professor of Law (July 
            '18 to present)

     Executive Director (Aug. '14-July '18) & Adjunct Prof. 
            of Law (Jan. '15-July '18)

     Director, Federal Legislation Clinic (July '18-June 
            '20)

   Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the 
        Law/Sen. Al Franken. Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, 
        DC.

     Chief Counsel to Subcommittee (Jan. '11-Aug. '14)

     Chief Counsel to Sen. Franken (June '10-Jan '11)

     Counsel to Sen. Franken (July '09-June '10).

   Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale and Dorr LLP. Pennsylvania 
        Ave. NW, Washington, DC.

     Associate (Sept. '07-July '09)

     Summer Associate (June-July '06) in New York, NY.

   U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy & Senate Judiciary Subcommittee 
        on Immigration, Refugees, and Border Security, Dirksen Senate 
        Office Building, Washington, DC.

     Law Clerk (May-June '06)

   NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Rector Street, New 
        York, NY.

     Law Clerk (May-Aug. '05)

   International Labour Office (ILO) Special Action Programme 
        to Combat Forced Labour, 4 route des Morillons, CH-1211, 
        Geneva, Switzerland.

     Research Consultant (April-June '04)

     Subcontractor via Eduardo Bedoya Garland (Oct. '03-
            April '04)

    9. Attach a copy of your resume.
    See attached.
    10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time 
service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other 
than those listed above, within the last ten years. None.
    11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee, 
partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any 
corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise, 
educational, or other institution within the last ten years. None.
    12. Please list each membership you have had during the past ten 
years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable, 
educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or 
religiously affiliated organization, private club, or other membership 
organization. (For this question, you do not have to list your 
religious affiliation or membership in a religious house of worship or 
institution.). Include dates of membership and any positions you have 
held with any organization. Please note whether any such club or 
organization restricts membership on the basis of sex, race, color, 
religion, national origin, age, or disability.

   CASA in Action. 8151 15th Ave., Adelphi, MD 20783

     Member, Board of Directors (June 2021 to present)

   CASA. 8151 15th Ave., Adelphi, MD 20783

     Member, Board of Directors (Oct. 2020 to present)

     Chair, Development Committee (July 2021 to present)

   The Accountability Movement. 1341 G St. NW 5th floor, 
        Washington, DC 20005

     Member, Board of Directors (Sept. 2020 to present)

   Free Press. 1025 Conn. Ave. NW, Suite 1110, Washington, DC 
        20036

     Member, Board of Directors (Dec. 2016-Oct. 2020)

   Free Press Action Fund. 1025 Conn. Ave. NW, Suite 1110, 
        Washington, DC 20036

     Member, Board of Directors (Dec. 2016-Oct. 2020)

   Center for Democracy & Technology. 1401 K St. NW #200, 
        Washington, DC 20005

     Member, Advisory Council (Dec. 2015-Aug. 2018)

   The Esperanza Education Fund. P.O. Box 27507, Washington, DC 
        20036

     Member, Board of Directors (Aug. 2014-June 2018)

     Member, Board of Advisors (July 2009-Aug. 2014)

     Co-Founder & Chair, Board of Directors (Jan.-July 
            2009)

    13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office 
(elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any 
campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are 
personally liable for that debt.
    No, I have not.
    14. List all memberships and offices held with and services 
rendered to, whether compensated or not, any political party or 
election committee within the past ten years. If you have held a paid 
position or served in a formal or official advisory position (whether 
compensated or not) in a political campaign within the past ten years, 
identify the particulars of the campaign, including the candidate, year 
of the campaign, and your title and responsibilities.
    Not applicable.
    15. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign 
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar 
entity of $500 or more for the past ten years.
    John King for Governor of Maryland ($1,000), 2021
    16. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary 
society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition 
for outstanding service or achievements.

   French-American Foundation Young Leader (2015-2016). Trans-
        Atlantic fellowship and exchange program.

   DC Legal Hackers ``Legal Hack of the Year'' Award (2016). 
        For the research in my Center's report, The Perpetual Line-Up, 
        on the privacy, civil liberties, and civil rights issues raised 
        by law enforcement use of face recognition technology.

   Legal Bisnow's 40 Lawyers Under 40 (2015). Awarded to 
        lawyers ``who have distinguished themselves in the past year 
        with exceptional performance.''

   National Law Journal Hill ``Hot List'' (2013). One of ``a 
        dozen congressional legal stars'' who ``play critical roles in 
        research, oversight, and shaping legislation.''

   Champion for Children Award (2010). Awarded by the First 
        Focus Campaign for Children for my Senate work to protect 
        children affected by immigration raids.

   The Hugh A. Johnson, Jr. Memorial Award (2010). Awarded by 
        the Hispanic Bar Association for the District of Columbia (HBA-
        DC) to the Esperanza Education Fund ``for outstanding 
        contributions to the Latino community.''

   Francis Wayland Prize (2007). Awarded by Yale Law School for 
        proficiency in negotiation and litigation in clinical work.

   Paul & Daisy Soros Fellowship for New Americans (2006). Two-
        year full scholarship to attend Yale Law School.

   Phi Beta Kappa (2003). For undergraduate studies at Harvard 
        College.

   Kawamura Fellowship (2003). One of three Harvard 
        undergraduates selected for an intensive cultural 
        ambassadorship program to Japan.

   Alexis de Tocqueville Prize (2003). Awarded to the best two 
        senior theses in my undergraduate major (Social Studies).

   Latino Studies Prize (2003). Awarded to the best two senior 
        theses on a subject concerning Latinos or Latin American 
        studies.

   Arthur Liman Public Interest Fellowship (2001). Public 
        interest law fellowship to support my summer internship at the 
        Migrant Farmworker Justice Project in Belle Glade, Florida.

    17. Please list each book, article, column, Internet blog posting, 
or other publication you have authored, individually or with others. 
Include a link to each publication when possible. Also list any 
speeches that you have given on topics relevant to the position for 
which you have been nominated. Do not attach copies of these 
publications unless otherwise instructed.
    Note: I have conducted an extended, diligent, and good faith search 
of all of my own records and public records to identify materials 
responsive to this question. However, due to the large number of my 
speaking engagements, I may have inadvertently omitted materials. If 
additional responsive material is identified, it will be provided to 
the Committee promptly.
Publications
   ``Watching Immigrants,'' Harvard National Security Journal 
        (forthcoming 2022). Based on my lecture at the HNSJ & Lieber 
        Institute at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point Symposium: 
        ``Racial & Intersectional Critiques of National Security Law'' 
        on March 2, 2021.

   With Sen. Clarence Lam & Del. Dana Stein, ``Maryland Bill 
        Would Restrict ICE Access to MVA Data,'' The Baltimore Sun, 
        Feb. 16, 2021.

   ``The Cruel New Era of Data-Driven Deportation,'' Slate, 
        Sept. 22, 2020.

   ``Privacy as Civil Right,'' 50 New Mexico Law Review 3 
        (2020).

   ``Algorithmic Discrimination vs. Privacy Law,'' in The 
        Cambridge Handbook of Consumer Privacy (Evan Selinger, Jules 
        Polonetsky, Omer Tene, eds.), 2018.

     Note: The chapter is paywalled, but I have temporarily 
            uploaded the page proofs to Google Drive for your review. 
            My chapter is on pages 232-240.

   ``A License to Discriminate,'' The New York Times, June 6, 
        2018.

   ``Why Silicon Valley Lobbyists Love Big, Broad Privacy 
        Bills,'' The New York Times, April 11, 2018.

   With Harrison Rudolph & Laura Moy, Not Ready for Take-Off: 
        Face Scans at Airport Departure Gates, Center on Privacy & 
        Technology at Georgetown Law, Dec. 2017.

     Media: Interactive Website.

   ``Deportation is Going High Tech Under Trump,'' The 
        Atlantic, June 21, 2017.

   ``You Cannot Encrypt Your Face,'' The Atlantic, May 5, 2017.

   With Clare Garvie, ``Smile! You've just been identified by 
        face recognition,'' New York Daily News, March 27, 2017.

   ``Who's Logging Your Face?'' The Washington Post, March 22, 
        2017.

   With Paul Ohm, Amicus Curiae Brief in Castorina v. De 
        Blasio, a case regarding the privacy of documents submitted in 
        the IDNYC program. Jan. 4, 2017.

   With Clare Garvie and Jonathan Frankle, The Perpetual Line-
        Up: Unregulated Police Face Recognition in America, Center on 
        Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law, Oct. 2016.

     Media: Interactive Website.

   Comments on Proposed FBI Rulemaking to Exempt the Next 
        Generation Identification System from Provisions of the Privacy 
        Act, July 6, 2016.

   ``The Color of Surveillance,'' Slate, Jan. 18, 2016.

   With Clare Garvie, Comments on ``Follow the Lead: A Workshop 
        on Lead Generation'' before the Federal Trade Commission, Dec. 
        18, 2015.

   ``Why I Walked Out of Facial Recognition Negotiations,'' 
        Slate, June 30, 2015.

   ``Surveillance in Marble,'' Slate, June 2, 2015.

   With Ben Sobel, ``Just How Kafkaesque is the Court that 
        Oversees NSA Spying?'' The Washington Post, May 21, 2015.

   ``Big Data and the Underground Railroad,'' Slate, Nov. 7, 
        2014.

   ``Executive Order 12,333 and the Golden Number,'' Just 
        Security, Oct. 9, 2014.

   Comments on ``Big Data: A Tool for Inclusion or Exclusion?'' 
        before the Federal Trade Commission, Aug. 15, 2014.

   With David Vladeck, Comments on ``Big Data and Consumer 
        Privacy in the Internet Economy'' before the National 
        Telecommunications & Information Administration, Aug. 5, 2014.

   Note, ``The Unforeseen Effects of Georgia v. Ashcroft on the 
        Latino Community,'' 115 Yale Law Journal, 2112-2146 (2006).

   Forum Contribution, ``Backlash at the Booth: Latino Turnout 
        After H.R. 4437,'' Yale Law Journal Pocket Part, Aug. 8, 2006.

   With Eduardo Bedoya & Patrick Belser, ``Debt Bondage and 
        Ethnic Discrimination in Latin America,'' in Forced Labor: 
        Coercion and Exploitation in the Private Economy 35-50 (Beate 
        Andrees & Patrick Belser eds., Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner 
        Publishers 2009).

   With Eduardo Bedoya Garland, Servidumbre por Deudas y 
        Marginacion en el Chaco de Paraguay [''Debt Bondage and 
        Marginalization in the Chaco of Paraguay''], (Int'l Labour 
        Org., Working Paper No. 45, 2005).

   With Eduardo Bedoya Garland, El Trabajo Forzoso en la 
        Extraccion de la Madera en la Amazonia Peruana [''Forced Labor 
        in the Logging Industry in the Peruvian Amazon''], (Int'l 
        Labour Org., Working Paper No. 40, 2005).

   With Eduardo Bedoya Garland, Enganche y Servidumbre por 
        Deudas en Bolivia [' ''Enganche' and Debt Bondage in 
        Bolivia''], (Int'l Labour Org., Working Paper No. 41, 2005).

   ``Captive Labor,'' Dollars & Sense, Sept./Oct. 2003.
Public Speeches, Lectures, Extended Interviews & Panel Discussions 
        Relevant to my Nomination
   ``The Shadowy Side of Smart Cities,'' Our Tech Futures 
        Conference by Just Futures Law, July 7, 2021.

   ``Seven Questions for the Future of Face Recognition 
        Technology'' Beyond Fairness: Towards a Just, Equitable & 
        Accountable Computer Vision, CVPR 2021 Workshop, June 25, 2021.

   Panel discussion: ``Building Bridges Between Law & 
        Technology'' Georgetown Law, May 6, 2021.

   Interview in No Safety with Surveillance, OpenMIC, April 6, 
        2021.

   Panel discussion: ``Racial Justice & Business 
        Technologies,'' The Technology Ethics Center at the University 
        of Notre Dame, March 5, 2021.

   ``Surveillance tech is not accomplishing the things it's 
        supposed to,'' Marketplace Tech, Jan. 11, 2021.

   Panel discussion: ``The Rhetoric and Application of AI in 
        Policing & Criminal Justice,'' Center on Global Transformation 
        at U.C. San Diego, Nov. 18, 2020.

   Public Interest Technology--University Network Inaugural 
        Convening: Keynote Panel on Technology, Race, and Our Future. 
        Nov. 21, 2019.

   ``Trevor Paglen: Sites Unseen'' Exhibition Panel Discussion, 
        Smithsonian American Art Museum, Washington, DC. Nov. 15, 2018.

   The Color of Surveillance: Monitoring of Poor and Working 
        People: Opening Remarks & Closing Remarks. Center on Privacy & 
        Technology, Georgetown Law, Washington, DC. Nov. 7, 2019.

   ``FBI, ICE Use State Driver's License Databases to Scan 
        Photos,'' NPR Morning Edition, July 8, 2019.

   The Color of Surveillance: Government Monitoring of American 
        Immigrants: Opening Remarks, ``The Military Intelligence 
        Division & American Jews (A Transition)'' & Moderator for Panel 
        Discussion: ``A Conversation on Countering Violent Extremism.'' 
        Center on Privacy & Technology, Georgetown Law, Washington, DC. 
        July 19, 2018.

   ``Bedoya on government monitoring of religious minorities,'' 
        The Privacy Advisor Podcast, June 15, 2018.

   Congressional Briefing: ``The Usual Suspects: Bias in 
        Government Surveillance.'' Fourth Amendment Advisory Committee, 
        Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Nov. 30, 2016.

   Congressional Briefing on The Perpetual Line-Up: Unregulated 
        Police Face Recognition in America Report. Senate Judiciary 
        Committee (Invitation from Chairman Grassley & Ranking Member 
        Leahy), Washington, DC. Nov. 28, 2016.

   Keynote Address to the International Joint Conference on 
        Biometrics, October 4, 2017.

   The Color of Surveillance: Government Monitoring of American 
        Immigrants: Opening Remarks & Moderator for Panel Discussion: 
        ``The Border and the Muslim Ban.'' Center on Privacy & 
        Technology, Georgetown Law, Washington, DC. June 22, 2017.

   Panel Discussion: ``Facial recognition and law enforcement: 
        technology and policy.'' Connect:ID 2017 Conference, 
        Washington, DC. May 3, 2017.

   ``Live from Summit with Alvaro Bedoya,'' The Privacy Advisor 
        Podcast, International Association of Privacy Professionals, 
        April 21, 2017.

   Panel Discussion: ``Justice, Work, and Opportunity,'' R 
        Street Institute, Washington, DC. April 17, 2017.

   ``The FBI and Facial Recognition,'' Tech Policy Podcast, 
        April 10, 2017.

   Panel Discussion: ``We Are the Color of Freedom: Resisting 
        Racist Police Surveillance in a Trump Era.'' A ``Virtual Town 
        Hall'' Hosted by the Center for Media Justice. March 29, 2017.

     Note: I avoid using the word ``racist'' to describe 
            race-biased technologies like face recognition; I find it 
            to be inflammatory and unhelpful. The hosts of this panel 
            changed the title of the panel a few days before the event 
            and did not check with me before doing so.

   Moderator for Panel Discussion: ``Privacy in Public 
        Surveillance.'' The American Criminal Law Review at Georgetown 
        Law, Katz @ 50 Symposium, Washington, DC. March 3, 2017.

   Lecture: ``The Perpetual Line-Up: Unregulated Police Face 
        Recognition in America.'' Harvard Data Privacy Lab, Cambridge, 
        MA. Feb. 17, 2017.

   ``Police Face Recognition Software Still Isn't Great With 
        Women & POCs, And Your Face Is Already In It,'' Criminal 
        Injustice, WESA (Pittsburgh NPR), Feb. 8, 2017.

   ``Police Facial Recognition Databases Log About Half Of 
        Americans,'' NPR Weekend Edition Sunday, Oct. 23, 2016.

   ``Police Face Recognition Databases May Include You,'' To 
        The Point, KCRW, Oct. 20, 2016.

   ``The Source: The 'Wild West' Of Facial Recognition 
        Technology,'' KSTX San Antonio (Texas Public Radio), Oct. 20, 
        2016.

   Panel Discussion: ``Safety of Personal Health Information: 
        Regulation around the Emergence of Wearable Technology.'' 
        O'Neill Institute at Georgetown Law, Washington, DC. Oct. 5, 
        2016.

   Congressional Briefing: Launch of the Fourth Amendment 
        Caucus and the Fourth Amendment Advisory Committee. Fourth 
        Amendment Advisory Committee, Washington, DC. July 13, 2016.

   Panel Discussion: ``Biometrics: Security, Privacy, and 
        Convenience.'' Fourth Annual George Mason Law & Economics 
        Center Public Policy Conference on the Law & Economics of 
        Privacy and Data Security, Arlington, VA. June 22, 2016.

   Opening Remarks: 6th Annual International Summit on the 
        Future of Health Privacy, Patient Privacy Rights, Georgetown 
        Law, Washington, DC. June 7, 2016.

   Panel Discussion: ``Privacy and Civil Liberties: 
        Implications of Securing Cyber Environments.'' Georgetown Law 
        Continuing Legal Education, Fourth Annual Cybersecurity Law 
        Institute, Washington, DC. May 25, 2016.

   Panel Discussion: ``Facial Recognition Technology: Notes of 
        Caution for Privacy, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.'' Johns 
        Hopkins University, Government Analytics Breakfast Forum. April 
        13, 2016.

   The Color of Surveillance: Government Monitoring of the 
        African American Community: Opening Remarks & Moderator for 
        Panel Discussion: ``Martin Luther King and the FBI.'' Center on 
        Privacy & Technology, Georgetown Law, Washington, DC. April 8, 
        2016.

   Panel Discussion: ``Technology, the Internet, and Race: Tool 
        for Liberation or Oppression?'' Computers Freedom and Privacy 
        Conference 2015, Alexandria, VA. Oct. 14, 2015.

   Panel Discussion: ``Freedom to Innovate, In Context.'' 
        Center for Civil Media at MIT and the Electronic Frontier 
        Foundation, Cambridge, MA. Oct. 10, 2015.

   Panel Discussion: ``Big Data, Inequality, and the Law.'' 
        Ford Foundation, New York, NY. Oct. 5, 2015.

   ``Do you really own your face?'' To The Point, KCRW, July 
        10, 2015.

   Panel Discussion: ``No Place to Run, No Place to Hide: The 
        Internet of Things, The Future of Internet Opportunities and 
        Risks.'' National Association of College and University 
        Attorneys (NACUA), 2015 Annual Conference, Washington, DC. June 
        30, 2015.

   ``Who Owns Your Face? The Fight to Regulate Facial 
        Recognition Technology,'' The Takeaway, WNYC & Public Radio 
        International, June 18, 2015.

   ``The Computer Will (Literally) See You Now,'' On Point with 
        Tom Ashbrook, WBUR and National Public Radio, June 18, 2015.

   ``Privacy Advocates Walk Out of Tech Talks,'' Quest Means 
        Business, CNN, June 17, 2015.

   ``Why people of color should care about mass surveillance, 
        Shift, MSNBC, June 9, 2015.

   ``The Digital Fingerprints We Leave Behind Online,'' The 
        Kojo Nnamdi Show, WAMU, May 19, 2015.

   Keynote Address to the National Association of Attorneys 
        General on Consumer Privacy. NAAG Spring Consumer Protection 
        Meeting, Washington, DC. May 11, 2015.

   Panel Discussion: ``Leveraging the Disruptive Power of the 
        Internet.'' Global Philanthropy Forum Conference, Washington, 
        DC. April 23, 2015.

   Panel Discussion: ``Will Health Tech Ever Be Hack-Proof?'' 
        New America Foundation, Washington, DC. March 26, 2015.

   Interview: ``Exploring Big Data and The Black Box Society.'' 
        Center on Privacy & Technology, Georgetown Law, Washington, DC. 
        Feb. 13, 2015.

   Keynote Interview of Edith Ramirez, Chairwoman of the 
        Federal Trade Commission. State of the Net 2015 Conference, 
        Washington, DC. Jan. 27, 2015.

   ``The Future of Uber And Online Car Services,'' The Diane 
        Rehm Show, WAMU, Dec, 11, 2014.

   Panel Discussion: ``The Business & Ethics of (Big) Data.'' 
        pii2014 Conference, Palo Alto, CA. Nov. 13, 2014.

   Panel Discussion: ``The NSA, Privacy and the Global 
        Internet: Perspectives on EO 12333.'' Center on Privacy & 
        Technology at Georgetown Law, Georgetown Law, Washington, DC. 
        Sept. 19, 2014.

   Panel Discussion: ``Nontrespassory tracking: Biometrics, 
        license plate readers, and drones.'' Yale Law Journal of Law 
        and Technology's Location Tracking and Biometrics Conference, 
        New Haven, CT. Feb. 6, 2013.

    18. List all digital platforms (including social media and other 
digital content sites) on which you currently or have formerly operated 
an account, regardless of whether or not the account was held in your 
name or an alias. Include the name of an ``alias'' or ``handle'' you 
have used on each of the named platforms. Indicate whether the account 
is active, deleted, or dormant. Include a link to each account if 
possible.

        Twitter: https://twitter.com/alvarombedoya

        Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/alvaro.martin.bedoya

        LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alvaro-bedoya-9312b258/

        Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/pluckyllama/ (inactive)

    19. Please identify each instance in which you have testified 
orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
governmental capacity and specify the date and subject matter of each 
testimony.

   Congressional Hearing Testimony: ``Law Enforcement's Use of 
        Facial Recognition Technology.'' Hearing before the U.S. House 
        of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Government 
        Reform, Washington, DC. March 22, 2017.

     Resources: Written Testimony; Oral Testimony & Video 
            of Hearing (start video at 27:25).

    20. Given the current mission, major programs, and major 
operational objectives of the department/agency to which you have been 
nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you 
believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for 
which you have been nominated, and why do you wish to serve in that 
position?
    I would be honored to serve as a commissioner in the Federal Trade 
Commission because I believe in its core mission: protecting consumers. 
I spent four of my five years in the U.S. Senate as chief counsel of a 
new Subcommittee dedicated to protecting consumers, and in my current 
role I am dedicated to protecting the most vulnerable in our society 
against invasions of privacy. I love this work and believe it is 
important.
    21. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to 
ensure that the department/agency has proper management and accounting 
controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large 
organization?
    As a President-appointed and Senate-confirmed official, it is my 
responsibility to help ensure that the Commission operates in 
accordance with the law and with integrity, including management and 
financial accountability.
    As the executive officer of the Center on Privacy & Technology at 
Georgetown Law, I manage a staff of 8 FTEs and an annual budget of $1.2 
million. As chief counsel to the Subcommittee on Privacy, I managed a 
staff of 3 FTEs. I have served on the boards of several larger 
organizations, including Free Press and CASA, which has a staff of over 
100 employees and a budget of $16 million. As Board Development Chair 
for CASA, I have become familiar with the financial processes 
underpinning the organization.
    22. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the 
department/agency, and why?

   Capacity. Despite their talents and long track record of 
        rigorous investigations and oversight, the Commission's staff 
        and resources are too limited to effectively enforce the myriad 
        statutes within its mandate. This is particularly true when it 
        comes to privacy enforcement, where agency staff--despite with 
        being charged with protecting against privacy invasions from 
        the globe's largest technology companies--is dwarfed by 
        comparable staffs in smaller European countries.

   Advanced Privacy Invasions. Historically, surveillance 
        technology has tracked your technology; now it tracks your 
        body, and not just your face: your voice, your gait, your iris, 
        etc. Relatedly, technology companies are employing a 
        sophisticated array of psychological tools to encourage user 
        dependency on their products. Unfortunately, due to the volume 
        and prevalence of these activities agency oversight and 
        enforcement has not kept up with these activities.

   Overlapping and Concurrent Crises. While the agency begins 
        to aggressively confront a consolidated and concentrated 
        technology sector, it is tasked with also responding to fraud 
        and abuse related to the pandemic, as well as aggressive debt 
        collection related to the recent lifting of Federal eviction 
        moratoria. Each of these is a defining crisis in its own right. 
        Responding to each of them effectively requires close 
        coordination across agency leadership and each of the 
        components of the Commission.
                   b. potential conflicts of interest
    1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation 
agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates, 
clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement 
accounts.
    I will continue to participate in my current defined contribution 
plan after leaving Georgetown University. Georgetown University will 
not make contributions after my separation.
    2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal, 
to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business, 
association or other organization during your appointment? If so, 
please explain.
    No, I have none.
    3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other 
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in 
the position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will 
resolve each potential conflict of interest.
    In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with 
the U.S. Office of Government Ethics and the Federal Trade Commission's 
Designated Agency Ethics Official to identify potential conflicts of 
interest. If confirmed, any potential conflicts of interest will be 
resolved in accordance with the terms of the ethics agreement that I 
have entered into with the Commission's Designated Agency Ethics 
Official. I am not aware of any other potential conflicts of interest.
    4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial 
transaction which you have had during the last ten years, whether for 
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in 
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the 
position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will resolve 
each potential conflict of interest.
    In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with 
the U.S. Office of Government Ethics and the Federal Trade Commission's 
Designated Agency Ethics Official to identify potential conflicts of 
interest. If confirmed, any potential conflicts of interest will be 
resolved in accordance with the terms of the ethics agreement that I 
have entered into with the Commission's Designated Agency Ethics 
Official. I am not aware of any other potential conflicts of interest.
    5. Identify any other potential conflicts of interest, and explain 
how you will resolve each potential conflict of interest.
    In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with 
the U.S. Office of Government Ethics and the Federal Trade Commission's 
Designated Agency Ethics Official to identify potential conflicts of 
interest. If confirmed, any potential conflicts of interest will be 
resolved in accordance with the terms of the ethics agreement that I 
have entered into with the Commission's Designated Agency Ethics 
Official. I am not aware of any other potential conflicts of interest.
    6. Describe any activity during the past ten years, including the 
names of clients represented, in which you have been engaged for the 
purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or 
modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and 
execution of law or public policy.
    In addition to my work for the Federal Legislation Clinic described 
in response to question 8 above, I have engaged in advocacy on behalf 
of the Center on Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law. Those issues 
include regulation and moratoria on law enforcement use of face 
recognition, gender, age, and race-bias testing of face recognition 
technology, use of information related to unaccompanied children 
related to immigration enforcement, automated scanning of social media 
related to immigration enforcement, and privacy laws to protect data 
held by DMVs, public utilities, and other state agencies.
                            c. legal matters
    1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics, 
professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a 
complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special 
Counsel, professional association, disciplinary committee, or other 
professional group? If yes:

  a.  Provide the name of agency, association, committee, or group;

  b.  Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or 
        personnel action was issued or initiated;

  c.  Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or 
        personnel action;

  d.  Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action, 
        complaint, or personnel action.
    No.
    2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by 
any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal, 
State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic 
offense? If so, please explain. No.
    3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were 
an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency 
proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please 
explain.
    Not during the time during which I was an officer. I am unaware of 
the prior litigation history of the non-profits which I served as a 
board member.
    4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo 
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic 
offense? If so, please explain. No.
    5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual 
harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or 
any other basis? If so, please explain. No.
    6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information, 
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in 
connection with your nomination.
    I am not aware of any such information.
                     d. relationship with committee
    1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with 
deadlines for information set by congressional committees, and that 
your department/agency endeavors to timely comply with requests for 
information from individual Members of Congress, including requests 
from members in the minority? Yes.
    2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can 
to protect congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal 
for their testimony and disclosures? Yes.
    3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested 
witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with 
firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes.
    4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly 
constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be 
reasonably requested to do so? Yes.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    Senator Schatz. Thank you very much, Mr. Bedoya. Ms. 
Bavishi.

        STATEMENT OF JAINEY K. BAVISHI, NOMINATED TO BE 
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR OCEANS AND ATMOSPHERE, U.S. DEPARTMENT 
                          OF COMMERCE

    Ms. Bavishi. Chair, Ranking Member, members of the 
Committee, my name is Jainey Bavishi, and I currently serve as 
the Director of the New York City Mayor's Office of Climate 
Resiliency. I am honored to be nominated by President Biden for 
the position of Assistant Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere. 
I am especially grateful to the Secretary of Commerce Gina 
Raimondo and NOAA Administrator Dr. Rick Spinrad for their 
support of my nomination. I also want to thank members of the 
Committee and staff for taking time to meet with me to share 
their perspectives. Finally, I want to thank my family, 
including my parents and my sister, who are here today and my 
partner and daughter who stayed back in New York.
    I have spent nearly 20 years working to bolster the 
resilience of communities' infrastructure and economies to 
withstand the impacts of extreme weather and rising seas, which 
are both amplified by climate change. When Hurricane Katrina 
made landfall on the Gulf Coast, I felt personally compelled to 
assist in the recovery and spent the next 4 years supporting 
both rural and urban communities in Louisiana, Mississippi, and 
Alabama. It was early in my career that I came to appreciate 
that the most economically and socially vulnerable communities 
are often the most environmentally vulnerable, which is why I 
have always sought to center equity in my work.
    Following my time on the Gulf Coast, I transitioned to NOAA 
just a few months before the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. I 
staffed the NOAA war room, which was established to respond to 
the crisis, for the duration of the initial 90 day response. 
That experience gave me deep insight into the use of scientific 
data and information to guide policy and operations. NOAA's 
scientific products inform everything from day to day response 
operations, to seafood safety, to economic recovery, to long 
term restoration. I also learned the importance of 
communicating the science in an accessible way. For example, 
when it became clear that Vietnamese-American fishermen in 
Mississippi were not receiving information about fisheries' 
closures due to the spill, it was my job to ensure that the 
information was translated and distributed in ethnic media 
outlets so that these fishermen could continue their 
livelihoods.
    I later moved to Honolulu, where I led a nonprofit 
initiative that built partnerships between academia, 
communities, Government, and the private sector to scale 
innovative approaches to disaster risk reduction in the Asia-
Pacific region. With a team of researchers in Hawaii, I worked 
on a project to scale community-based landslide early warning 
systems in Indonesian villages. Our work led to a national 
commitment to establish the early warning system in 1,000 
communities. My experience underscore the importance of 
partnerships to advance enduring and innovative solutions. I 
then worked at the White House Council on Environmental 
Quality, where my purview included supporting the resilience of 
Alaska Native villages on the frontlines of climate change. I 
visited Shaktoolik, a village that is actively addressing the 
impacts of thawing sea ice and increasing storm surge.
    Through this work, I gained a deep appreciation for how 
traditional ecological knowledge can complement climate science 
and reveal important social and cultural insights about the 
impacts of climate change. For the last 5 years, I have led New 
York City's multi-hazard resilience strategy, which encompasses 
over $20 billion worth of projects citywide. One aspect of my 
portfolio is the construction of coastal resilience projects 
that protect our waterfront neighborhoods from devastating 
storm surge and regular tidal flooding. These complex, first of 
their kind projects involve rigorous scientific and technical 
analysis, coordination with all levels of Government and 
private partners, and robust engagement with community.
    These experiences have provided me with invaluable insight 
into effective leadership and management, especially with many 
diverse stakeholders. I believe these varied experiences have 
prepared me well to advance NOAA's mission. Never has that 
mission been more critical to the future of our Nation. Just in 
the last summer alone, our country experienced devastating heat 
waves in the normally temperate Pacific Northwest, which caused 
the deaths of hundreds and wreaked havoc on Pacific salmon and 
other important fisheries. Hurricane Ida, whose storm surge 
ravaged Louisiana and Mississippi before creating unprecedented 
flash flooding in New York and New Jersey, and a historical 
multi-year drought in the West. If confirmed, I would deploy 
NOAA's products and services in a user-friendly and accessible 
way to support local, state, and tribal Governments, the 
private sector, and Federal agency partners to better plan and 
make informed decisions on a changing climate.
    I would ensure NOAA advances both environmental stewardship 
and economic opportunity to unlock new jobs and foster growth 
while transforming to a clean energy economy, building 
resilience to climate impacts, and conserving our natural 
resources. I would work to restore habitat and strengthen the 
Nation's coastlines to protect ecosystems, communities, and 
infrastructure from disruptive and often devastating climate 
impacts.
    Finally, I would focus on recruiting the next generation of 
scientists and environmentalists so that they reflect the 
diversity of our country. In closing, thank you for your 
consideration and opportunity to testify here today, and I look 
forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement and biographical information of Ms. 
Bavishi follow:]

    Prepared Statement of Jainey K. Bavishi, Nominee for Assistant 
    Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere, U.S. Department of Commerce
    Chair Cantwell, Ranking Member Wicker, Members of the Committee, my 
name is Jainey Bavishi, and I currently serve as the Director of the 
New York City Mayor's Office of Climate Resiliency. I am honored to be 
nominated by President Biden for the position of Assistant Secretary 
for Oceans and Atmosphere. I am especially grateful to the Secretary of 
Commerce Gina Raimondo and NOAA Administrator Dr. Rick Spinrad for 
their support of my nomination. I also want to thank members of the 
Committee and staff for taking time to meet with me to share their 
perspectives.
    I have spent nearly twenty years working to bolster the resilience 
of communities, infrastructure, and economies to withstand the impacts 
of extreme weather and rising seas, which are both amplified by climate 
change. When Hurricane Katrina made landfall on the Gulf Coast, I felt 
personally compelled to assist in the recovery and spent the next four 
years supporting both rural and urban communities in Louisiana, 
Mississippi and Alabama. It was early in my career that I came to 
appreciate that the most economically and socially vulnerable 
communities are often the most environmentally vulnerable, which is why 
I have always sought to center equity in my work.
    Following my time on the Gulf Coast, I transitioned to NOAA, just a 
few months before the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. I staffed the NOAA 
``war room,'' which was established to respond to the crisis, for the 
duration of the initial 90-day response. That experience gave me deep 
insight into the use of scientific data and information to guide 
operations and policy. NOAA's scientific products informed everything 
from day-to-day response operations to seafood safety to economic 
recovery to long-term restoration.
    I later moved to Honolulu where I led a nonprofit initiative that 
built partnerships between academia, communities, government, and the 
private sector to scale innovative approaches to disaster risk 
reduction in the Asia Pacific region. For example, with a team of 
researchers from Hawaii, I worked on a project to scale community-based 
landslide early warning systems in Indonesian villages. Our work led to 
a national commitment to establish the early warning system in 1,000 
communities. My experience underscored the importance of partnerships 
to advance enduring and innovative solutions.
    I then worked at the White House Council on Environmental Quality, 
where my purview included supporting the resilience of Alaska Native 
villages on the frontlines of climate change. I visited Shaktoolik, a 
village that is actively addressing the impacts of thawing sea ice and 
increasing storm surge. Through this work, I gained a deep appreciation 
for how traditional ecological knowledge can complement climate science 
and reveal important social and cultural insights about the impacts of 
climate change.
    For the last five years, I have led New York City's multi-hazard 
resilience strategy, which encompasses over $20 billion worth of 
projects citywide. One aspect of my portfolio is the construction of 
coastal resilience projects that protect our waterfront neighborhoods 
from devastating storm surge and regular tidal flooding. These complex, 
first-of-their-kind projects involve rigorous scientific and technical 
analysis, coordination with all levels of government and private 
partners, and robust engagement with community. These experiences have 
provided me with invaluable insight into effective leadership and 
management, especially with many diverse stakeholders.
    I believe these varied experiences have prepared me well to advance 
NOAA's mission. Never has that mission been more critical to the future 
of our Nation. Just in the last summer alone, our country experienced 
devastating heatwaves in the normally temperate Pacific Northwest, 
which caused the deaths of hundreds and wreaked havoc on Pacific salmon 
and other important fisheries; Hurricane Ida, whose storm surge ravaged 
Louisiana and Mississippi before creating unprecedented flash flooding 
in New York and New Jersey; and a historical multi-year drought in the 
West.
    If confirmed, I would deploy NOAA's products and services in a 
user-friendly and accessible way to support local, state and Tribal 
governments, the private sector and Federal agency partners to better 
plan and make informed decisions in a changing climate. I would ensure 
NOAA advances both environmental stewardship and economic opportunity 
to unlock new jobs and foster growth while transforming to a clean 
energy economy, building resilience to climate impacts, and conserving 
our natural resources. I would work to restore habitat and strengthen 
the Nation's coastlines to protect ecosystems, communities, and 
infrastructure from disruptive, and often devastating, climate impacts. 
Finally, I would focus on recruiting the next generation of scientists 
and environmentalists so that they reflect the diversity of our 
country.
    In closing, thank you for your consideration and the opportunity to 
testify here today. I look forward to your questions.
                                 ______
                                 
                      a. biographical information
    1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): Jainey Kumar 
Bavishi.
    2. Position to which nominated: Assistant Secretary for Oceans and 
Atmosphere.
    3. Date of Nomination: August 10, 2021.
    4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):

        Residence: Information not released to the public.
        Office: 253 Broadway, 14th Floor, New York, NY 10007.

    5. Date and Place of Birth: August 29, 1981; Bethlehem, PA.
    6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your 
spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including 
stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).
    Spouse: Jerome Hughes, Faculty, University of District of Columbia 
School of Law.
    7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school 
attended.

        Bachelor of Arts, Public Policy and Cultural Anthropology, 
        2003, Duke University
        Master of City Planning, 2007, Massachusetts Institute of 
        Technology

    8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all 
management-level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to 
the position for which you are nominated.

        June 2003-August 2003: Faculty Advisor, Global Young Leaders

        August 2003-December 2003: Intern, Self-Help

        January 2004-July 2004: Lewis Hine Documentary Fellow, Duke 
        University

        August 2004-December 2006: Research Assistant, Fannie Mae 
        Foundation

        January 2006-July 2006: Field Research Co-Coordinator and 
        Funding Liaison, Unitarian Universalist Service Committee 
        (UUSC)

        July 2006-June 2007: Consultant, Gulf Coast Funders for Equity

        September 2006-June 2007: Research Assistant, MIT Department of 
        Urban Studies and Planning

        January 2007-June 2007: Consultant, Mobilizing Communities

        August 2007-November 2007: Program Associate, Community 
        Engagement, Louisiana Disaster Recovery Foundation

        December 2007-July 2009: Director, Equity and Inclusion 
        Campaign, Louisiana Disaster Recovery Foundation

        November 2009-December 2009: Consultant, Emily Pelton 
        Consulting

        January 2010-May 2013: Senior Policy Advisor and Director of 
        External Affairs, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
        Administration

        May 2013-August 2015: Executive Director, R3ADY Asia-Pacific

        August 2015-January 2017: Associate Director, Climate 
        Preparedness, White House Council on Environmental Quality

        January 2017-present: Director, NYC Mayor's Office of Climate 
        Resiliency

    9. Attach a copy of your resume.
    See attached.
    10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time 
service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other 
than those listed above, within the last ten years.

        Urban Ocean Lab, Advisor, 2018 to present

        National Academies of Science, Member, Resilient America 
        Roundtable, 2019 to present

        Nicholas Institute, Resilience Roadmap, Steering Committee 
        Member, 2021 to present

        Resilience 21, Leadership Council Member, 2021 to present

    11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee, 
partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any 
corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise, 
educational, or other institution within the last ten years.
    Foundation for Louisiana, Director, 2018 to present
    12. Please list each membership you have had during the past ten 
years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable, 
educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or 
religiously affiliated organization, private club, or other membership 
organization. (For this question, you do not have to list your 
religious affiliation or membership in a religious house of worship or 
institution.). Include dates of membership and any positions you have 
held with any organization. Please note whether any such club or 
organization restricts membership on the basis of sex, race, color, 
religion, national origin, age, or disability.
    Not Applicable.
    13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office 
(elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any 
campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are 
personally liable for that debt.

        Appointed as a Policy Advisor at NOAA in 2010.
        Appointed as Director, Mayor's Office of Climate Resiliency in 
        2017.

    14. List all memberships and offices held with and services 
rendered to, whether compensated or not, any political party or 
election committee within the past ten years. If you have held a paid 
position or served in a formal or official advisory position (whether 
compensated or not) in a political campaign within the past ten years, 
identify the particulars of the campaign, including the candidate, year 
of the campaign, and your title and responsibilities.
    Climate, Energy, Environment Policy Committee, Biden for President, 
2020.
    15. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign 
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar 
entity of $200 or more for the past ten years.
    Biden for President, $200.
    16. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary 
society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition 
for outstanding service or achievements.

        Marshall Memorial Fellowship, German Marshall Fund, 2017
        Louisiana Effective Leadership Program, Duke University and 
        Southern University, 2008-2009

    17. Please list each book, article, column, Internet blog posting, 
or other publication you have authored, individually or with others. 
Include a link to each publication when possible. Also list any 
speeches that you have given on topics relevant to the position for 
which you have been nominated. Do not attach copies of these 
publications unless otherwise instructed.

        March 2006: Unitarian Universalist Service Committee, New 
        Orleans post Katrina Community organizing landscape: current 
        efforts, unmet need.

        April 2006: Unitarian Universalist Service Committee, From 
        Action to Policy
        https://www.uua.org/files/documents/gcrp/0604_uua-
        uuscreport.pdf

        June 2006: Unitarian Universalist Service Committee, Building 
        Relationships to Rebuild New Orleans
        https://www.uua.org/files/documents/gcrp/0606_uua-
        uuscreport.pdf

        2007: MIT Master's Thesis, Building community capacity in the 
        rebuilding of New Orleans: the role of philanthropic funders 
        post-Katrina
        https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/39931

        September 2008: Spotlight on Poverty and Opportunity 
        Congressional Briefing, The Gulf Coast and the New 
        Administration: An Agenda for the First 100 Days
        https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x31xs2o

        March 28, 2014: Global Connections TV
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1gQCDLs18

        October 5, 2016: Developing Climate Resilience: An Island 
        Perspective,
        https://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2016/10/developing-climate-
        resilience-island-perspective/

        June 14, 2017: Building Energy Exchange, Women in 
        Sustainability and Energy, Building Resilient Communities, 
        https://be-exchange.org/wise-resilient-communities/

        June 15, 2017: Hot 97, NYC Paris Agreement and NYC Heat 
        Resiliency Programs, https://www.youtube.com/
        watch?v=qsgdeOm7idk

        April 23, 2019: Verge Science, This is what sea level rise will 
        do to coastal cities, https://www.youtube.com/
        watch?v=6tesHVSZJOg&t=2

        July 23, 2019: Columbia University, Managed Retreat Conference 
        Opening Remarks, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJF_rh9nvqY

        September 19, 2019: MIT A Livable Climate,
        https://events.technologyreview.com/video/watch/jainey-bavishi-
        nyc-plan-for-adapting-to-climate-change/

        October 15, 2019: Conscious Cities Festival, Heat Resiliency
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GB1QS1IVkdo

        October 24, 2019: City Limits, Summer of 2019 Is Over but Heat 
        Risk Is Not Going Away
        https://citylimits.org/2019/10/24/the-summer-of-2019-is-over-
        but-the-heat-risk-to-nyc-is-not-going-away/

        February 10, 2020: Global Center on Adaptation, Adaptation 
        Voices: New York https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUekpm6okKs

        March 13, 2020: American Shore and Beach Preservation 
        Association, Coastal Resiliency in NYC
        https://asbpa.org/2020/03/13/bavishi-capitol-beach/

        August 3, 2020: Mayor DeBlasio Media Availability on Tropical 
        Storm Isaias Preparations
        https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/565-20/
        transcript-mayor-de-blasio-holds-media-availability-tropical-
        storm-isaias-preparations#/0

        August 21, 2020: Now This, Climate Crisis is a Fight for Social 
        Justice https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kufzX2GrVcs

        September 2020: A Tale of Three Cities, All We Can Save

        October 3, 2020: Crain's op-ed, ``Our vision for coastal 
        resiliency must go past the shoreline''
        https://www.crainsnewyork.com/op-ed/our-vision-climate-
        resiliency-must-go-past-shoreline

        October 9, 2020: Climate One Podcast, A Feminist Climate 
        Renaissance https://www.climateone.org/people/jainey-bavishi

        November 9, 2020: Verge Green Biz, Collaborating with the ocean 
        is essential to addressing climate change and environmental 
        justice
        https://www.greenbiz.com/video/collaborating-ocean-essential-
        addressing-climate-change-and-environmental-justice

        December 3, 2020: Living on Earth, All We Can Save
        https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/
        ?v=685513895439861&ref=watch_
        permalink

        December 8, 2020: Books & Books, Discussion about All We Can 
        Save
        https://booksandbooks.com/virtual-event/an-evening-with-sarah-
        miller-jainey-k-bavishi-jane-gilbert-laurencia-strauss-and-
        greg-bloom/

        December 11, 2020: George Mason University, Power Lunch Series, 
        Climate Change https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEsoAnrVrn4

        January 27, 2021: Milken Institute, New Pathways for Resilient 
        Infrastructure Innovation
        https://milkeninstitute.org/article/public-financecfo-forum-
        2021

        March 12, 2021: Climate Museum, Talking Climate: Infrastructure
        https://climatemuseum.org/blog/2021/3/12/talking-climate-
        infrastructure

        April 8, 2021: Urban Design Forum, Power after the Pandemic: 
        Greening Growth
        https://urbandesignforum.org/events/power-after-the-pandemic-
        greening-growth/

        April 14, 2021: Chatham House, From Local to Global: A Roadmap 
        for U.S. Climate Action
        https://www.chathamhouse.org/events/all/research-event/local-
        global-roadmap-us-climate-action

        April 21, 2021: Gotham Gazette Op-Ed, ``Building a climate safe 
        future for Manhattan's east side''
        https://www.gothamgazette.com/opinion/10406-building-climate-
        change-safe-future-manhattan-east-side-resiliency

        April 21, 2021: Nicholas Institute, Climate Resilience: An 
        Urgent Opportunity for U.S. Leadership
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPwlYiFElbY

        May 17, 2021: Honolulu Climate Change Commission, Adapting to 
        Climate Change in New York City
        https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/
        ?v=799632117343307&ref=watch
        _permalink

        May 21, 2021: Reuters, East Side Coastal Resiliency Project
        https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/park-protect-nyc-rising-sea-
        174509385.html

        May 24, 2021: The Hill Op-Ed, ``FEMA's flood insurance overhaul 
        could entrench inequalities in coastal cities''
        https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/555077-femas-
        flood-insurance-overhaul-could-entrench-inequities-in

    18. List all digital platforms (including social media and other 
digital content sites) on which you currently or have formerly operated 
an account, regardless of whether or not the account was held in your 
name or an alias. Include the name of an ``alias'' or ``handle'' you 
have used on each of the named platforms. Indicate whether the account 
is active, deleted, or dormant. Include a link to each account if 
possible.

        Twitter: https://twitter.com/jaineytweets?lang=en 
        (@jaineytweets), active

        Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/jainey.bavishi/, active

        Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/j41n3y8/ (@j41n3y8), 
        active

        LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jaineybavishi/, active

    19. Please identify each instance in which you have testified 
orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
governmental capacity and specify the date and subject matter of each 
testimony.
    Not Applicable.
    20. Given the current mission, major programs, and major 
operational objectives of the department/agency to which you have been 
nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you 
believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for 
which you have been nominated, and why do you wish to serve in that 
position?
    For the last 15+ years, I have worked to help communities adapt to 
and prepare for the impacts of a changing climate. I have worked in 
diverse communities across the U.S.--from the Gulf Coast States to 
Hawaii to New York City. I have also directed climate adaptation policy 
at the Federal and local levels. My work experience is complemented by 
my education, having received my bachelor's degree in public policy and 
cultural anthropology, and my master's degree in urban planning.
    21. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to 
ensure that the department/agency has proper management and accounting 
controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large 
organization?
    My responsibilities will be to support the NOAA Administrator in 
advancing the mission of the agency, and help to develop the programs, 
budgets, and policies to accomplish the components of that mission.
    I currently lead the New York City Mayor's Office of Climate 
Resiliency, where I oversee the implementation of a $20 billion 
portfolio of climate resilience and adaptation projects.
    22. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the 
department/agency, and why?
    The first challenge will be developing and deploying a suite of 
user-friendly and accessible data, information and tools to support 
informed decision-making and planning in a changing climate. NOAA is 
the authoritative source for these products and services and will have 
a critical role to play in supporting local, state and Tribal 
governments, the private sector, as well as other Federal agencies, in 
planning for climate change.
    The second challenge is to ensure that NOAA's program balances both 
environmental stewardship and economic growth. There is abundant 
opportunity to create jobs and foster growth while transforming to a 
clean energy economy, building resilience to climate impacts and 
conserving our natural resources. NOAA, in partnership with other 
Department of Commerce bureaus like the Economic Development 
Administration (EDA), has an important role to play to unlock these 
opportunities.
    The third challenge is to ensure that NOAA workforce of the future 
represents the diversity of our country. NOAA plays a key role in 
educating and training the next generation of scientists and 
environmentalists. NOAA has an important leadership role to play to 
recruit and diversify young talent in an inclusive and equitable 
manner.
                   b. potential conflicts of interest
    1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation 
agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates, 
clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement 
accounts.
    Retirement accounts include:

  1)  City of New York, 401K

  2)  City of New York, 457 Tax Deferred Savings Plan

  3)  City of New York, defined benefit plan

  4)  University of Hawaii Foundation, 403B

  5)  University of Hawaii Foundation, 403B TDA

  6)  Louisiana Disaster Recovery Foundation, 403B TDA

    2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal, 
to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business, 
association or other organization during your appointment? If so, 
please explain.
    No.
    3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other 
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in 
the position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will 
resolve each potential conflict of interest.
    Any potential conflict of interest will be resolved in accordance 
with the terms of my ethics agreement, which was developed in 
consultation with ethics officials at the Department of Commerce and 
the Office of Government Ethics. I understand that my ethics agreement 
has been provided to the Committee. I am not aware of any potential 
conflict other than those addressed by my ethics agreement.
    4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial 
transaction which you have had during the last ten years, whether for 
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in 
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the 
position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will resolve 
each potential conflict of interest.
    Any potential conflict of interest will be resolved in accordance 
with the terms of my ethics agreement, which was developed in 
consultation with ethics officials at the Department of Commerce and 
the Office of Government Ethics. I understand that my ethics agreement 
has been provided to the Committee. I am not aware of any potential 
conflict other than those addressed by my ethics agreement.
    5. Identify any other potential conflicts of interest, and explain 
how you will resolve each potential conflict of interest.
    Upon confirmation, I will resign from my position with the City of 
New York and from the Board of Directors of the Foundation for 
Louisiana. Any potential conflict of interest will be resolved in 
accordance with the terms of my ethics agreement, which was developed 
in consultation with ethics officials at the Department of Commerce and 
the Office of Government Ethics. I understand that my ethics agreement 
has been provided to the Committee. I am not aware of any potential 
conflict other than those addressed by my ethics agreement.
    6. Describe any activity during the past ten years, including the 
names of clients represented, in which you have been engaged for the 
purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or 
modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and 
execution of law or public policy.
    None.
                            c. legal matters
    1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics, 
professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a 
complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special 
Counsel, professional association, disciplinary committee, or other 
professional group?
    No.
    If yes:

  a.  Provide the name of agency, association, committee, or group;

  b.  Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or 
        personnel action was issued or initiated;

  c.  Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or 
        personnel action;

  d.  Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action, 
        complaint, or personnel action.

    2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by 
any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal, 
State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic 
offense? If so, please explain. No.
    3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were 
an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency 
proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please 
explain. No.
    4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo 
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic 
offense? If so, please explain. No.
    5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual 
harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or 
any other basis? If so, please explain. No.
    6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information, 
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in 
connection with your nomination. None.
                     d. relationship with committee
    1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with 
deadlines for information set by congressional committees, and that 
your department/agency endeavors to timely comply with requests for 
information from individual Members of Congress, including requests 
from members in the minority? Yes.
    2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can 
to protect congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal 
for their testimony and disclosures? Yes.
    3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested 
witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with 
firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes.
    4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly 
constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be 
reasonably requested to do so? Yes.


[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]



    Senator Schatz. Thank you, Ms. Bavishi. And now we will 
proceed with the final nominee, Mr. Venkataraman.

          STATEMENT OF ARUN VENKATARAMAN, NOMINEE FOR

           ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR GLOBAL MARKETS AND

            DIRECTOR GENERAL OF THE U.S. AND FOREIGN

        COMMERCIAL SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

    Mr. Venkataraman. Thank you, Senator. Chair Cantwell, 
Ranking Member Wicker, members of the Committee, thank you for 
the opportunity to appear before you today. I am honored to be 
nominated by President Biden to be the Assistant Secretary of 
Commerce for Global Markets and the Director General of the 
U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service. I want to thank Secretary 
Raimondo for her support of my nomination. I also want to thank 
the Committee for the opportunity to meet with many members of 
your staff. I feel the deepest sense of gratitude and humility 
in being considered for this position.
    When my parents brought me to this country 45 years ago, we 
could not appreciate that we were part of a proud lineage of 
immigrants that came through New York, like us, in search of 
better opportunities. And my parents certainly could not have 
imagined that those opportunities would lead to my being here 
today to be considered for this position by the Committee. I 
remain grateful to my parents for making all of this possible 
because of their bold decision to move 8,000 miles away from 
everything they knew to start a new life for us here in 
America. Their support for everything I do has been unwavering.
    Together with my brother and sister in law, whom I am proud 
to have with me here today, and my nieces who could not be 
here, but are a constant source of joy, love, and laughter in 
my life, my family remains the source of my strength and 
commitment that I bring to every professional endeavor. I have 
had the privilege of spending much of my career in public 
service, working on a wide range of international trade issues 
on behalf of the American people.
    I have negotiated with some of our most challenging trading 
partners on issues like subsidies and tech policy and held them 
accountable to their commitments under our trade agreements. I 
have collaborated with foreign Governments to address shared 
challenges in third country markets. I have also helped defend 
the legitimate policy tools we have to protect American 
companies and workers from unfair, state-backed competition 
from countries like China. And in these and other areas, I have 
worked extensively across the multiple agencies and with 
various stakeholders to build a unified position for the 
Government.
    From working and leading teams in highly matrixed 
organizations, both in and out of Government, I fully 
understand that no one of us has a monopoly on solutions to the 
types of trade problems we are being called on to address at 
this time in our history. We increasingly need to look beyond 
our silos to bring to bear the right perspectives and knowledge 
to any challenge. That is why I am committed to working 
together with my colleagues across the Commerce Department, and 
across the Administration, and with Congress, and with all 
stakeholders to meet these challenges head on.
    In over 20 years working on international trade, my career 
has allowed me to see how trade works from different vantage 
points, from the Judicial Branch, from an international 
organization, from the private sector, and from the public 
sector. I believe the global markets is uniquely situated to 
make trade work for American firms and their workers.
    This team works with foreign Governments to make sure 
American firms get the fair access they deserve to foreign 
markets. Global markets also help small and medium sized 
enterprises become new exporters and take advantage of the 
commercial opportunities created by trade agreements. Finally, 
global markets leverages the inherent attractiveness of the 
United States as an investment destination to bring foreign 
companies to America and create jobs. Through these core 
activities, global markets brings to life the potential that 
trade, and investment offer the American people, and I am 
committed to seeing that mission through to its fullest, if 
confirmed.
    One last point I would note for the Committee, I fully 
appreciate the privilege I would have if I were confirmed to 
this position. I have had the fortune of working closely with 
global markets through much of my Government career, most 
recently as the International Trade Administration, as Director 
of policy in the Obama Administration. I know firsthand the 
high caliber of staff and the deep commitment of the global 
markets team to creating opportunities and bringing the 
benefits of trade to the American people.
    If confirmed, I commit to you to be worthy of leading this 
high performing team to do what it does best and drive the 
Administration's efforts to strengthen precisely that 
connection between trade and the American people. Thank you 
again for this opportunity to be considered for this position 
and to appear before you today. I look forward to your 
questions. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement and biographical information of Mr. 
Venkataraman follow:]

    Prepared Statement of Arun Venkataraman, Nominee for Assistant 
   Secretary for Global Markets and Director General of the U.S. and 
        Foreign Commercial Service, U.S. Department of Commerce
    Chair Cantwell, Ranking Member Wicker, Members of the Committee, 
thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I am honored 
to be nominated by President Biden to be the Assistant Secretary of 
Commerce for Global Markets and Director General of the U.S. and 
Foreign Commercial Service. I want to thank Secretary Raimondo for her 
support of my nomination. I also want to thank the Committee for the 
opportunity to meet with many members of your staff.
    I feel the deepest sense of gratitude and humility in being 
considered for this position. When my parents brought me to this 
country 45 years ago, we could not appreciate that we were part of a 
proud lineage of immigrants that came through New York, like us, in 
search of better opportunities. And my parents certainly could never 
have imagined that those opportunities would lead to my being here 
today to be considered for this position by the Committee.
    I remain grateful to my parents for making all this possible 
because of their bold decision to move 8000 miles away from everything 
they knew to start a new life for us here in America. Their support for 
everything that I do has been unwavering. Together with my brother and 
sister-in-law, whom I am proud to have with me here today, and my 
nieces, who could not be here but are a constant source of joy and 
laughter in my life, my family remains the source of my strength and 
commitment that I bring to every professional endeavor.
    I have had the privilege of spending much of my career in public 
service, working on a wide range of international trade issues on 
behalf of the American people. I have negotiated with some of our most 
challenging trading partners on issues like subsidies and tech policy 
and held them accountable to their commitments under our trade 
agreements. I have collaborated with foreign governments to address 
shared challenges in third-country markets. I have also helped defend 
the legitimate policy tools we have to protect American companies and 
workers from unfair State-backed competition from countries like China. 
And, in these and other areas, I have worked extensively across the 
multiple agencies and with various stakeholders to build a unified 
position for the government.
    From working and leading teams in highly matrixed organizations, 
both in and out of government, I fully understand that no one of us has 
a monopoly on solutions to the types of trade problems we are being 
called on to address at this time in our history. We increasingly need 
to look beyond our silos to bring to bear the right perspectives and 
knowledge to any challenge. That is why I am committed to working 
together with my colleagues across the Commerce Department and across 
the Administration, with Congress, and with all stakeholders, to meet 
those challenges head-on.
    In over twenty years working on international trade, my career has 
allowed me to see how trade works from different vantage points--from 
the judicial branch, from an international organization, from the 
private sector, and from the public sector. I believe that Global 
Markets is uniquely situated to make trade work for American firms and 
their workers. This team works with foreign governments to make sure 
American firms get the fair access they deserve to foreign markets. 
Global Markets also helps small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) 
become new exporters and take advantage of the commercial opportunities 
created by trade agreements. Finally, Global Markets leverages the 
inherent attractiveness of the United States as an investment 
destination to bring foreign companies to America and create jobs. 
Through these core activities, Global Markets brings to life the 
potential that trade and investment offer the American people. And I am 
committed to seeing that mission through to its fullest, if confirmed.
    One last point I would note for the Committee: I fully appreciate 
the privilege I would have if I were confirmed to this position. I have 
had the fortune of working closely with Global Markets through much of 
my government career, most recently as the International Trade 
Administration's Director of Policy in the Obama Administration. I know 
firsthand the high caliber of staff and the deep commitment of the 
Global Markets team to creating opportunities and bringing the benefits 
of trade to the American people. If confirmed, I commit to you to be 
worthy of leading this high-performing team to do what it does best and 
drive the Administration's efforts to strengthen precisely that 
connection between trade and the American people.
    Thank you again for this opportunity to be considered for this 
position and to appear before you today. I look forward to your 
questions.
                                 ______
                                 
                      a. biographical information
    1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): Arun 
Venkataraman.
    2. Position to which nominated: Assistant Secretary for Global 
Markets and Director General of the U.S. and Foreign Commercial 
Service.
    3. Date of Nomination: May 27, 2021.
    4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):

        Residence: Information not released to the public.
        Office: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
        NW, Washington, DC 20230.

    5. Date and Place of Birth: August 24, 1973; Coimbatore, India.
    6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your 
spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including 
stepchildren and children by a previous marriage). Not applicable.
    7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school 
attended.

        Bachelor of Arts, Tufts University (1991-1995)

        Master of Arts in Law and Diplomacy, The Fletcher School of Law 
        and Diplomacy, Tufts University (1996-1999)

        Juris Doctor, Columbia Law School (1995-1999)

    8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all 
management level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to 
the position for which you are nominated.

   Counselor to the Secretary (U.S. Department of Commerce, 
        March 2021 to present)--managerial position

   Senior Director (Visa Inc., April 2019-March 2021)--
        managerial position

   Trade and Investment Advisor (Steptoe & Johnson, May 2018-
        March 2019)--managerial position

   Director of Policy (International Trade Administration, U.S. 
        Department of Commerce, April 2014-January 2017)--managerial 
        position

   Director for India (Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, 
        August 2010-April 2014)--relevant non-managerial position

   Associate General Counsel (Office of the U.S. Trade 
        Representative, April 2006-August 2010)--relevant non-
        managerial position

   Legal Affairs Officer (World Trade Organization, September 
        2002-February 2006)--relevant non-managerial position

   Associate (Steptoe & Johnson, November 2001-August 2002)--
        relevant non-managerial position

   Law Clerk (Judge Jane Restani, U.S. Court of International 
        Trade, October 2000-September 2001)--relevant non-managerial 
        position

   Associate (Steptoe & Johnson, October 1999-September 2000)--
        relevant non-managerial position

   Law Clerk (Judge Jane Restani, U.S. Court of International 
        Trade, August-September 1999)--relevant non-managerial position

   Summer Associate (Steptoe & Johnson, Washington, DC, May 
        August 1999)--relevant non-managerial position

   Summer Associate (Steptoe & Johnson, Washington, DC, May 
        August 1998)--relevant non-managerial position

   Intern (Judge Jane Restani, U.S. Court of International 
        Trade, New York, NY, August-December 1997)--relevant non-
        managerial position

   Summer Associate (Shearman & Sterling, New York, NY and 
        Washington, DC, May-August 1997)--relevant non-managerial 
        position

   Research Assistant (Professor Jeswald Salacuse, Fletcher 
        School of Law and Diplomacy, Medford, MA, June-August 1996)--
        relevant non-managerial position

    9. Attach a copy of your resume.
    Attached.
    10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time 
service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other 
than those listed above, within the last ten years.
    None.
    11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee, 
partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any 
corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise, 
educational, or other institution within the last ten years.
    None.
    12. Please list each membership you have had during the past ten 
years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable, 
educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or 
religiously affiliated organization, private club, or other membership 
organization. (For this question, you do not have to list your 
religious affiliation or membership in a religious house of worship or 
institution.). Include dates of membership and any positions you have 
held with any organization. Please note whether any such club or 
organization restricts membership on the basis of sex, race, color, 
religion, national origin, age, or disability.

 
                             Office Held (if
       Organization                any)            Dates of Membership
 
1. DC Bar                  None                 2000-present (inactive
                                                 2013-2018)
2. MD Bar                  None                 1999-2003
3. Washington              Board Member         2019-Present
 International Trade                            (Board Member 2020-
 Association (WITA)                              Present)
 

    No restriction on membership on the basis of sex, race, color, 
religion, national origin, age, or disability.
    13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office 
(elected, non elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any 
campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are 
personally liable for that debt.
    No.
    14. List all memberships and offices held with and services 
rendered to, whether compensated or not, any political party or 
election committee within the past ten years. If you have held a paid 
position or served in a formal or official advisory position (whether 
compensated or not) in a political campaign within the past ten years, 
identify the particulars of the campaign, including the candidate, year 
of the campaign, and your title and responsibilities.
    None.
    15. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign 
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar 
entity of $200 or more for the past ten years.

        Biden for President--$500 (07/13/20)

        Biden Action Fund--$500 (07/13/20)

        Biden Victory Fund--$500 (09/03/20)

        Biden for President--$500 (09/03/20)

        Biden Victory Fund--$500 (10/11/20)

        Biden Victory Fund--$500 (10/11/20)

        Biden for President--$500 (10/11/20)

        Biden for President--$500 (10/11/20)

        Biden for President--$800 (10/29/20)

        Sri for Congress--$20 (10/31/20)

        Sri for Congress--$20 (10/24/20)

        Sri for Congress--$20 (10/17/20)

        Sri for Congress--$20 (10/10/20)

        Sri for Congress--$20 (10/03/20)

        Sri for Congress--$100 (9/9/20)

        Haley Stevens for Congress--$250 (3/31/2019)

    16. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary 
society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition 
for outstanding service or achievements.

        USTR Kelly Award for outstanding performance and extraordinary 
        leadership (2011)

        USTR Team Awards for leading settlement of litigation on 
        Chinese subsidies and for contributions to passage and 
        implementation of U.S. Peru Free Trade Agreement (2008)

    17. Please list each book, article, column, Internet blog posting, 
or other publication you have authored, individually or with others. 
Include a link to each publication when possible. Also list any 
speeches that you have given on topics relevant to the position for 
which you have been nominated. Do not attach copies of these 
publications unless otherwise instructed.

        USMCA Unlocked: Working Under the New NAFTA, co-authored with 
        Susan G. Esserman, Luke Tillman, Lauren Shapiro, March 2019 
        (https://www.steptoe
        .com/en/news-publications/usmca-unlocked-working-under-the-new-
        nafta.html).

        ``India: A Turing Point on Trade?'', co-authored with Susan G. 
        Esserman, Harvard Asia Quarterly, Spring 2002 (https://
        proiects.ig.harvard.edu/files/har/files/
        vol_6.2_spring_2002.pdf).

        ``Binational Panels and Multilateral Negotiation: A Two-Track 
        Approach to Limiting Contingent Protection?'', Columbia Journal 
        of Transnational Law, vol. 37 (1999) (no link available).

    18. List all digital platforms (including social media and other 
digital content sites) on which you currently or have formerly operated 
an account, regardless of whether or not the account was held in your 
name or an alias. Include the name of an ``alias'' or ``handle'' you 
have used on each of the named platforms. Indicate whether the account 
is active, deleted, or dormant. Include a link to each account if 
possible.

        LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/venkataramanarun

        Instagram: www.instagram.com/clubarunv/

        Twitter: @arunincali

        Facebook: account deleted, but believe it was listed under my 
        full name

    19. Please identify each instance in which you have testified 
orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
governmental capacity and specify the date and subject matter of each 
testimony.
    None.
    20. Given the current mission, major programs, and major 
operational objectives of the department/agency to which you have been 
nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you 
believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for 
which you have been nominated, and why do you wish to serve in that 
position?
    I have spent over two decades working on international trade issues 
in the public and private sector. In particular, I have devoted most of 
my career to public service, working to advance the interests of U.S. 
business and workers by expanding commercial opportunities in foreign 
markets.
    I wish to serve in this position in the Biden-Harris Administration 
because I believe the Global Markets business unit of the International 
Trade Administration (ITA), working closely with Congress, can help put 
the U.S. on a long-term trajectory of economic success at this pivotal 
moment in our history. As our country emerges from the pandemic, Global 
Markets' role in expanding opportunities to sell U.S. goods and 
services to foreign markets and attracting job-creating foreign 
investment to the U.S. will help sustain the post-pandemic economic 
recovery. By engaging foreign governments to improve their commercial 
policy environments and improving our strategy for competing in those 
markets, Global Markets will help strengthen the competitiveness of 
U.S. industry and support growing jobs in the U.S. If confirmed, I 
would also be eager for Global Markets to work with other offices in 
the Commerce Department and with USTR to make trade agreements work 
better for American industry and workers. This would include offering 
more export-oriented services to a wider group of small and medium-
sized enterprises, ensuring full access to those services for all 
Americans, and making sure our trading partners follow through on their 
obligations under those agreements.
    Through my experience, I have worked to acquire skills that will 
allow me, if confirmed, to successfully perform the role of Assistant 
Secretary for Global Markets and Director General of the U.S. and 
Foreign Commercial Service. I have led negotiations with key trading 
partners to hold them accountable to their trade commitments and open 
markets for U.S. goods and services. I have defended U.S. trade laws 
against foreign governments' efforts to limit their effectiveness and 
stood up for U.S. industry and workers when faced with unfair foreign 
trade practices. I have implemented and participated in government 
dialogues and developed new tools of engagement with foreign 
governments that are designed to strengthen U.S. negotiating positions 
and facilitate cooperation in challenging policy areas. I have also 
worked with Congress in the implementation of trade agreements, 
development of trade promotion authority, and the strengthening of U.S. 
trade laws, and look forward to building on this cooperation if 
confirmed.
    Central to my experience has been close coordination with U.S. 
industry. My previous positions have required a deep understanding of 
the impact of foreign government policies on U.S. business operations 
and employment across a range of sectors. Through my work in the 
private sector and open and regular engagement with stakeholders while 
in government, including individual companies and trade associations, I 
have developed that understanding and worked to shape U.S. policy 
responses that would secure the benefits of open foreign markets for 
U.S. industries and their workers.
    In addition to developing and refining the skills needed to execute 
this position, I have had the privilege of working before at ITA as the 
Director of Policy. In that position, as in the position I currently 
occupy as Counselor to the Secretary, I worked closely with a number of 
the teams in Global Markets and with many members of the U.S. and 
Foreign Commercial Service. I am deeply familiar with the functions of 
Global Markets, the depth of expertise brought to bear by Global 
Markets professionals (including in the U.S. and foreign field) for 
U.S. companies, and the importance of coordinating the organization's 
work with other business units in ITA, as well as across the bureaus in 
Commerce. While I will undoubtedly have more to learn in the position, 
I believe my significant experience with Global Markets would allow me 
to make immediate contributions to ITA and the Department if confirmed.
    21. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to 
ensure that the department/agency has proper management and accounting 
controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large 
organization?
    Proper management and accounting controls, especially for a 
government organization like Global Markets, are critical to ensuring 
efficiency, fairness and accountability to the American people. Global 
Markets is the largest business unit in the International Trade 
Administration (ITA), with many team members located outside 
Washington, DC and outside the U.S., and requiring the application of 
both Foreign Service and Civil Service guidelines to staff in the 
organization. In addition, domestic and foreign travel, as well as 
consultation and appropriate partnerships with stakeholders, are 
critical to the effective functioning of the organization. These and 
other key features of Global Markets underscore the need for active, 
attentive and thoughtful management of the organization. If confirmed, 
I will work with other leaders in the Commerce Department to ensure the 
development and implementation of proper management and accounting 
controls, including the observance of procedures and policies, 
enforcement of reporting rules, and establishment of appropriate 
metrics to evaluate performance.
    In my career I have developed the skills needed to perform this 
task, if confirmed. I have led teams, including members that reported 
directly to me as well as others in my business unit, to define 
objectives, develop organization-wide positions and implement new 
initiatives. I have also driven teams across business functions and 
across agencies to identify and work towards a shared goal, overcome 
differences, and produce concrete outcomes for stakeholders. When 
managing my own team, I have supervised and evaluated their 
performance; helped develop metrics to support such evaluation; 
implemented tools to facilitate communication and information sharing 
among the team; established priorities and revised them to respond to 
changing business needs; and ensured compliance with established 
policies and procedures including budgetary requirements. If confirmed, 
I would apply this experience to the needs of Global Markets to ensure 
the full and proper implementation of management and accounting 
controls.
    22. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the 
department/agency, and why?
    I believe the top three challenges facing Global Markets are the 
following:

  1.  Reaching many more small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), 
        including minority-and women-owned businesses, to become 
        exporters. Notwithstanding the dynamic U.S. domestic market, 
        exporting can help support the long-term viability of U.S. 
        SMEs. With the dramatic growth in a middle class overseas, 
        consumers outside the U.S. represent a critical opportunity for 
        SMEs that should not be ceded to our competitors. However, 
        despite Global Markets' commitment to supporting SME exports, 
        less than one percent of SMEs export from the U.S. SMEs face 
        particular challenges entering their first export market given 
        their limited resources and bandwidth. With many countries 
        still struggling to gain their economic footing after Covid, 
        and looking inward to protect their markets, the commercial and 
        policy environments for SMEs have become even more challenging. 
        Global Markets is well positioned to help U.S. SMEs overcome 
        these challenges but can do more to reach a broader SME 
        population that would benefit most from its export services.

  2.  Helping U.S. companies compete in export markets against third 
        country products. U.S. companies can successfully compete 
        against goods and services from anywhere in the world. However, 
        their competitors from third countries often have advantages of 
        government support that are not matched by the U.S. Government. 
        In some cases, with allies as well as with countries like 
        China, those competitors have significantly greater commercial 
        diplomacy resources available to promote their exports and 
        advocate on behalf of their sales to governments. In other 
        cases, those competitors are supported by State-led policies 
        that offer subsidies and export financing. Global Markets can 
        develop new strategies to evaluate the reach of these 
        competitors in various export markets and identify actions the 
        U.S. Government can take to re-create a level playing field in 
        those markets.

  3.  Aligning Global Markets' engagement with foreign governments to 
        better support U.S. competitiveness. The Biden-Harris 
        Administration is implementing a series of actions to ensure 
        the long term competitiveness of the U.S. economy, including by 
        investing in critical American industries and establishing 
        resilient supply chains. Global Markets can reinforce these 
        actions by partnering with like minded governments in these and 
        other areas. In this way, enhancing bilateral trade and 
        investment with key allies can help both countries reduce their 
        dependence on China and other less reliable suppliers.
                   b. potential conflicts of interest
    1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation 
agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates, 
clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement 
accounts.
    I continue to participate in a Visa defined contribution plan, but 
the plan sponsor no longer makes contributions.
    2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal, 
to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business, 
association or other organization during your appointment? If so, 
please explain.
    No.
    3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other 
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in 
the position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will 
resolve each potential conflict of interest.
    In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted in 
coordination with the Department of Commerce Ethics Office and the 
Office of Government Ethics. Any conflict of interest will be resolved 
according to the terms of an ethics agreement that I have entered into 
with the Commerce Designated Agency Ethics Official, which will be 
provided to this Committee. In the event that an actual or potential 
conflict of interest arises during my appointment, I will consult with 
Commerce ethics officials and take the measures necessary to resolve 
the conflict.
    4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial 
transaction which you have had during the last ten years, whether for 
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in 
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the 
position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will resolve 
each potential conflict of interest.
    None.
    5. Identify any other potential conflicts of interest, and explain 
how you will resolve each potential conflict of interest.
    Any conflict of interest will be resolved according to the terms of 
the aforementioned ethics agreement.
    6. Describe any activity during the past ten years, including the 
names of clients represented, in which you have been engaged for the 
purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or 
modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and 
execution of law or public policy.

   Visa Inc.: Implementation of financial services provisions 
        in U.S. Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA)

   Visa Inc.: Negotiation and implementation of financial 
        services provisions in China Phase One trade agreement

   Visa Inc.: Negotiation of financial services issues in U.S.-
        India trade negotiations

   Visa Inc.: Negotiation of financial services issues in OECD 
        tax negotiations

   Visa Inc.: Negotiation of financial services issues in U.S.-
        UK trade negotiations

   Visa Inc.: Negotiation of financial services issues in U.S.-
        Kenya trade negotiations

   Visa Inc.: Negotiation of financial services issues in WTO e 
        commerce negotiations

   Visa Inc.: Financial services issues in connection with 
        meetings of the G7, G20 and the Asia-Pacific Economic 
        Cooperation forum

   Visa Inc.: Financial services issues in Argentina, 
        Bangladesh, Belarus, Brazil, Burma, China, European Union, 
        Ghana, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Korea, 
        Nepal, Nigeria, Serbia, Singapore, South Africa, Ukraine, 
        Vietnam

   Visa Inc.: Sanctions or potential sanctions in connection 
        with Burma, China, Russia, Turkey and Venezuela

   Steptoe & Johnson (client: Varian): Exclusion from Section 
        301 tariffs for U.S. medical equipment

   Steptoe & Johnson (client: wish.com): Protection of 
        intellectual property rights for online platform

   Steptoe & Johnson (client: U.S.-India Strategic Partnership 
        Forum): Application of tariffs under the Generalized System of 
        Preferences

    None of my lobbying activities met the threshold for registering as 
a lobbyist under the Lobbying Disclosure Act at any point in the past 
10 years.
                            c. legal matters
    1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics, 
professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a 
complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special 
Counsel, professional association, disciplinary committee, or other 
professional group? If yes:
    No.

  a.  Provide the name of agency, association, committee, or group;

  b.  Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or 
        personnel action was issued or initiated;

  c.  Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or 
        personnel action;

  d.  Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action, 
        complaint, or personnel action.

    2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by 
any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal, 
State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic 
offense? If so, please explain. No.
    3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were 
an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency 
proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please 
explain. No.
    4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo 
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic 
offense? If so, please explain. No.
    5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual 
harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or 
any other basis? If so, please explain.
    In August 1994, when I was 20 years old, I worked as a counselor at 
a summer camp in Massachusetts. During the program, a high school 
participant claimed that I had made him uncomfortable after asking me 
to administer medical treatment (application of calamine lotion) to a 
rash on his back. While the student did not file a formal complaint, he 
mentioned this to another student, who brought it to the attention of 
program leadership.
    I informed the program leadership of what had happened, and that I 
had not done anything inappropriate or against program rules, but I had 
also allowed myself to be in a position where I was alone with this 
participant and could not substantiate my proper behavior. As a result, 
I decided, with their agreement, to resign from the program.
    6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information, 
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in 
connection with your nomination.
    None.
                     d. relationship with committee
    1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with 
deadlines for information set by congressional committees, and that 
your department/agency endeavors to timely comply with requests for 
information from individual Members of Congress, including requests 
from members in the minority? Yes.
    2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can 
to protect congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal 
for their testimony and disclosures? Yes.
    3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested 
witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with 
firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes.
    4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly 
constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be 
reasonably requested to do so? Yes.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]



    The Chairwoman [presiding]. Well, I want to thank all the 
witnesses for their testimony, and we are going to start with a 
round of questioning. I am going to defer my questions for at 
least another round and call on Senator Klobuchar.

               STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA

    Senator Klobuchar. Very good. Thank you very much, Madam 
Chair, and congratulations to all of the incredible nominees we 
have. I also welcome many Commissioners here from the FTC here 
to show their support for Mr. Bedoya. So very good showing. And 
I am not going to be able to ask you, I think, Mr. 
Venkataraman, questions today. I am going to put them on the 
record, but I can't tell you how important it is to me the 
Foreign Commercial Service.
    I actually worked on a major bill years ago to help get 
funding and what a difference it makes for our country. We 
should be a country that makes stuff, invents things, exports 
to the world. So thank you for that. I am going to start with 
you, Chairwoman Rosenworcel. I always--I like someone that has 
an even longer last name than me. So I was honored to have you 
in Minnesota. You came to talk about 9-1-1 many, many, many 
years ago and the importance of upgrading that.
    And could you talk about how you will continue to make that 
in this changing world where people are making emergency calls 
by text and where we have people maybe marooned in the middle 
of a snowstorm in Minnesota, and if their cell phone goes off, 
what happens? All these things keep happening in our state. 
Firefighters being able to have actual plans before they go 
into a building. Can you talk about your plans there?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Absolutely. Thank you, Senator, for the 
question. You may only call 9-1-1 once in your life, but it is 
going to be the most important call you ever make. And when you 
make it, you absolutely want first responders to find you. And 
we are on the cusp of updating 9-1-1 in this country to next 
generation 9-1-1, which will provide so much more functionality 
than just traditional voice. It could be video, data, and 
information that can help public safety address your needs when 
they arrive.
    And I think the way to do that is we are going to need to 
standardize our definitions of next generation 9-1-1. We are 
going to have to identify new funding sources. Traditionally, 
this has been done at the local level, and this probably needs 
a Federal boost. And in addition, we are going to have to 
continue work to make sure that wireless calls result in public 
safety being able to find you in a snowstorm or in a building 
or anywhere you might be using that device to reach out for 
help.
    Senator Klobuchar. Well, thank you very much. And I am 
chair of the 9-1-1 caucus, I should have mentioned, you know 
that. We are excited we are going to get some funding, I 
believe, in this reconciliation bill and we will move forward 
from there. Broadband, I was the head of the bill that 
Representative Clyburn had in the House. I know you have been 
all over this. Could you talk about the challenges as we bring 
in this incredible investment to get to every corner of our 
country? And I always joke that if Iceland can get broadband 
everywhere with the volcanoes, maybe we can handle it. Mapping, 
some of the things I know you are going to be asked about by my 
colleagues. Just what you see our biggest challenges to be.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes, I think this pandemic has proven like 
nothing before that we need to get broadband to everyone, 
everywhere. We need to get it to 100 percent of the country. 
And we can't accept anything less. And with this recent 
infrastructure bill, I think we have a chance for generational 
change, but it requires us to execute and do that well. So 
making sure that the Department of Commerce, the Federal 
Communications Commission, our colleagues at the Rural 
Utilities Service are all working off the same data sets to 
make smart decisions about what to defund and where to deploy I 
think is the first order of business. And in June we signed a 
Memorandum of Understanding with the Rural Utility Service and 
the NTIA in anticipation of just that right.
    Senator Klobuchar. Right. And I think one of our obsessions 
is getting the funding out. And I know you will focus on that, 
making sure actually that people get money. One of the reasons 
we put a clawback in this bill is that if people don't start 
actually building it, we are going to have to take it back. 
Because for too long, there has been a lot of promises made in 
certain rural areas. This will be something Secretary Raimondo 
will also be dealing with, and I want to thank you for that.
    One specific question, and this comes from my competition 
work over in Judiciary, I have long been concerned about 
competition in the video marketplace. We continue to hear 
serious concerns from independent programming networks 
regarding the negotiating tactics of some of the video 
distributors. Will you work with me and my colleagues to 
reexamine the impact of these practices and take appropriate 
action to protect the public interest?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. If confirmed, yes, I will.
    Senator Klobuchar. OK, very good. I want to turn now, I 
think you are on, Mr. Bedoya, Professor Bedoya, via video 
there, hello. Questions about the importance of the FTC work 
with your, what we hope to be your future colleagues here. My 
view is you can't take on the biggest companies the world have 
ever known with just duct tape and band-aids, you need 
resources. And could you talk about the importance of that in 
both the privacy area and the antitrust piece of the FTC's 
work?
    Mr. Bedoya. Thank you, Senator. I emphatically agree with 
you. The folks in the Competition Bureau and the Bureau of 
Consumer Protection Privacy Division do extraordinary work, but 
they are dwarfed by the staffs at similar European countries, 
particularly privacy. And I think there is an urgent bipartisan 
consensus that we need to fix that. And I emphatically support 
that, and would if confirmed in.
    Senator Klobuchar. Very good. And then privacy legislation. 
Senator Cantwell has been an incredible leader in this area. 
Senator Wicker, I know that they are working together on this. 
We have had this really earth shattering testimony of the 
whistleblower, which after years of working on this, I felt 
like that kind of crystallized everything we know, people 
feeling out of control in their lives, not being able to 
control their kids' exposure to accounts that they would never 
want them to see, data being shared, companies profiting off of 
individuals in our country like they are just pure profit 
centers with no regard to people's own privacy. Could you talk 
about how your experience in this area is perfect--this is a 
softball, so perfect for what we have to do going forward.
    Mr. Bedoya. Thank you, Senator. Certainly, I believe my 
oversight work, bipartisan oversight work in the Senate speaks 
to my ability to do this. I am a new parent. Sima and I have 
been thinking a lot about how to introduce our kids to this, 
and I also I have been excited to work with Commissioner Wilson 
on this issue. I know this is near and dear to her heart. She 
is an expert on this.
    Senator Klobuchar. OK, very good. And thank you as well to 
all the nominees. Look forward to working with you. Thank you, 
Senator Cantwell.
    The Chairwoman. Senator Wicker.
    Senator Wicker. Thank you, Madam Chair. Chair Rosenworcel, 
let me take up where Senator Klobuchar left off on maps. When--
or when do you estimate that we are actually going to have the 
new maps?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you for the question, Senator. I 
admit that I anticipated you might ask. And that is a fair 
reason because for too long the FCC has been working off maps 
that are not accurate, that overstate where broadband is in 
this country, which means that we don't send dollars to the 
right places. So I want you to know, right after I took over, 
we got to work on this immediately and in this summer, in early 
August, we produced the Nation's best ever wireless maps.
    We worked with the carriers to build a prototype for the 
Broadband Data Act, and you can go on the FCC's website right 
now, look up your address, and you will find data that is light 
years better than anything you might have seen from the agency 
before or anything you might get if you walk into a store and 
try to purchase a handset. That is because we required every 
carrier to use the same cell loading characteristics and 
propagation models. So for the first time, we have an apples to 
apples comparison.
    But like I said, that is just a prototype to test the 
systems that I had to acquire when I took over because it 
turned out that the FCC didn't actually have the computer 
processing power to build big maps. But we have acquired 
those----
    Senator Wicker. When did you learn that?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. I learned that within the first few weeks 
of arriving at the agency. So we set----
    Senator Wicker. But you have been in the agency for two 
terms?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes, but I didn't have oversight over the 
Office of Managing Director with authority over those issues. 
That is not information that is available----
    Senator Wicker. So the rank and file members don't have 
that information?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. No, you don't operate with the budget or 
work with the agency's computer processing systems. So as soon 
as I found out, we immediately secured that capacity. And then 
we also decided that we would come up with a statistically 
valid way for states, localities, and tribes to challenge any 
data before us. On top of that, we are working on a redo of our 
speed test app, which more than 200,000 people have downloaded 
and can use to instantly report to us where service is and is 
not.
    So we will have a whole consumer brigade that is able to 
assist. Here is the thing though, that is going to tell us what 
day they will be available by, it is a challenge in the 
Broadband Data Act, which is legislation I know you are 
familiar with because it came through this committee. There is 
something called the broadband serviceable location fabric. It 
tells you where every location that can be served in this 
country is. And under the Broadband Data Act, we had to follow 
Federal Government acquisition regulations to procure it. And I 
have learned a lot more about that process in the last few 
months. It is not fast, but we have procured a broadband 
service for location fabric, which is essential, it is the 
ground floor for all of this work. However, every bidder who 
did not succeed can now protest that vote, and it will stay our 
ability to work on that fabric while the GAO reviews it.
    And the GAO review can take up to 100 days. So with that 
behind me, let me just say that we are doing everything 
possible to encourage the GAO to move fast if there is a 
protest. But if we have problems, I might ask for you and this 
committee's assistance because we absolutely need to get those 
maps done because all of the money that is flowing through the 
infrastructure bill depends on them being available.
    Senator Wicker. When was the protest period be over?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. So it is a terrific question. We made the 
award last week. They--anyone who wants to protest has 3 days 
to ask for a debriefing from the agency staff. Five days after 
that, they can file a protest, and GAO has----
    Senator Wicker. 100 days.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. 100 days, yes.
    Senator Wicker. OK. Well, you do agree, though, that we 
need the accurate maps fully in place----
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Absolutely.
    Senator Wicker.--before we start sending the money out?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Absolutely. And I have told the Commerce 
Department that we are going to send them every bit of data 
that we have as soon as we have it, because we know all those 
infrastructure dollars will be better spent when we do. And I 
am still hopeful, despite that process I just described to you, 
that we are going to be able to do this with haste. I just 
wanted to make sure you understand what the law looks like.
    Senator Wicker. Good. And I appreciate that answer and I 
know the members of the Committee do. Let me see if I can 
squeeze a question in in that extra 1.20 minutes that Senator 
Klobuchar had. With the regulation on net neutrality that was 
repealed under the last Administration, it seems to me we did 
better than Europe under the light touch appropriation--under 
the light touch regulation.
    Broadband usage increased significantly, and companies 
invested in broadband in America. Unlike in Europe, we did not 
have to ask providers to throttle service or take other 
measures to reduce traffic. Can you tell us what, if any, 
disadvantages occurred to our country or to consumers when we 
repealed the Obama Administration net neutrality rules? Or am I 
correct that we had a lot more build out and no throttling or 
measures to reduce traffic?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you for the question. I think, you 
know that I support net neutrality. I supported it in 2015 and 
then I opposed the rollback in 2017. I continue to support it. 
I think the investment record is something we always have to 
pay attention to because as we develop rules at the FCC, we 
have got to be mindful what the impact is on infrastructure in 
this country.
    That being said, I think the impact of the rollback in 2017 
is broader than just net neutrality because it took the FCC 
away from oversight of broadband. And coming out of this 
pandemic, I think, you know, all of us know that we need some 
oversight because it has become such an essential service for 
day to day life.
    Senator Wicker. Well, let me just ask you to submit on the 
record a specific answer to examples of consumers being harmed 
by the repeal of net neutrality regulation.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. I would be happy to do so. Thank you.
    Senator Wicker. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    The Chairwoman. Senator Schatz was to be next right before 
you walked in the door. Is that OK, Senator Blumenthal? Senator 
Schatz. Thank you. Then followed by Senator Blumenthal.

                STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII

    Senator Schatz. You are gentlemen, thank you very much. 
Thank you, Madam Chair. Before I get to my questions, I want to 
reiterate what Senator Lujan said. It is so urgent to move 
Chair Rosenworcel's nomination to a markup so we can send the 
nomination to the floor and confirm her before the end of the 
year.
    We don't have very many floor days left, and if we don't 
confirm her before the end of the year, then by law she has to 
pack up her office and leave the FCC. On Monday, the President 
signed historic legislation that will help us to connect all 
Americans with broadband, and this is on top of other broadband 
legislation that we passed this year and last, and so we need 
the expert agency to provide its expertise. Jessica Rosenworcel 
is an extremely qualified nominee with widespread bipartisan 
support. This is not the time to leave the agency leaderless.
    Ms. Rosenworcel, you--I am not sure if you coined it, but 
you certainly popularized the phrase the homework gap, and I 
would like for you to talk about the progress that you have 
made and the progress that you think you can make as the Chair 
of the Commission?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you for the question, Senator. When 
I was growing up, I didn't need an Internet connection to do my 
homework. It was paper or pencil, and I got to make sure my 
brother would stay out of the room. Those days are gone. Every 
child needs an Internet connection to fully participate in 
school. We knew that before this pandemic, but this pandemic 
has shined a light on it like nothing else.
    In the United States, we don't need to have children 
sitting in the parking lot outside of fast food restaurants 
just to attend the virtual class. And I am really pleased that 
at the FCC, we have been able to make some meaningful 
difference because of the Emergency Connectivity Fund, which is 
a fund that this Congress helped set up to close the homework 
gap. We have distributed funding for connections for school 
kids to more than 7,000 schools and 600 libraries. We are 
making a meaningful difference.
    Senator Schatz. How many kids remain unconnected?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. So the numbers that we have from the 
pandemic were almost 17 million. I think that we have reduced 
that number with this program, but I don't think we can stop it 
until every child has the opportunity to go online for class.
    Senator Schatz. I know you are mom, I am a dad. I just find 
that no mind-boggling in the wealthiest nation in the history 
of the world, and in a context where we forced kids onto a 
WebEx or a Zoom, and then 17 million of these kids don't have 
access to the internet. It is just unconscionable, and I think 
it is all of our collective responsibility, and I thank you for 
leading in this space. I want to follow up on Senator Wicker's 
line of questioning regarding maps.
    My understanding is there is a ton of interagency 
coordination that is required, and I am wondering if you can 
help us to understand the different agencies, three and four 
and five letter agencies that are involved, and how you are 
making sure that I think it is FCC primarily, but USDA and NTIA 
and others, and how we make sure we are not stepping on each 
other's toes and maximizing our collective impact?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Such a good question, Senator, because 
after this infrastructure bill has passed, we have all of this 
funding and all of these opportunities to address our Nation's 
digital divide, but it is really contingent on every agency 
working together. Back in June, the FCC signed a memorandum of 
understanding with the NTIA and the RUS to make sure that we 
are sharing all of our data. I have also made available to the 
Department of Commerce our Tower Connection Notification 
System, so that the NTIA can use that data as well in these 
programs. I would like to invite the Treasury Department, which 
also has funds, to come in and start to work with us on this. I 
know if we all work off of the same data set, we will take 
those dollars and we will be able to make them go further.
    Senator Schatz. So just so I understand jurisdiction, RUS 
under USDA, you guys obviously, Treasury just because they have 
a program that they are administering, not because they have 
access to particular data sets that are interesting.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Correct.
    Senator Schatz. OK. So is there anything that the Congress 
needs to do to clarify its legislative intent and make sure 
everybody is, you know, as we say, in Hawaii, paddling in the 
same direction?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes, that is a very useful metaphor. We 
are going to need your oversight to make sure we continue to 
paddle in the same direction.
    Senator Schatz. Thank you very much. Mr. Bedoya, this is an 
easy one. Don't you love the bills that I have introduced?
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Schatz. I just want to ask you about the duty of 
loyalty. We had a really good conversation about that. Do you 
agree that Federal privacy law must include a duty of loyalty 
to prohibit companies from using the data that they collect 
from users to their detriment?
    Mr. Bedoya. Senator, I appreciate the question. I think it 
is a great idea. And what I like about it is a lot of times 
when there is legislation on privacy, there is this felt need 
to reinvent the wheel and do something out of whole cloth. And 
what I appreciate about the duty of loyalty is that it ties 
back to a very old common law tradition that is just as old as 
the First Amendment. That information held by fiduciaries, like 
folks like doctors, clergy, etc. in certain circumstances is 
protected. And I admire that.
    Senator Schatz. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam 
Chair.
    The Chairwoman. Senator Fischer.

                STATEMENT OF HON. DEB FISCHER, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA

    Senator Fischer. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Bedoya, I 
won't ask you if you love all my bills, I am sure you do. But I 
would say that I see that you have been a strong critic of 
facial recognition technologies in your work. You have 
suggested banning or having a moratorium put in place. What 
privacy guardrails are vital for facial recognition?
    I wonder if you believe that there are still benefits with 
this technology, such as for public safety, health care. If you 
would be confirmed as a Commissioner, how would you assess 
technologies that you feel deserve more scrutiny on privacy? 
Would you support banning certain commercial technologies based 
on privacy concerns alone for those that fall in the FTC's 
jurisdiction?
    Mr. Bedoya. Thank you, Senator, I appreciate the chance to 
speak to this. I, you know--I will speak to the question of 
supporting the technology. I will give you a clear example. You 
know, my ability as a parent of young kids to open up my phone 
with my face is very useful. And I think this ties into your 
question about when I would apply greater scrutiny. The beauty 
of opening up a phone with your face is it is transparent. You 
opt into it. And there is limited data collection, and the data 
resides on the device.
    And so I, if confirmed, probably I think would apply 
greater scrutiny to situations where collection and use is 
opaque, where there is broader dragnet data collection, and 
where people aren't allowed to consent and where the data is 
free flowing without restriction. And I don't anticipate 
calling for a ban in the commercial setting. I certainly can't 
think of one off the top of my head. Those would probably be 
the guardrails I would anticipate, Senator.
    Senator Fischer. So I have--from your answer, I would say 
that you do believe that the United States needs to be a global 
leader then on these emerging technologies such as facial 
recognition?
    Mr. Bedoya. In certain respects, for example, to help folks 
with disabilities for verification, I think facial recognition 
can be a great second or third factor. So yes, I very much 
agree with you in that respect.
    Senator Fischer. OK, thank you. Chair Rosenworcel, so good 
to see you again. As you know, the USF contribution factor 
remains exceptionally high, and it hit at an all-time record in 
the second quarter of this year. With the shrinking base of who 
pays into the fund, the situation is straining on our 
telecommunication providers, especially the smaller providers 
that we have in our most rural areas. It strains their ability 
to be able to manage that high fee.
    I notice that you have also supported expanded E-Rate 
subsidies and other means of growing broadband affordability 
programs through the FCC. So how do you square the push to grow 
certain USF programs at the Commission, given what we are 
seeing in the contribution factor?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Sure. Thank you for the question. The 
Universal Service Contribution System is a byproduct of the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996. In 1996, I had an AOL account, 
and I really badly wanted a palm pilot. I mean, it was a long 
time ago. And it was the collective belief of Congress that we 
should assess a little bit off of the long distance bill of 
every customer to help sustain networks nationwide. It was a 
smart idea. It exempted the fund from the annual appropriations 
process. It made it more consistent, which was important for 
those small rural providers.
    But I think 25 years hence, we need to have a conversation 
with this committee about what is the right mix of universal 
service and appropriations going forward, because already 
Congress has started to change that. You see that in the 
emergency broadband benefit and its successor, the Affordable 
Connectivity Plan, because that's dependent on actually 
appropriated dollars, which is distinct from the traditional 
Universal Service Fund. The bottomline is we need to think 
about a revamp, and we need to work with you to do it.
    Senator Fischer. What--do you have any ideas on what you 
would suggest to us on that? You know, when I was in the State 
legislature, I chaired our committee on Transportation 
Telecommunications, and this was in the early 2000s. And I went 
into that chairmanship thinking that I was going to have to 
deal with what the feds were going to send down after they 
updated the 1996 bill. Well, I am here now. We still haven't 
updated it. What are a couple of ideas that you would be 
willing to share publicly at this time?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Well, this is definitely something that's 
going to need some more conversation. We have a Federal State 
joint board on universal service that allows Federal officials 
and State officials to come together.
    Senator Fischer. That needs to be more active.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. And needs to propose some ideas on this 
front, because I do think the best ideas aren't just here, they 
are working with our State counterparts. I know my colleagues 
have recommended other ideas about expanding it to the tech 
universe, and I also know that we have to think about the role 
of appropriations with some of these programs, because like I 
mentioned, some of them are now being funded like that, which 
is distinct from this traditional mechanism. I know the bottom 
line is 25 years out. I think that the FCC needs to have a 
conversation with you about this, so we make it on firmer--
firmer footing going forward.
    Senator Fischer. OK. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    The Chairwoman. Senator Blumenthal.
    Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Madam Chair. We are fortunate 
to have a nominee to the FTC with us this morning and even more 
fortunate that the President of the United States has asked the 
FTC to investigate skyrocketing gasoline prices. I am a veteran 
of a number of these investigations, having served as Attorney 
General of Connecticut. It is a challenging issue, but one that 
has to be faced. What we are seeing is that the costs of 
refined product are diminishing, but consumers see at the pump 
soaring prices and rising profits as well on the part of the 
major gas companies and stock buybacks.
    So this investigation is overdue, absolutely necessary, 
should be pursued vigorously and promptly. The present 
monopolistic practices of these companies need to be exposed 
for what they are, so consumers understand why prices are 
rising. And we need to call attention as well to the 
monopolistic prices of OPEC and the producers of gasoline. 
There is no reason that consumers should be left in the dark 
about why gasoline prices at the pump are rising so 
astronomically. And I will just cite if the gap between refined 
fuel costs and gasoline prices at the pump were to return to 
normal pre-pandemic levels, drivers would be paying as much as 
$0.25 less per gallon. Twenty-five percent less per gallon is 
real money in consumers' pockets, and an effective 
investigation will help achieve that goal. Mr. Bedoya, do you 
support this investigation?
    Mr. Bedoya. Absolutely, in principle, Senator. Gas prices 
matter for everyone, and they particularly matter for folks 
living paycheck to paycheck. And I would add that I believe 
there is a 2007 petroleum manipulation--pardon me, manipulation 
rule. And if confirmed, Senator, I would try to make sure that 
that is enforced rigorously.
    Senator Blumenthal. The FTC, as you know, is an independent 
agency, but I urge consumers to write to you, to call you as an 
agency to make their real life stories known to you, because 
that is the most powerful evidence. Their faces and voices can 
have a real impact. They can make a difference. So thank you 
for that answer.
    Chair Rosenworcel, I want to address a topic that is 
unlikely to be raised otherwise, the Local Journalism 
Sustainability Act. I know you have been very committed to 
sustaining and enhancing local journalism. This measure would 
help support the existence and survival and thriving of 
outlets, local media outlets. Can you tell me a little bit more 
about how to revitalize and sustain local journalism?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you for the question, Senator, and 
thank you for your kind remarks earlier. We all need local 
journalism to make decisions about our lives, our communities, 
and our country. And yet over the last decade and a half, we 
know that nearly 2,000 newspapers have shuttered. It is getting 
harder and harder to find economic models that give us the news 
we need. So I think the kind of tax credits that are involved 
with payroll or with the production of local news journalism 
are essential for its future. I also think that restoring the 
minority media tax credit would be a beneficial way to 
encourage small businesses and people of color to take over the 
ownership of local radio and television stations. That is, I 
know, a bill that is also pending before the Congress right 
now. I think we are going to need a whole lot of little tools 
to make that happen. There is not one big single answer, but I 
think we have to invest in them because journalism and local 
journalism is so important.
    Senator Blumenthal. I really welcome your commitment to 
this cause. I would like to work with you further on it. 
Obviously, our time is limited this morning, but I know you 
have a commitment to it. Let me ask one last question about 
robocalls, a mission for both of us. You have visited Hartford, 
Connecticut, to talk about this issue on multiple occasions 
that robocalls continue.
    This morning we approved a bill out of committee to 
increase penalties for spoofing, which is a tactic used by the 
robocalls con artists to disguise their origins and frustrate 
investigation. Can you talk a little bit about the tools that 
you think are necessary to combat this bane of consumers' 
existence?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Absolutely. Robocalls are a nuisance. They 
are awful, they are annoying, and in the last several years 
they have really grown. We need to trust our communications 
networks. And with these calls, people don't want to pick up 
the phone. So what we have done at the agency since I have been 
leading it in an acting capacity is we have done a lot more 
enforcement. We now issue cease and desist letters to anyone 
that we think is issuing robocalls and tell them they have 48 
hours to knock it off or we will tell all their carriers to 
block their traffic. We also have turned to technology.
    We have now enforced stir shaken and call authentication 
technology on our networks nationwide. We are starting to 
notice that more calls are coming from overseas, so we are 
starting up new gateway policies to make sure that we can stop 
them before they hit our shores. But I will tell you that scam 
artists move fast. They move faster than regulators and 
legislators. And if there were two things that I think are 
necessary to do next, I would make it these.
    The Supreme Court this year had a decision in Facebook v. 
Duguid where it decided to narrow the definition of auto 
dialer. And that matters because it limits the agency and 
private rights of action against robocalls. It is a 
technocratic decision, but it has got real world impact. And 
the second thing is, this is not a problem that is new at the 
FCC, but it is long standing and that is--we will issue fines.
    Under my leadership, we have had the largest fine ever 
under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, the largest fine 
ever under the Truth In Caller ID Act to go after bad actors 
for robocalls. But then I need to turn to the Department of 
Justice for civil enforcement action. And I think we have to 
not just fine these bad actors, we have to take them to court 
and collect.
    And so I would like assistance working with the Department 
of Justice to make this a priority or possibly even give the 
FCC some civil enforcement authority so we can take these bad 
actors to court because I think we need to engage in more of 
those efforts to make sure we have adequate deterrence and 
retribution when it comes to these nuisance calls.
    Senator Blumenthal. I agree. I hope the Department of 
Justice is listening, and I hope they will take note. Thank 
you. Thanks, Madam Chair.
    The Chairwoman. Yes. Senator Moran.

                STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY MORAN, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM KANSAS

    Senator Moran. Chairman, thank you. Thank you all for being 
here. Thank you for your willingness to serve. Each of you 
deserve a hearing of your own. There are sufficient 
conversations. I am an appropriator for all of you and an 
authorizer for all of you, and so I assume we will have, upon 
your confirmation, the opportunity to pursue many topics. Let 
me just start with a few today in the few minutes that I have. 
Chairman Rosenworcel, I will start with you, and unfortunately, 
a couple of my topics Senator Blumenthal and Senator Wicker 
have already covered and so I will not repeat those. Let me 
first confirm what I believe to be true about you.
    You know, this committee and this Congress in general has 
consistently shown support for local broadcasting, local 
journalism, broadcasters in particular. When you were 
discussing local broadcasting in front of this committee last 
summer, you brought up your commitment to local journalism, as 
well as the need to have content created in and for the 
communities that stations serve. I appreciate that sentiment, 
which I believe is one that this committee shares, and I hope 
that if you are confirmed as the next Chair of the FCC, we can 
continue working together to achieve that goal. Is that true?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Absolutely.
    Senator Moran. Thank you. Congress and the FCC--this again 
for you, Chair Rosenworcel. Congress and the FCC have placed 
build out requirements on recipients of broadband buildout 
funds that mandate companies complete their networks by a 
certain period of time. This requirement makes sense. It is 
designed to ensure that underserved areas receive broadband 
services in a timely fashion.
    However, there are a number of supply chain issues 
impacting build times, particularly for small Internet 
providers. Is the FCC monitoring and working to alleviate these 
supply chain issues? Does the FCC have any plans to work with 
broadband providers who run into these supply chain issues and 
may not meet those timely deadlines?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator. That is a good and 
obviously timely question. In May of this year, I actually 
started a proceeding with my colleagues to ask questions about 
supply chain, in particular semiconductors, and how it impacts 
the telecommunications industry and deployments. There has been 
a lot of discussion about that, but we felt that we needed to 
develop a detailed record to inform our work on this.
    We shared that record with the Department of Commerce, 
which has authority in this area, and we are using it to inform 
continuing discussion with those before the agency because we 
are mindful this can be a problem. But I think that that record 
was an especially useful tool to develop right at the outset.
    Senator Moran. I think this is particularly, but certainly 
this is a timely issue, but it is also a timely issue with the 
additional dollars that are being put into broadband 
investment, and the capability for many of the suppliers and 
builders that get towers to get building permits, it is a real 
challenge that I think you cannot ignore.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. I agree with you, Senator.
    Senator Moran. Thank you. Billions of dollars has been and 
will be distributed for broadband deployment. FCC, NTIA, USDA 
and other agencies--I keep saying before we authorize more 
money for more broadband, we ought to simplify and consolidate 
the programs that are there. We have not done that and 
therefore the burden falls to you and others. The Universal 
Service Fund continues to play an important role in making 
certain that unserved areas in Kansas and other States receive 
quality broadband service.
    What can the FCC do about ensuring USF contribution factor 
is stabilized and reflect the view--you touched on this topic 
earlier, but I would be pleased to hear more about what your 
thoughts are in regard to the USF contribution factor and its 
modernization.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Sure. I spoke to this Senator Fischer 
about this earlier, and I pointed out that the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996 is when the universal service 
contribution factor was developed. It was a long time ago, and 
25 years later, we might need to start having a discussion 
about what an update looks like. We already see that with the 
funds and then the way they are being distributed.
    The Affordable Connectivity Program, its predecessor, the 
Emergency Broadband Program, the Emergency Connectivity Fund, 
all of these are existing outside of the universal service 
system and through the annual appropriation system. And so we 
are going to figure out what the right mix of appropriations 
and adjustment to the universal service system are necessary--
--
    Senator Moran. I did hear your answer to Senator Fischer. 
Does that suggest that the FCC has no intentions of taking this 
issue on its own?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Well, I will be honest with you, we were 
going to have to have a referral to--under the law, to the 
Federal State Joint Board on Universal Service first. But I 
also think that there are some challenges with the law that we 
have before us, and that if you would like us to assess on 
other constituencies, other industries, it would take a change 
in the legislation.
    Senator Moran. Thank you for that answer. 19 seconds. The 
last 4 years at the urging of both chambers of commerce, the 
FCC put in place a number of process reforms. Commission items, 
three weeks advance of a vote, preventing significant changes 
on items once they have been voted on, establishing the Office 
of Economic and Analytics. What is your take on the results of 
that effort? Improved process, better outcomes?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. The short answer is, yes, I left both of 
those initiatives in place and intend to do so if confirmed.
    Senator Moran. Final question. What am I going to do in the 
absence of a Kansas chairman? Will you and Commissioner Stark 
fulfill the role of the taking care of the--excuse me, the 
citizens of my state?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. We will do our best, but you might have to 
have some New England references along the way.
    Senator Moran. I will try to be accommodating. Thank you.
    The Chairwoman. Senator Baldwin I think is next, and then 
followed by Senator Markey and then Senator Hickenlooper. That 
is on our side.

               STATEMENT OF HON. TAMMY BALDWIN, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

    Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Madam Chair. Chair Rosenworcel, 
I am excited about the progress that is being made on the 9-8-8 
line. This is a three code or three digit code for the National 
Suicide Prevention Lifeline, and I was proud to have been a 
lead author of that legislation. Beyond making access to 
resources easier for people in crisis and for everyone, one of 
my chief goals was to ensure that populations that were 
disproportionately facing high rates of suicide could have 
access to the specialized services that they need. In the bill 
itself, we talked about the veterans community, we talked about 
the LGBTQ youth community in particular.
    I know I have also worked on suicide prevention for farmers 
as they face disastrous conditions. Under the law, the National 
Suicide Prevention Lifeline must be ready to begin accepting 9-
8-8 calls on July 16, 2022, and that deadline is fast 
approaching.
    So given the importance of this change and of focusing on 
servicing and serving populations with the greatest need, I 
would like to hear you give us an update on how the Commission 
will continue to engage Government stakeholders as we--as well 
as nonprofits and mental health specialists on the 9-8-8 
rollout. And we had a great conversation about this. I hope you 
will talk a little bit about essential technologies, especially 
for youth, the text to chat and integrated voice responses.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Senator, thank you for the question. Thank 
you, more importantly, for your work on this. We do have a 
suicide crisis in this country. The rates for teen girls are 
three times higher than they have been over the last 20 years. 
It is true for young people of color, LGBTQ youth, and our 
veterans, and more first responders die annually by suicide 
than in the line of work. We can do better by them, and we 
should. We have long standing, had a toll free number for them 
to call, but moving it to a three digit code is a way to make 
it more accessible to more people.
    I am especially proud that this week the FCC will vote on 
making it texting accessible. And for young people in 
particular, that is their native language. It is not picking up 
the phone and talking. And so we will continue to work with the 
VA and DHS to make sure that they have the resources needed to 
answer those calls however they come in. And I think we are 
going to have to continue to discuss with them how we make sure 
that people get the specialized care they might need in that 
moment of need.
    Senator Baldwin. Thank you. I am as excited as my 
colleagues about the new major Federal resources that will be 
targeted for broadband, universal broadband, high speed access 
for all. But I know you agree that it won't be a success if we 
don't have better maps. I was proud to be a co-sponsor of the 
Broadband Data Act and I was pleased to see the FCC announce a 
new wireless service map using the Act's standards.
    And I understand the Commission was recently awarded--has 
recently awarded an important contract, you have talked about 
that earlier already today, for a better map for wired 
broadband. But I am anxious to see more progress quickly. 
First, when can we expect to see additional maps come online 
and how will you continue to push the Commission toward that 
goal, if confirmed, as permanent rather or rather than Acting 
Chairman?
    And then second, along these lines, I am particularly 
interested in the FCC using the new methods to verify the 
existence of broadband service, including using Federal fleet 
vehicles like Postal Service vehicles, National Park Service 
vehicles, National Forest--you know, that sort of thing where 
we are able to get more data. So give me an update on those.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Sure. Absolutely. You know, look, the best 
time to make better broadband maps would have been 5 years ago. 
The second best time is right now. So we are working morning, 
noon and night to do that. We are working through a Federal 
acquisition process to get the broadband serviceable location 
fabric, which is like the ground floor for building our 
wireless maps. I am hopeful we can work through that fast, but 
in the meantime, we are trying to come up with ways where we 
can build these maps really outside of Washington. And by that, 
I mean, we are coming up with a methodology so that states, 
municipalities, and tribes can challenge any data that they see 
that carriers have filed with us. We are also trying to update 
our speed test app.
    So if you go and test your phone, you will actually be able 
to send us the data about what is happening in your own 
backyard. We are also setting up webinars with tribal 
communities to make sure that we can get them involved in this 
mapping process. In the end, I believe the best maps are not 
going to just be built by us in Washington, they are going to 
be built by all of us using creative technologies. And we have 
done some exploration of using postal trucks in rural areas 
just like you described. It turns out it is more costly to use 
than we had anticipated, and there are some power challenges, 
but it might be a tool that we use in some rural areas to help 
us get really accurate data.
    Senator Baldwin. Thank you.
    The Chairwoman. Thank you. Senator Thune.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE, 
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA

    Senator Thune. Thank you, Madam Chair. Ms. Rosenworcel, the 
Universal Service Fund at the FCC, particularly a high cost 
program, has had a significant impact on states like South 
Dakota that have a large rural area. Do you believe it is 
important to provide rural broadband providers, particularly 
rate of return carriers, regulatory certainty in the USF 
program?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you for the question. The answer is 
yes.
    Senator Thune. Good. If confirmed as the Chair of the FCC, 
what steps will you take to ensure the FCC is better 
coordinating with other Federal agencies on spectrum issues?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. This is an important issue. We are using 
more of our airwaves than ever before for commercial activity. 
Every one of us here knows it because we rely on those phones 
for much of our day to day life. And when you add it up with 
Wi-Fi and all the new ways that we are going to start 
connecting the world around us, you realize we need more of 
that spectrum for commercial activity. The challenge, of 
course, is the laws of physics mean that we are not making more 
spectrum, so we have to reclaim it from older uses. And 
sometimes that requires going to Federal actors and asking them 
to choose to be more efficient with their current allocations.
    That, for instance, is how we were able to hold our most 
recent auction, which is still we are finishing up in the 3.45 
to 3.55 gigahertz band. That process, though, is a difficult 
one. And what I hope over time is that we can build a whole of 
Government approach where we all understand that repurposing 
some of those airwaves for new commercial use has innovative 
benefits for our economy and our civic life. And I hope we can 
have the support of the Committee when we do that.
    Senator Thune. And I hope you all can really focus on that 
and figuring that issue out, because that is an issue that has 
been particularly problematic given the fact the Federal 
Government sits on so much of the spectrum that is going to be 
necessary for commercial use. And getting that coordination 
between the different layers and levels and silos in Government 
is going to be key to making sure that we can accommodate the 
growth that we are going to see and the demand. Let me--I want 
to come back to the issue. I think Senator Wicker touched on 
this, the issue of net neutrality.
    On the issue of net neutrality, I continue to believe, and 
I think you know this, we had this conversation in the past, 
and I actually laid out 11 principles for an open Internet when 
I was Chairman of this committee. But I still think the best 
way to provide long term protections for the Internet is for 
Congress to pass bipartisan legislation. And I think that I say 
that today, I said it when I was Chairman, I stand ready and 
willing to work toward finding a lasting legislative solution 
that will resolve the dispute over net neutrality once and for 
all. If you are confirmed as Chair of the FCC, will you commit 
to coming to Congress for more direction before attempting any 
iteration of net neutrality rules?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you for the question, Senator. I 
will always agree to work with this committee on these issues 
and offer any technical assistance when asked.
    Senator Thune. Would you come to Congress, though, I mean, 
yes or no, before moving forward?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. I think, you know, as a matter of history 
that in 2015 I supported the agency putting in place net 
neutrality rules, so I believe it inherently has the authority 
to do so. But we will always work with this committee on issues 
like this that we know are big and important to the country.
    Senator Thune. Do you think it is good for--would be a good 
idea for Congress to legislate in this area?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. I think any efforts to update our Nation's 
telecommunications laws are a good idea because many of them 
have a vintage quality to it. I think the principles in them, 
including nondiscrimination, are strong, but I think that they 
always benefit from a legislative update.
    Senator Thune. The internet, open Internet order that was 
repealed in 2017. Since that time, we have had a good amount of 
time now, 4 years or so to see the impact. Strikes me, at least 
if you look at through the pandemic in particular, the Internet 
and Television Association reports that cable providers saw a 
34.9 percent increase in upstream usage, an 18.7 percent 
increase in downstream usage.
    And what we had in Europe, we didn't have any throttling or 
anything like that--what we had in Europe, which has net 
neutrality regulations, they had to take measures to throttle 
use and other types of measures to reduce and manage that 
increased use. And you did say, I think in your dissenting 
statement, the FCC is restoring Internet freedom order. You 
said I am not going to give up. We are going to bend this 
toward a more just outcome in the courts and Congress, wherever 
we need to go to ensure that net neutrality stays the law of 
the land. And you end your dissent by saying, let's fight, 
let's not stop here or now.
    Given what we have seen since that time and given the fact 
that President Biden has nominated Ms. Judy Sohn to be the 
fifth Commissioner of the FCC, who has stated not only that she 
would be for reinstating those rules, but also would support 
additional authorities for the FCC to adopt policy and handle 
issues like zero rating and data caps. Where do you come down? 
Has your position changed when it comes to the route that you 
might find necessary to bring back these 2015 rules? Do you 
agree with her position?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Well, I want to respect that a lot of 
people have different opinions when it comes to net neutrality, 
but I support it. And I think if the agency were to proceed, we 
would have to start with a traditional rulemaking to ask 
questions and get updates. And of course, that would include 
information associated with our increased use of broadband 
during this pandemic, and I would want whatever rules we passed 
to be fully up to date and reflect that.
    Senator Thune. And I would just say, Madam Chair, and this 
committee, which has jurisdiction over this issue, could 
really, by acting legislatively and putting rules in place, get 
away from the constant back and forth that we have with the 
agency, with the courts, and the uncertainty and 
unpredictability that creates to those out there who are 
investing in and making this wonderful benefit that we have 
from technology work as well as it did, particularly at a time 
through the pandemic when Americans really needed it to work. 
Thank you.
    The Chairwoman. Well, I want to thank you, Senator Thune. I 
know you have been a long advocate of trying to work this out, 
and I certainly believe that the pandemic brought us to the 
point of seeing how critical this was when people didn't have 
access to service. And I, trust me, have a long list of issues 
that I think are here of great concern about broadband, so 
hopefully we will have a chance to work on them.
    The Chairwoman. Senator Markey.

               STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY, 
                U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS

    Senator Markey. Thank you, Madam Chair, very much. Madam 
Chair of the Federal Communications Commission and just 
following up on Senator Thune's line of inquiry, just going 
back to 2015 and just restating what you just gave as an 
answer, you did vote to approve the open Internet order and 
that put net neutrality protections in place. And from my 
perspective, it properly treated broadband as a 
telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications 
Act. And as we know, regrettably, the Trump era Federal 
Communications Commission then eliminated the Commission's 
rightful authority to investigate broadband consumer 
complaints, promote public safety, close the digital divide. 
Yet the ongoing pandemic has dramatically increased reliance on 
the internet.
    Now more than ever, Americans actually need net neutrality. 
Americans need a Commission with authority to have consumers' 
backs and oversee what is undoubtedly an essential utility, 
broadband access. We are all having big discussions here about 
antitrust in this communications sector. Well, that is what net 
neutrality is. Just making sure the smaller upstart companies 
don't have to hire more lawyers but hire more engineers so that 
they can come up with their new ideas without worrying about 
being sued by these giant behemoths.
    So again, Chairwoman Rosenworcel, do you support 
reinstating net neutrality rules and restoring a classification 
of broadband as a Title II service?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator, for the question. Yes, 
I support net neutrality.
    Senator Markey. Beautiful. And I intend actually on 
introducing legislation that would end this ping pong between 
Administrations and make explicit broadband as a Title II 
service. My hope is that we could do this on a bipartisan 
basis, but perhaps that will not be the case, and you will 
still retain that inherent authority of the FCC to act. On E-
Rate, the coronavirus pandemic has also highlighted the 
homework gap experienced by 12 to 17 million children, mostly 
poor children, rural children, black and brown children in our 
country who have been unable to complete their homework at 
home.
    And it is why I fought for $7 billion for an emergency 
connectivity fund, which is now the law, and I thank you for 
the excellent way in which you have implemented that program. 
Under your leadership, the FCC has already received more than 
$6 billion in applications, and you have committed more than $3 
billion to helping communities across the country to connect 
those 12 to 17 million children at home so they can do their 
homework. And so I think that the numbers actually show the 
urgency of us--of continuing to deal with the issue. And we are 
working hard to include more money in the Build Back Better 
Program so that you will have more resources in order to deal 
with this issue.
    Do you agree that we should add more funding to the Build 
Back Better bill for emergency connectivity so that the 
resources are there for those children?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator, for the question. The 
homework gap, as you said, may affect as many as 17 million 
kids in this country. We are making progress with the funds 
from the Emergency Connectivity Fund. I just don't want to have 
to stop until we connect every child everywhere, so no student 
is locked out of the virtual classroom.
    Senator Markey. And do you believe that we have to create a 
permanent solution to this problem so that children in the 
future are not locked out at home?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes.
    Senator Markey. Thank you. And let me just ask you, Mr. 
Bedoya, in terms of a child online privacy protection law, the 
FTC is responsible for enforcing the Children's Online Privacy 
Protection Act. Mr. Bedoya, do you agree that Congress should 
update COPPA to one, give 13, 14 or 15 year old's control over 
their data to ban targeted ads to children, and three, create 
an eraser button so that parents can insist that all 
information collected about their 13, 14, or 15 year old son or 
daughter is erased from their data record forever?
    Mr. Bedoya. Thank you, Senator. I think those are critical 
updates to the law and very much support them.
    Senator Markey. You do support it. Can I just get your view 
on that as well?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Well, as the parent of a child in that age 
range, I fully support the idea of an eraser button.
    Senator Markey. Yes, thank you. Ms. Bavishi, do you have a 
view on that?
    Ms. Bavishi. Yes, fully support.
    Senator Markey. Fully support. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Venkataraman. No child----
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Markey. So we will just go with those who do and 
say that they represent every other parent in America that is 
understandably paranoid about what they saw in the last year 
and a half in terms of their children's relationship with this 
device that has been their companion in increasing numbers of 
hours, every single day, every single week, and we should 
provide those protections. And I think we should do it in this 
Congress. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    The Chairwoman. Thank you, Senator Markey. Senator 
Sullivan.

                STATEMENT OF HON. DAN SULLIVAN, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA

    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Madam Chair. And Chairman 
Rosenworcel, I appreciate our discussion yesterday, thanks. Let 
me ask a quick question on net neutrality. I know there is a 
lot of debate, big policies at stake. Your very distinguished 
background includes being a staff member on this committee. 
Don't you think that something that big in terms of policy 
should be authorized by Congress, not just Federal agencies to 
make it up?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Senator, as you know, I support net 
neutrality. I also would support working with this committee in 
any way, shape, or form on these issues or any other update to 
telecommunications law. But as I said earlier, I do believe the 
agency has inherent authority in this area.
    Senator Sullivan. Let me turn to the majority of our 
discussion yesterday, and that is the unique challenges in 
Alaska. And I know you are very well aware of those. And you 
made a number of commitments to me yesterday in our meeting. 
Can I just get you publicly to kind of make those again and 
talk briefly about some of the issues--commit to, a commitment 
to come back up to the great State of Alaska and see our people 
and challenges to work with the stakeholders in the Alaska plan 
on what comes next and how we move forward on that important 
and very successful initiative from the FCC.
    And then not to subject Alaska to the USEC rural health 
care rate setting database and have more transparency and 
timeliness on a lot of the issues that the previous Chairman, 
in my view, completely ignored and almost cratered the entire 
health care system in rural Alaska.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Alright. So that would be yes to a visit. 
Yes, to continuing to work with you on the Alaska plan. And 
yes, with respect to your concerns about the rural health care 
system and that data base. I have in fact stayed that database 
right now, so it is not in effect. I think we are going to have 
to figure out other ways forward, like I said to you yesterday 
that reduce waste and abuse, have appropriate transparency, but 
are ultimately mindful of the fact that these communications 
are essential for the health and safety of the people who rely 
on them.
    Senator Sullivan. Yes, some of the most vulnerable people 
in the country with very limited access to health care, a lot 
of them are my constituents.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Absolutely. Listen, I think, you know, I 
have been in a lot of rural Alaska bush villages where the 
health care facilities at the center of town, and but for that 
connection back to Anchorage, many of those people would not be 
able to see professionals. It is among the most essential 
health care in this country.
    Senator Sullivan. Thank you. And just real quickly, if you 
can comment very briefly on the discussion we had, with the 
infrastructure bill, USDA's initiatives, NTIA's initiatives, 
there is going to be an opportunity on more broadband 
throughout the country, particularly in rural communities. But 
I am concerned about the lack of coordination, waste, fraud, 
and abuse. Can you comment on that? I know that you guys 
recently put together an MOU with NTIA and USDA on these 
issues. They are important.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes. Like I think I have said a little bit 
earlier here today, we have an opportunity for generational 
change with the infrastructure bill. So we need to execute on 
it. And if two things stand out to me most, the first is we are 
going to need coordination about data and facts, so the FCC, 
which doesn't have a driving role in the bulk of these funds, 
is going to have to support every other organization in the 
Government that does and the states as well.
    In addition, I actually think we need really strong a 
countermeasures--accountability measures right out of the gate. 
It would be--the criticism I have had of previous FCC programs, 
we need to make clear exactly what kind of audits are happening 
and what kind of penalties exist for anyone who takes those 
funds and doesn't deliver.
    Senator Sullivan. Good. Thank you. Ms. Bavishi, I am sorry 
we didn't have our meeting yesterday. I look forward to meeting 
with you. Your position is enormously important to my state and 
my constituents. Two-thirds of the seafood harvested in 
America, two-thirds comes from Alaska. So we are the superpower 
of seafood, and NOAA is a really, really important partner in 
terms of surveys, in terms of stock assessments, in terms of 
clean and healthy oceans.
    And again, we haven't met yet, so I am going to withhold 
judgment. I am a little concerned about your background, which 
is impressive, but its focus on urban planning, climate 
resilience. I don't see a lot that is in the area of the core 
NOAA focus, which is so important to my state and my 
constituents. Can you comment on that?
    Ms. Bavishi. Well, thank you, Senator Sullivan. And I look 
forward to having a chance to connect directly. I enjoyed 
talking with your staff yesterday. You know, I want to start by 
just saying that I have previously worked at NOAA, and I worked 
at NOAA when the Deepwater Horizon oil spill happened, which 
really leveraged every part of the agency to jump into action. 
So I really got a crash course in the agency and really believe 
that I can hit the ground running, if confirmed.
    But I would also say that my work in climate resilience is 
so cross-cutting and really is focused on making sure we 
leverage the best available science wherever----
    Senator Sullivan. I am all for that transparency.
    Ms. Bavishi.--and apply that to decisionmaking, evidence 
based decisionmaking. And I believe that that work that I have 
done in communities across the country, including in Alaska. I 
mentioned in my testimony that when I worked at the White House 
Council on Environmental Quality, part of my portfolio was 
actually focused on the resilience of Alaska Native villages. I 
had a chance to visit to Shaktoolik and really appreciated 
being able to connect with Alaska Natives there and just 
appreciate the tremendous challenges that they face in 
maintaining their----
    Senator Sullivan. Good. Well I look forward--and I don't 
want to cut you off, I have one more question for Mr. Bedoya 
and so, but I do look forward to our meeting, and again, I 
apologize I had to cancel on that yesterday. Mr. Bedoya, I am a 
little--well, not a little, I am actually quite concerned. In 
2016, there was a tweet that you retweeted, and it was talking 
about the Presidential convention in 2016.
    A number of Senators on this committee, myself included, 
went to it. And the tweet said, ``I never thought I would see a 
televised Presidential convention that essentially was a white 
supremacist rally.'' That is a pretty strong view there. Look, 
we realize the FTC leadership structure is made up of partisan 
Commissioners, but this tweet and other tweets raise questions 
about whether you have the temperament, the maturity, the 
dispassionate views required of an FTC Commissioner in charge 
of over 1,100 employees.
    And I am sure a lot of those employees didn't see that 
Convention in 2016 as a white supremacist rally. How do you 
respond to my concerns about your temperament and judgment, 
meaning that you need to serve all Americans in this job?
    Mr. Bedoya. Absolutely, Senator. I appreciate the chance to 
speak to this. I think my record in the Senate as a staffer and 
at Georgetown speaks to this----
    Senator Sullivan. I am not--I am not asking about your 
record, I am asking about this tweet. Directly--and don't dodge 
me on it. Just address it. Maybe you are sorry. Maybe that 
wasn't really your viewpoint. Don't dodge the question. Tell me 
about your temperament, your maturity, your dispassionate views 
when you are essentially claiming half the country was at a 
white supremacist rally, which was the Convention that we had 
in 2016?
    Mr. Bedoya. Of course, Senator. I want to clarify, I do not 
believe the former President's supporters are white 
supremacists. They are part of my family. I love them.
    Senator Sullivan. So are you apologizing for that or what 
is your--are you taking that back? Are you saying that that was 
probably a mistake, maybe or something like that?
    Mr. Bedoya. Yes, sir. I don't think it is appropriate to 
call the entire convention a white supremacist rally. I do 
apologize for that. I was trying to clarify that I don't cast 
judgment on the former President's supporters. They are part of 
my family, an important part of my family and I hold them dear 
to me. The last four or 5 years affected my own family. My 
daughter has never met her great grandmother because of the 
travel ban. And I could give example as to why, as a private 
citizen and a law professor, I spoke out. But I pledge to you 
that if confirmed, it is my duty to do as I did as a Senate 
staffer, to set aside all those politics and serve every single 
person in the country, irrespective of political opinion and 
party. Yes, sir.
    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
    The Chairwoman. I see, Senator Tester. Are you ready, 
Senator Tester?

                 STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA

    Senator Tester. I am ready to rock. Thank you, Madam 
Chairman. I--the other folks can take a break because all my 
questions are going to be focused on FCC Chairwoman 
Rosenworcel. And thank you for all being here and thank you for 
being here, Jessica. I don't need to tell you that Internet 
access has always been a major challenge, and particularly in 
rural states like Montana. This pandemic has only exacerbated 
those challenges. Congress and the FCC, Montana schools have 
received $850,000 bucks for emergency connectivity funds. 
Doesn't sound like a lot, but it is a lot for Montana.
    Montana health providers received nearly $2.9 million 
through the FCC's telehealth program. As of this last Monday, 
we got about nearly 13,000 households in Montana that are using 
emergency broadband benefit program, and now we have got the 
Infrastructure Investment Jobs Act, which I am intimately 
familiar with because I am one of the 10 that helped negotiate 
it.
    We are going to see $65 billion in investments and 
broadband infrastructure there, which should close the digital 
divide in every state in the Union. And if you disagree with me 
on that, let me know. But the truth is, is this, how do you 
plan to coordinate with NTIA on implementation of the broadband 
provisions in the Infrastructure Investment Jobs Act?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator, for the question. And 
all those numbers, the legislation that was just signed into 
law on Monday is our best shot at closing the digital divide 
for this generation. So we are going to have to coordinate with 
the Department of Commerce, which has primary authority for 
those funds, like we never have before.
    I am keenly aware of that. We are going to have to make 
that a priority going forward. In anticipation of this 
legislation, we have already signed a memorandum of 
understanding with data sharing. And we have already shared our 
tower construction notification system with the Department of 
Commerce. But I want to open up all of our books and all of our 
information to them because it is the only way we are going to 
truly execute on these funds and really address the digital 
divide.
    Senator Tester. I will put you on the spot because I don't 
know that you can answer this question, but I do want to get 
your perspective. This bill was passed that was signed on 
Monday, from your seat on the FCC, how quick do you think we 
could get these dollars out?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. This is a really good question. I think I 
would probably need to do some review of the law itself. But I 
think that the Department of Commerce, if they were asking me 
for three pieces of advice, first I would say work with our 
data. Second, I would say, make sure that there are clear 
penalties upfront if anyone takes those dollars and doesn't 
perform. And the third is, I would say, I put some premium on 
the projects that are ones we can move on fast.
    Senator Tester. OK. Well, thanks. Look, we have got seven 
reservations, seven Indian reservations in Montana, and quite 
honestly, the investments in communication infrastructure there 
isn't where it needs to be. The FCC has a report, in fact, that 
says that 68 percent of the people living in rural areas of 
tribal lands don't have access to broadband. That is more than 
two-thirds of the people don't even have access. And tribal 
colleges and universities, often in Indian country, often pay 
more for slower Internet than other higher education 
institutions. So how is the FCC currently working with tribal 
communities to improve Internet access? And how can the FCC 
improve its tribal engagement process?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you for the question. Listen, it 
can't be that our native communities are the last communities 
to see the benefits of the digital age. But the numbers, like 
you describe, suggest that we have a real problem, and we have 
to take special action to address it. One thing the FCC has 
been doing is we have been issuing licenses in the 2.5 
gigahertz bands to tribes in rural areas across the country. We 
have issued more than 300 of them. This is a once in a lifetime 
opportunity to show up, get a license, and use that to serve 
your community.
    I think that is going to provide a real opportunity in days 
ahead. We have also--we are also midcourse in updating our 
policies to support tribal libraries. Not every tribal library 
can actually apply for eRate funds under the existing system. I 
am working with my colleagues right now to fix that. We are 
going to have to expand our engagement. We are already starting 
to do that on mapping. And then you mentioned tribal colleges. 
I know that we have close to three dozen of them in this 
country.
    Many of them are in rural locations. I think they punch 
above their weight when it comes to the service they provide to 
those students in their communities. I think we actually have 
to make a specialized effort to do more to ensure that they 
have full access to broadband so they can take advantage of the 
full opportunities of the digital age.
    Senator Tester. Jessica, thank you very much. I look 
forward to voting for your confirmation. Thank you.
    The Chairwoman. Thank you. Senator Blackburn.

              STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE

    Senator Blackburn. Thank you. Chairwoman, I would like to 
come to you first, and thank you for the time this week. I want 
to say thank you to or congratulate you on a successful auction 
that you just completed. So let's talk about spectrum because 
all these other issues cannot be resolved if we do not have 
spectrum that is needed and have that deployed. And we have 
just recently had a couple of things. We have--the NTIA has 
kind of gotten outside of their jurisdiction, I would say, when 
it comes to spectrum, and the FCC is working to clear more 
spectrum held by Federal agencies.
    We also have the issue with the FAA raising objections and 
questions that they have never raised through this entire 
process and slowing down the 5G systems. So when it comes to 
dealing with this commercial side of spectrum, let's talk about 
how you are going to approach that, how you are going to 
approach utilization, how you are going to keep agencies from 
squatting.
    We have issues over at the DOD. How you are going to deal 
with like the FAA, because spectrum is what is going to allow 
us to close the digital divide, to utilize wireless, to get 
Internet into areas where we cannot get fiber, so.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you. Our future is wireless, so 
these issues are really important for every aspect of civic and 
commercial life. And we are always going to be looking for new 
airwaves to put to use for our economy to increase innovation 
and enhance our quality of life. The challenge is that we are 
not--we don't have more airwaves out there. We have just got to 
allocate them smarter.
    And there has been a lot of back and forth between 
different Federal actors with allocations and the FCC and the 
NTIA. And I would just say going forward, we need a whole of 
Government approach to this and we need our engineers working 
in concert rather than at cross-purposes. So a few things that 
I think could help. First, I hope that the NTIA can actually 
speak as it is authorized to do so for Federal Government 
spectrum interests so that we can speak through NTIA, confident 
that they are acting on behalf of other Federal authorities 
with allocations. It would streamline our process. They should 
have that authority instead of having us have to talk to all 
these other authorities all the time.
    Second, I think we could revisit the memorandum of 
understanding between the NTIA and the FCC with maybe updated 
timelines or agreements about methodologies, testing what 
harmful interference looks like. And then third, this is maybe 
a long term project, but I think we have to start thinking 
about what the incentive structure is for existing spectrum 
allocations to Federal authorities. If we don't give them 
incentives to be efficient, they will only see loss rather than 
gain from reallocation.
    And we have to start getting smarter about building 
incentives on their side so that we can be more successful when 
we try to repurpose airwaves for commercial use.
    Senator Blackburn. I agree with you on that last part 
wholeheartedly. And going back to discussions we had when I was 
in the House and you were appearing before us, as you know, I 
think it is time for us to conduct an inventory of all spectrum 
that is allocated to different Federal agencies so that we know 
what is there, what is being used, what is not being used, and 
what we can then recoup and auction for commercialization.
    So I look forward to those conversations. Mr. Bedoya, I 
would like to come to you, please, sir. I had discussed with 
you the open app market legislation that Senator Blumenthal and 
Klobuchar and I have done, and you said that you wanted more 
time to look at that issue. So I just wanted to see if you had 
taken the time to look at it and how you would--what position 
you would take with that legislation and if you had changes 
that you would offer to that legislation.
    I will say Senator Blumenthal and I do think this is an 
important one to move forward because it is imperative that we 
have a competitive marketplace.
    Mr. Bedoya. Thank you for that question, Senator. I think 
it is a strong bill, and I think it is an important one and I 
will tell you why. In that very first Senate hearing that I 
staffed on smartphone geolocation, we looked at app 
marketplaces. And this tradeoff that the platforms say they 
offer is, well, you know, we will make sure the apps in the 
marketplaces are safe and secure, and that is why we need to 
protect our walled gardens.
    But what we found, and admittedly, it was 10 years ago, but 
the marketplaces had been open for several years, is that in 
one of the marketplaces, not one app had been removed for the 
failure to adequately protect geolocation information, despite 
problems being rife on geolocation and sharing of that data in 
a non-consensual manner. And so I believe----
    Senator Blackburn. So do you like the bill or not?
    Mr. Bedoya. Of course, Senator. I am sorry, yes, very much.
    Senator Blackburn. OK, yes or no is really good there. Yes 
and we will look forward. Let's see, it is Mr. Venkataraman. 
Did I pronounce it right?
    Mr. Venkataraman. Yes, Venkataraman.
    Senator Blackburn. Say that one more time.
    Mr. Venkataraman. Venkataraman.
    Senator Blackburn. Venkataraman. Yes, I didn't know which 
syllable had the emphasis, so I thank you for that. I do have a 
question for you. In the interest of time, I will submit it for 
a written response. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    The Chairwoman. Thank you, Senator Blackburn. Next, we will 
go to Senator Rosen.

                STATEMENT OF HON. JACKY ROSEN, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA

    Senator Rosen. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. I really 
appreciate this hearing today. I am very excited for all the 
nominees to come forward and serve the country. Pleased to have 
you with us today. But I am going to start with broadband 
mapping and maternal mapping because one of the lessons that we 
have learned during the pandemic is how critical it is for all 
Americans to have access to affordable broadband. That is why I 
am so glad this week that President Biden signed into the law 
bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which has a 
historic investment in broadband access and affordability. But 
among other things, broadband access has allowed us to connect 
to telemedicine. It is decreasing disease exposure, and in-
patient demand is really moving up.
    And so that is fantastic. So telemedicine is not always a 
perfect substitute for receiving a physical evaluation. It is, 
however, useful in assessing whether or not patient does need 
in-person treatment, and physicians have observed that 
telemedicine patients were more likely to keep their 
appointments. You can also keep pregnant and new mothers safe 
while accessing the care that they need. In rural areas, 
especially throughout Nevada, lack of access to medical care 
can lead to severe complications and worse outcomes for 
pregnant women.
    That is why earlier this year, Senators Fischer, Young, 
Schatz, and I introduced the bipartisan Data Mapping to Save 
Moms Lives Act, which would direct the FCC to consult with the 
CDC to incorporate data on maternal health outcomes into the 
FCC's broadband health maps to show where poor broadband access 
and high rates of poor maternal health outcomes, or to see 
where they overlap and that we know where telehealth services 
mainly are needed most.
    So, Chairwoman Rosenworcel, can you discuss the importance 
of mapping the overlap of health outcomes with broadband access 
as a way of taking a holistic approach of addressing maternal 
and infant mortality? Of course, and if confirmed, we know 
black women, indigenous women are more than three times more 
likely than white women to die from pregnancy related causes. 
Will you help us address these gaps?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes, Senator. The short answer is 
obviously yes. The United States is the only industrialized 
country with a rising level of maternal mortality. It is an 
incredible shame, and it affects women of color especially 
hard. It also affects women in rural areas because more than 
half of our rural counties no longer have a maternity ward. 
During my time as a Commissioner at the agency, I visited with 
the University of Arkansas Medical School and also the Mayo 
Clinic to talk about the technologies they can use with 
broadband to help monitor pregnant women who are most at risk. 
They are incredible. They are available. Those technologies 
exist today, and they are all dependent on broadband.
    So the more that we get broadband to more people in more 
places, the more we will be able to use those tools to address 
it. And I think the kind of multilayer mapping you are 
contemplating where we think about a problem we have, what 
technology solutions we have, and overlay them on our Nation's 
broadband map is going to be precedent for also thinking about 
other problems even beyond health care and maternal mortality.
    Senator Rosen. I hope we are going to do a little something 
with COVID-19 and some of the outcomes there are too as we move 
forward. So thank you for that. I want to move on to notorios 
scams. So, Mr. Bedoya, I would like to ask you a few questions 
about those, questions that I posted to the current FTC 
Commissioners when they testified before the Committee in 
August. As you know, Nevada is home to thousands of immigrant 
families who make up the mosaic and beauty diversity of my 
wonderful state, and of course, our Nation. And nearly 30 
percent of the Nevandans' identify as Hispanic or Latino.
    And unfortunately, some of these members communities go 
through a process to become American citizens, and far too 
often they are just a target of scammers, and they pose to help 
them through the challenging process. We know one form of 
deception is the notorios scam. And so were they--public 
notaries claim to act as attorneys, and they really do take 
advantage of our community.
    So in the interest of time, I know that you had some 
campaigns about this, but if you are confirmed to the FTC, what 
kinds of outreach do you think we should do to help protect 
people, so they don't become individual victims of these 
notorios scams?
    Mr. Bedoya. Thank you, Senator, for that question. And I 
will share that a student of mine, this happened to a student 
of mine. He wrote about this and how his family was cheated out 
of a lot of money that they didn't really have by one of these 
notorios. Senator, I think it is critical that the Commission 
help people regardless of the language they speak.
    I think one of the unsung accomplishments of Chair 
Ramirez's tenure was her work with the staffer named Monica 
Vaca to run conferences called Common Ground Conferences, where 
they went to Spanish-speaking communities and made sure they 
were in touch with local law enforcement, State Attorneys 
General to prepare people and put them on the lookout for a 
notorios.
    And one of the things I pledge to you to do, if confirmed, 
is to make sure this work is continuing not just in Spanish, 
but, you know, in New Mexico, might be Dine, in Minnesota it 
might be Hmong, making sure that everyone in this country, 
regardless of the language they speak, is protected against 
fraud.
    Senator Rosen. Thank you. I appreciate that. Of course, in 
the interest of time, I have some questions on 
telecommunications for the deaf and hard of hearing. I will 
submit those for the record. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    The Chairwoman. Senator Lee.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE, 
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH

    Senator Lee. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Bedoya, I would 
like to speak with you for a moment if that is alright. I 
appreciated the time you and I spent about 2 weeks ago, and you 
were kind enough to give me some time and answer my questions. 
Now there were a lot of questions I had, and these are the 
kinds of questions that kind of need to be answered. There are 
some of them as to which you didn't have complete answers, 
understandable in some ways, but there has been--a couple of 
weeks have lapsed since that conversation.
    So I am hoping today that I can get some answers on some 
basic questions, just things that are not gotcha's, things that 
ought to be able to be answerable with a yes or a no. So I 
would appreciate if you can give me a yes or a no answer in 
response to each one of these, because they are necessary. 
First of all, can you commit that if you are confirmed, you 
will be committed to enforcing the consumer welfare standard 
under precedent as it now stands?
    Mr. Bedoya. Senator, I commit to enforce the law, and I 
emphatically support your efforts to ensure that the standard 
include not just price but output, quality, choice, innovation. 
There are critiques of how the standard is applied and I have 
been thinking about our conversation----
    Senator Lee. And Mr. Bedoya, I just encourage you. I need a 
yes or no answer here and then you can supplement afterwards 
with any supplemental information. I think I heard you say you 
follow precedent and----
    Mr. Bedoya. Of course.
    Senator Lee.--including precedent on the consumer welfare 
standard?
    Mr. Bedoya. Yes, as we are bound to, I believe.
    Senator Lee. Should the FTC use its Section 5 rulemaking 
authority when it comes to unfair methods of competition, under 
Section 5?
    Mr. Bedoya. Yes. I do believe that if the Commission is to 
be called on to police big tech, it needs every tool at its 
disposal. I do believe that the structure and history of----
    Senator Lee. Again, I have got a very limited time here, so 
I would appreciate the yes or the no. You agree with the FTC's 
recent decision to rescind the 2015 antitrust enforcement 
statement as the antitrust policies of 2015?
    Mr. Bedoya. With respect to vertical merger, Senator?
    Senator Lee. Yes.
    Mr. Bedoya. This one, I want to think more about. My 
specialty is privacy, but I would like to have the benefit of 
staff. That said, I will say I am acutely concerned with 
vertical integration on technology platforms.
    Senator Lee. And again, I am asking for a yes or no 
question. I guess you are not--I will take that to mean you are 
not prepared to answer that one with a yes. Should the FTC be 
focused on enforcement and adjudication rather than on 
expansive rulemaking?
    Mr. Bedoya. I believe that it is charged by Congress to do 
both. But I think the meat and potatoes of the work is 
enforcement, but where Congress has given the Commission 
express authority, I think it is important they use it as 
necessary to----
    Senator Lee. Yes. Again, I am looking for a yes or no. 
These are not gotchas. These are very simple answers that can 
and should produce a binary result. So should it be focused on 
enforcement and adjudication rather than expansive rulemaking, 
is that a yes or no?
    Mr. Bedoya. Yes, primarily enforcement. Adjudication when 
necessary.
    Senator Lee. Thank you. Now, despite the fact that Rohit 
Chopra has left the Commission, now Chair Khan is still voting 
for him by proxy. You give yourself a de-facto majority, 
despite there being only four Commissioners at the FTC at the 
moment. Do you support the use of proxy votes for former 
Commissioners on current proceedings, even after those 
Commissioners have left the FTC?
    Mr. Bedoya. I have not read into that, Senator. I would 
like the chance to read into that and get back to you in 
writing if possible.
    Senator Lee. Thank you. Should the FTC exercise only power 
that has been delegated to it by Congress expressly?
    Mr. Bedoya. Yes, sir.
    Senator Lee. Thank you. Can the FTC use its rulemaking 
power to circumvent legal precedents with which it disagrees?
    Mr. Bedoya. I don't think that's a good idea, Senator.
    Senator Lee. So that us a no, that is a no. The FTC 
recently voted with a vote of three to two to eliminate 
procedural rules related to Section 18 of Magnuson-Moss with 
regard to rulemaking authority. Do you support this decision?
    Mr. Bedoya. I can't speak to the decision to rescind it, 
but I do believe that it is appropriate for them to exercise 
the authority under--that was granted to it by Congress under 
Magnuson-Moss, sir.
    Senator Lee. Are there any limits to the rules that the 
Commission has the authority to promulgate or should promulgate 
under 6(g) of the FTC Act? That is, to define unfair or 
deceptive trade practices or unfair methods of competition.
    Mr. Bedoya. With respect to UDAP, you would have to go 
under Magnuson-Moss, I believe, and the restrictions are 
extensive. You can only do prevalent practices and there yet--
so, yes----
    Senator Lee. So there are limits. OK.
    Mr. Bedoya. Yes.
    Senator Lee. Now, the FTC only recently voted to require 
the support of only a single Commissioner to open 
investigations, as opposed to the practice of having a majority 
of Commissioners. Do you support that decision?
    Mr. Bedoya. I support the agency having every tool at its 
disposal to police consumer protection and competition. You 
know, the principle----
    Senator Lee. Not an answer to this question though. I 
understand that answer, but that is not answering this 
question. Do you support that particular decision that I am 
describing, to allow things to proceed rather than with a vote 
of the majority of the Commissioners, just put the single 
Commissioner approving?
    Mr. Bedoya. For investigations, yes, sir.
    Senator Lee. OK. I see my time has expired. I appreciate 
your trying to answer the questions. I really do believe each 
one of these questions could and should be subject to a 
reasonable yes or no answer. I haven't gotten that today. I 
should have gotten that, and that is deeply concerning to me. 
Thank you.
    The Chairwoman. Senator Warnock.

              STATEMENT OF HON. RAPHAEL WARNOCK, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA

    Senator Warnock. Well, thank you so very much, Madam Chair. 
And I want to thank Senator Lujan for letting me get ahead of 
him today. Chairwoman Rosenworcel, it is great to see you again 
and thank you so much for coming to Jackson County, Georgia 
just last week at my invitation. I think it was an important 
conversation. It gave us an opportunity to hear directly from 
rural Georgians about the importance of broadband, the 
challenges they are having, and how best to get the job done 
with respect to the signing yesterday--a couple of days ago, 
the bipartisan infrastructure bill.
    And you and I had some great conversations there and you 
got a chance to talk face to face with Georgians on the ground. 
But I was particularly struck by one conversation we had with a 
third year medical student. You will recall he was a student at 
the Morehouse School of Medicine. And he said that because his 
house had such low speeds, he had to drive to a friend's house 
to finish his homework, his medical school homework.
    Obviously, we need that student to be helping us make our 
way through the remainder of this pandemic, and he is trying to 
get online to do his medical school homework. We also heard 
from a parent about how the Internet is so slow that if both 
she and her daughter are trying to log on, neither of them can 
get anything done. She is a nurse practitioner online. She 
needs to do broadband work or her daughter needs it to study, 
and they can't be online at the same time. I think this is a 
travesty. I think broadband is to the 21st century what 
electricity and electric lights were to the 20th century.
    The lack of reliable broadband is hurting our kids, is 
hurting vital services like telehealth, is hurting our economy. 
If confirmed, will you commit to working with me and others to 
support the big goal of connecting every single household in 
Georgia, but particularly our rural areas in Georgia and all 
across the country to broadband? And can you speak to where 
that will fit in your portfolio of priorities?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator, for the question and 
the invitation to join you in Georgia last week, which wasn't a 
hardship assignment. And the folks we met with, you know, they 
all told stories that stay with you. I can't imagine being in 
medical school and couch surfing just because that is what you 
needed to do to go to class during a pandemic.
    Though I have some conviction he is going to be an awfully 
good doctor 1 day. But the bottom line is, this is our moment. 
It is like what rural electrification was in the prior century. 
We are going to do something audacious. We are going to connect 
every household in this country, and we are not going to stop 
until we get 100 percent of us with fast, reliable, and 
affordable broadband.
    And I think we should say it that clearly and that simply 
because it has to be our goal. That is how we are going to 
produce more equity in this country and more opportunity, not 
just in that corner of Georgia, but throughout the entire 
nation.
    Senator Warnock. Thank you. And I was honored to be there 
with you as we talked and heard directly from these families. 
And the broadband issue, as you know, it is multi-tiered. We 
are talking about accessibility. We are talking about 
affordability. We are talking about access to devices to 
actually take advantage of broadband. Families need devices--
couldn't get online, but some can't afford laptops and tablets.
    And when working families are struggling to afford monthly 
bills, they don't have hundreds of dollars is lying around to 
purchase a device. In fact, about 4 in 10, 4 in 10 lower income 
families don't have a laptop or a tablet at home. Do you agree 
that ensuring that all families have access to laptops and 
tablets is a critical component to closing the digital divide?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes, I do.
    Senator Warnock. Thank you so much. I agree, obviously, and 
that is why I introduced the Device Access for Every American 
Act. This bill would provide essential devices like laptops and 
tablets for free to low income families so that parents and 
kids can access opportunities for work, school, health and 
more. I am so glad that this legislation is part of the Build 
Back Better package, and I am going to work really hard until 
we get it signed into law. I look forward to working with you 
in the future to making sure that everybody is connected.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Absolutely, thank you.
    Senator Warnock. Thank you.
    The Chairwoman. Thank you. Senator Cruz.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS

    Senator Cruz. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am going to direct 
my questions to Mr. Bedoya. Mr. Bedoya, the Biden 
Administration has nominated a number of extreme nominees, 
radicals who have advocated for abolishing the police, two of 
the senior officials currently at the Justice Department, a 
banking regulator who trained in the Soviet Union and advocates 
nationalizing the banks and wants to bankrupt thousands of 
businesses across America.
    And unfortunately, Mr. Bedoya, as I look at your record, 
you fall firmly in that line. I see the record of someone who 
has been a left wing activist, a provocateur, a bomb thrower, 
and an extremist. So I want to take a minute to explore your 
views. You know, I took a look at Twitter. You have been very 
active on Twitter. Tell me, Mr. Bedoya, what are your views on 
ICE?
    Mr. Bedoya. Thank you for that question, Senator. I have, 
as a law professor called attention to what I see as Fourth 
Amendment violations in ICE's face recognition searches, and 
these are measures that have triggered bipartisan oversight 
by----
    Senator Cruz. OK, let's be clear. I am not talking about 
the things you say when you are wearing a suit and tie, talking 
about Fourth Amendment violations, I am talking about what you 
angrily tweet out to the world. I refer you to a tweet from 
February 26, 2021, ``it is time to call ICE what it is, an out 
of control domestic surveillance agency that peers into all of 
our lives.'' That is not just simply a comment about an 
abstract Fourth Amendment issue.
    And let's be clear, you also have on April 10, 2021, a 
tweet which is certainly not lacking in subtlety, it is a tweet 
that says, ``Maryland police have no business working with ICE. 
Maryland police have no business working with ICE. Maryland 
police have no business working with ICE. Maryland police have 
no business working with ICE. Maryland police have no business 
working with ICE.''
    So apparently, you are calling on State law enforcement to 
refuse to cooperate in any way with Federal immigration 
enforcement? How do you explain these tweets? Is that--are you 
with the more radical members of the squad in the House and are 
you an advocate for abolishing ICE?
    Mr. Bedoya. I am not, Senator. That last message was 
rhetoric. The bill that was posted in support of was a bill to 
require the Government to get a warrant before scanning 7 
million Maryland driver's faces. Won the support of one of the 
most prominent Republicans in our Senate, Senator Christopher 
West.
    And so I have occasionally used rhetoric, sir, but I have 
worked with you and your staffer when I was a staffer in 2013. 
The bill that I helped draft to help the separated children 
act, you co-sponsored as an amendment, and so I emphatically 
believe that if confirmed, I can and will work across the 
aisle, set aside my politics to help your constituents and 
those across the country.
    Senator Cruz. Well, let's talk a little bit more rhetoric. 
Let's take a look at June 23, 2018, another tweet you sent. In 
this case, you are blasting a fellow Democrat, ``decorum,'' 
directed at Steny Hoyer, the House Whip, ``thousands of Latino 
kids still forcibly separated from their parents, some in 
cages, and you go on CNN to ask for decorum from members of the 
Hispanic Caucus. You should apologize to those members and to 
the Latino community.'' So you are blasting not just ICE, not 
just Federal law enforcement, but you are also blasting 
Democrats who are not sufficiently extreme to your liking when 
it comes to immigration. Is that right?
    Mr. Bedoya. Senator, I think family separation was a 
horror. The kids at the border looked like my cousins.
    Senator Cruz. So you were really troubled by the kids in 
cages under President Trump?
    Mr. Bedoya. And as I was troubled with what happened to 
children in certain circumstances under the prior 
Administration.
    Senator Cruz. Have you said one word about the kids in 
cages and the Joe Biden cages? The cages are bigger, they are 
more full. Have you said a word about it since it was a 
Democrat President putting kids in cages?
    Mr. Bedoya. Senator, respectfully, I believe I have in 
certain circumstances criticized immigration policy under the 
current Administration.
    Senator Cruz. Have you said a word about the Biden cages, 
or is that rhetoric only directed at your political opponents?
    Mr. Bedoya. I can't say whether I have used the word cages, 
but I do believe I have been critical of Democrats and 
Republicans alike. And I believe Democrats and----
    Senator Cruz. You believe you have been critical of 
Democrats and Republicans alike. That is your sworn testimony 
today?
    Mr. Bedoya. Yes, and I believe the message you referred to 
with respect to Leader Hoyer speaks to that.
    Senator Cruz. Alright. Here is another one you are 
retweeting Joy Anne Reid, where she says, ``We are learning 
daily the ugly consequences of having had a white supremacist 
Administration.'' Do you embrace the practice of the far left 
of blasting their political opponents as white supremacists? 
And do you think that kind of rhetoric is suitable for what is 
supposed to be an independent agency enforcing the law?
    Mr. Bedoya. Senator, I don't recall sharing that I don't 
believe the prior Administration was a white supremacist 
Administration. I have worked with Democrats and Republicans 
alike on the Senate Commerce Committee----
    Senator Cruz. OK, well you retweeted it and I will enter 
the tweet in the record. I am going to ask about one final one, 
which is something else you retweeted where it was actually I 
gave a speech where I said ``critical race theory is bigoted, 
it is a lie, and it is every bit as racist as the klansmen in 
white sheets.'' And you retweeted some fellow named John B. 
King with a GIF of slamming the door. I take it you disagree 
with the proposition that the critical race theory is bigoted. 
So, tell us your views on critical race theory?
    Mr. Bedoya. Senator, Secretary King's great grandfather was 
enslaved in Gaithersburg, Maryland, and I believe his point was 
that that history should be taught in schools. I don't recall 
that specific message, but I don't know if I have a top line.
    Senator Cruz. Do you agree with the propositions of 
critical race theory that America is fundamentally racist, that 
all white people are racists, that our institutions are 
irredeemably racist?
    Mr. Bedoya. Senator, I do not believe all white people are 
racist. I don't--I haven't given great thought to critical race 
theory before this hearing, sir, but I emphatically do not 
think all white people are racist and I can't recall the other 
provisions of your question, sir.
    Senator Cruz. So, Madam Chair, I would ask unanimous 
consent that the tweets that I referred to be entered into the 
record.
    The Chairwoman. Without objection.
    [The information referred to follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
                                 ______
                                 
                                 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                 
                                 ______
                                 
                                 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                 
                                 ______
                                 
                                 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                 
                                 ______
                                 
                                 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                 

    The Chairwoman. Senator Lujan.
    Senator Lujan. Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner 
Rosenworcel, as I said in my opening statement, it is 
refreshing to finally be having a hearing as we are having a 
conversation about the importance of having a five member 
Federal Communications Commission. The importance of what I 
hope will be a confirmed NTIA Director as well. The importance 
of having a full FTC as well, given all the challenges that 
this committee has had before it, whether it be the revelations 
with The Wall Street Journal, with Facebook and the importance 
of protecting children, the importance of privacy in the work 
that has been done.
    And I just want to say thank you to the Chair and the 
Ranking Member for bringing this hearing before us. And I look 
forward to the other hearings where it is my hope that the 67 
members that supported the bipartisan infrastructure package 
that sent $65 billion to the Department of Commerce, namely the 
NTIA that they will move swiftly as well to confirm an NTIA 
Director so we can get that money into our communities. But I 
want to highlight some of the work that still needs to be done 
to protect consumers in New Mexico and make all forms of 
connectivity more affordable, resilient, and secure for 
families in my state, particularly in rural and tribal 
communities.
    Promoting affordable, resilient, secure broadband should be 
at the core of the FCC's mission. But Congress has not 
clarified jurisdiction, particularly the user privacy. The FTC 
just completed a report on the privacy practices of Internet 
service providers that gives more evidence that Congress must 
move comprehensive privacy legislation. So my question is both 
for Chairwoman Rosenworcel and for Mr. Bedoya. Chairwoman 
Rosenworcel, yes or no, do you commit to this committee to 
protect consumer privacy, including ensuring that tech 
platforms and Internet service providers recognize their duty 
to secure and minimize use of individual identifiable 
information?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator, for the question. The 
answer is yes.
    Senator Lujan. Mr. Bedoya, the same question.
    Mr. Bedoya. Yes, sir. Absolutely.
    Senator Lujan. Traditional local communities in New Mexico 
have challenges when it comes to access, access to high speed, 
affordable broadband. Commissioner Rosenworcel, you know this 
best. You actually rode on a bus with me in rural New Mexico, 
which was retrofitted so students could access the internet. 
And we are now seeing the deployment of more of this across 
America. Bus drivers like it because students are more 
attentive. Students like it because they are able to get work 
done as well. It has also become more difficult for us to 
access local news and understand developments in our own 
communities, particularly for families that speak Spanish at 
home.
    Newspapers, radio, and television can no longer rely on ad 
revenue that has largely shifted to Facebook and Google. And as 
we have seen in this committee, local trusted voices are 
difficult to hear through all the noise where misinformation is 
often the loudest. And the social media companies are doing 
much worse with bringing accountability to non-English 
language, namely Spanish language, when it comes to 
misinformation. What can the FCC do to support local 
broadcasters and local newspapers so that they continue to 
serve the needs and interests of our communities in New Mexico 
and around the country?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator, for the question. It 
is really important for our democracy that we all get the news 
that we need to make decisions about the communities where we 
live. And I think that goes to the heart of spectrum licenses 
for broadcasting because the duty under law is for those 
licenses to serve the community that they are in. And I think 
the FCC, over time is going to have to figure out more ways to 
encourage them to use that license to truly serve that 
community, because that is a resource we have for news in the 
world today and we need to make sure that we support it.
    Senator Lujan. I also have been an advocate for diversity 
in media ownership. I worked with Senate colleagues now and I 
worked closely with G.K. Butterfield, a member of the U.S. 
House of Representatives, in this space, and it is another 
conversation I hope that we can have going forward.
    I recently was in Catron County in Southwestern New Mexico, 
a population of about 3,500 in the county in the small town of 
Reserve, which has between 350 and 500 people living there. 
Some of the folks that came to chat with me get their Internet 
from a satellite connection, but they are subjected to data 
caps. And they are not the only ones. Some of my constituents 
who received access to the Internet through their phones or 
through other subscriptions are often subjected to these data 
caps. I think it is a technology of the past in the same way, I 
don't believe people should be paying for long distance calls 
anymore. I think that is preying on older Americans who 
predominantly are still using that service when they could make 
a free call from a mobile device if they have both in their 
home. And we should also look to modernize revenue streams when 
it comes to USF.
    And I think that there are some ways that we can get to the 
bottom of making access to the Internet more affordable and 
modernizing this so that we can keep people from having to make 
choices, especially when it comes to not using their Internet 
connection for telehealth or students with education or 
teachers trying to support those students. So I am hopeful we 
can get that done. And Madam Chair, I do have several other 
questions. I will submit them to the record. But I do want to 
thank Mr. Bedoya, again, for coming forward.
    The other three questions that I have, sir, are all for 
you. I want to again say thank you for the work you have done, 
especially in the area of facial recognition and what has led 
really to Facebook finally admitting that they should not have 
been collecting that data here in the United States and they 
are taking it down. But I do look forward to a full functioning 
FTC and especially again reminding the FTC Commissioners that 
are here. I incorrectly said earlier it was two, four plus Mr. 
Bedoya, who I hope will be five soon, on getting to the bottom 
of what is happening with fuel prices, especially given the 
letter that President Trump--or sorry, President Biden recently 
sent. So I just want to thank everybody for that. Thank you, 
Madam Chair.
    The Chairwoman. Thank you. Senator Lummis.

               STATEMENT OF HON. CYNTHIA LUMMIS, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING

    Senator Lummis. Thank you, Madam Chairman. My questions are 
primarily for Chairwoman Rosenworcel. So thank you for being 
here today. Wyoming is one of the states that has had to start 
developing its own broadband map as a direct result of the 
FCC's slow pace in releasing maps. So what is your message to 
states like Wyoming that are creating their own maps?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator, for the question. For 
too long, the FCC collected data for its maps based only on 
census blocks, and we would make this assumption if there was a 
single subscriber to broadband in a census block in Wyoming, 
well then inevitably service would be available throughout. And 
you don't have to be much of a statistician to know that is not 
correct. And when Congress passed the Broadband Data Act and 
then authorized funds, you gave us the ability to really 
improve on that.
    I am now working through the Government procurement process 
to secure a broadband service for location fabric with geocoded 
data about every single structure in this country where we can 
build broadband. So we are going to do a whole lot better, but 
I know we are not going to do it by ourselves.
    We actually have to have outreach to states like Wyoming 
and others to make sure that they are collecting information 
about what is going on in their backyard that actually works 
with the methods and standards that we have at the Federal 
level. We are starting that outreach right now. In fact, we are 
working with some tribes, which might include the State of 
Wyoming to do that.
    And I am optimistic that if we work together on this, we 
are going to have data sets that are radically superior to 
anything the FCC has had in the past.
    Senator Lummis. Well, thank you. We will look forward to 
working with you on that. As you know, the country that wins 
the 5G race will determine the standards and security of 5G 
infrastructure throughout the globe. We are in jeopardy of 
losing the 5G race and need mid-band spectrum to launch ahead 
of our competition. So will you commit to move quickly to 
establish new 12 gigahertz rules, if you find coexistence is 
possible between terrestrial and satellite users in the band?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Senator, I absolutely agree with you about 
mid-band spectrum. And in fact, we are coming to the end of our 
auction of the 3.45 to 3.55 gigahertz band right now as I 
speak, and mid-band spectrum is the sweet spot where we are 
going to grow our 5G economy. We do have a proceeding on the 12 
gigahertz band. There are a lot of engineering issues, as you 
alluded to there, and we are combing through it from front to 
back because we want to be really careful about further 
terrestrial deployment in this band, making sure there is no 
interference to satellite services that may use it today.
    Senator Lummis. I am going to jump now to some issues about 
the Universal Service Fund. I have heard from service providers 
in my state that are being squeezed by big tech and big 
streaming companies that are taking up to 75 percent of the 
pipe in rural broadband networks without contributing to the 
Universal Service Fund. So in this case, the video streamers 
get the revenue, and the rural broadband operators get the 
costs that can't be passed on to subscribers because of 
affordability concerns in high cost rural areas. And the--my 
friend from New Mexico, Mr. Lujan, just alluded to some of the 
issues related to the service fund as well. What are your 
thoughts about expanding the base of services that contribute 
to the Universal Service Fund?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you for the question. This has come 
up before, so I apologize if my answer is a little repetitive. 
Congress established that fund back in 1996, which was a long 
time ago, and clearly many of the services you are describing 
weren't a part of our communications mix back then. I think 
that this needs a fresh look, and I think expanding it, like 
you described, is a discussion we should have. It would require 
legislation from this Congress to do so.
    Senator Lummis. Well, we would look forward to having a 
report that studies the unrecovered cost of the middle mile, 
and who should pay for the Universal Service Fund and what 
costs should be covered by the USF. So I will look forward to 
working with you on that. Now in Wyoming, we are concerned--I 
better check my time.
    I am getting close to the end here. In Wyoming, we are 
concerned about the use of taxpayer dollars to overbuild 
networks where there is already service, when there are areas 
of our state that have no service. Same issue is raised 
recently in New Mexico. So with that in mind, coordination 
between the FCC, NTIA, and USDA is important to avoid the 
overbuild because they all have programs that support broadband 
deployment. How would you characterize the coordination between 
these agencies, and are you concerned about this issue?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes, we are getting started. As I have 
mentioned before we started, we signed a Memorandum of 
Understanding with those agencies. We have got to work with 
them more carefully, more often, and better in light of the 
recent infrastructure legislation. And if confirmed, I would be 
certainly willing to do so.
    Senator Lummis. Thank you, and I apologize for the 
repetitiveness of my questions. I suspect they are repetitive 
because they are important to more than just Wyoming, but I 
think that is an indication that we look forward to working 
with you on these issues and others. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 
I yield back.
    The Chairwoman. Senator Sinema.

               STATEMENT OF HON. KYRSTEN SINEMA, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA

    Senator Sinema. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you to 
the nominees for joining us today. This week, President Biden 
signed into law the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and 
Jobs Act. I was proud to work with Senator Portman, the White 
House, Chair Cantwell, and many of my colleagues on both sides 
of the aisle to pass a historic law that includes our boldest 
investment ever in closing the digital divide. The bipartisan 
infrastructure law invests $65 billion in broadband deployment, 
affordability for low income families, digital inclusion, and 
specific programs for broadband expansion in rural and tribal 
areas.
    The Federal Communications Commission has an important role 
to implement and oversee the IIJA, and Arizonans expect a lot 
to be implemented in a fair and expedient manner to benefit our 
communities. So my first question is for Chair Rosenworcel. I 
have appreciated your work to improve connectivity in Arizona, 
particularly for telehealth, for students learning remotely 
during the pandemic, and for tribal communities.
    Our bipartisan infrastructure law provides a significant 
investment in broadband deployment, with Arizona set to receive 
hundreds of millions of dollars to expand access to broadband 
internet. This is crucial for Arizonans living in rural and 
tribal areas. But in order to allocate these broadband 
investments, the FCC needs to finally update its broadband maps 
to determine which areas of the country do not have access to 
high speed broadband. So could you provide an update on the 
FCC's mapping process and tell us when these maps will be 
complete?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator, for the question. The 
Broadband Data Act was passed into law in 2020. When I took 
over at the agency, the first thing we did was set up a 
broadband data task force. We procured computer processing 
power so that we could actually take in all this data and start 
manipulating it for updated maps.
    We set up a system to make sure that we have a 
statistically valid way for States like Arizona, towns in 
Arizona, and consumers to actually challenge any of the data 
that our carriers provide us with. And right now, we are 
working to finally procure and resolve a broadband serviceable 
location fabric, which will feature every buildable location in 
the United States. That is part of an ongoing Government 
contracting project that we are working very fast to finish. 
And as soon as we finish that, we are going to proceed with new 
data which will form new maps.
    My goal is to make that all available to the NTIA and 
others who have broadband authority as a result of this 
infrastructure legislation, because I know that that data is 
absolutely vital for them to make smart choices with the new 
funding they have from that bill.
    Senator Sinema. Thank you, Chair Rosenworcel. Given your 
experience on the FCC working to expand broadband and close the 
digital divide, what other advice do you have for States as 
they distribute the broadband funding that they will receive 
through this bipartisan bill?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. You know, this is a terrific question. I 
appreciate that you are asking. First, I would encourage them 
to even come talk to us. We can tell them about what data and 
information we have. I am going to encourage them also to think 
creatively about the different entities that might be able to 
apply for these funds, which would include some nontraditional 
actors like rural electric co-ops. And then they are going to 
have to think beyond just the last mile and look at middle mile 
and other activities that can increase redundancy and 
competition in the state.
    Senator Sinema. Turning to Mr. Bedoya, Arizonans value 
their privacy, and they don't want their data used for 
malicious purposes, they don't want their data breached. And 
since 2005, data breaches have cost Arizonans over $1 billion.
    You know, Arizonans also want Congress to work together to 
develop bipartisan solutions to major issues. And there are 
reports the Federal Trade Commission is considering opening a 
rulemaking for data privacy, where the Commission would act 
without Congress passing new legislation to set Federal privacy 
policy. If you are confirmed as a Commissioner, would you 
support such an approach, and why or why not?
    Mr. Bedoya. Senator, I would support a rulemaking on unfair 
methods and deceptive practices. And if it extended to data 
security, I would emphatically hope, if confirmed, to work with 
you and your staff to make sure that your concerns are 
addressed. But I do agree that it is preferable for Congress to 
pass a law. Unfortunately, if that doesn't happen, I want to 
make sure that your constituents and everyone else in the 
country is protected, but I very much would like to work with 
you on this question. I know you are a leader on it, 
particularly with respect to seniors.
    Senator Sinema. I am turning back to Chair Rosenworcel. 
Prior to this hearing, the Committee approved bipartisan 
legislation that I developed with Senator Susan Collins, the 
Anti Spoofing Penalties Modernization Act.
    Our bill doubles the existing penalties for individuals who 
provide misleading or inaccurate caller identification 
information. I frequently hear from my constituents in Arizona 
who have been defrauded or who are just annoyed by unsolicited 
calls and robocalls, and they are particularly troubling when 
they are spoofed to look like they are coming from a neighbor 
or a local business. Do you support our legislation and how 
will it complement other FCC efforts to address the issue of 
scam callers?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes, robocalls are incredibly annoying, 
and among the most annoying are the ones that are spoofed to 
look like their family and friend who is calling you so you are 
compelled to pick up the phone and answer. Those scams are 
increasing, and I appreciate the legislation that you have 
brought to this committee, which will increase the fines. That 
is terrific. It will help us as we proceed with enforcement 
activity. But as you mentioned, there are other things we are 
doing to cut down on spoofing. By requiring stir shaken 
technology to be built into our IP networks at the network 
level, we are engaged now in call authentication practices that 
should help cut down on this activity over time. But the mix of 
enforcement and technology might be the way that we are going 
to actually be able to tackle these troubling calls.
    Senator Sinema. Thank you. And Madam Chair, my time has 
expired. Thank you for holding this hearing.
    The Chairwoman. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Sinema. I 
will now take my questions. I don't know if anybody else is 
going to join us, but I thank the witnesses. I know it has been 
a long morning already. But I think there are important issues 
to put onto the record in one fashion or another.
    Mr. Venkataraman, I am going to ask you to submit something 
for the record about commercial service leveraging its 
expertise for U.S. manufacturers on the supply chain. We had a 
hearing on obviously our legislation that is being considered, 
USICA, and also had some supply chain witnesses who submitted 
very lengthy answers, which was very helpful for us in 
developing legislation. So we would ask you to submit a very 
lengthy answer on what and how the commercial service could be 
used on the expertise of helping U.S. manufacturers navigate 
the supply chain.
    And Ms. Bavishi, we definitely support the new National 
Culvert Removal Replacement Restoration Grant Program that was 
part of the legislation just passed and signed into law by the 
President. NOAA scientists are salmon and habitat experts, and 
if confirmed, we want to know how you will help with NOAA 
expertise at the Department of Transportation to support this 
culvert grant program, so if you could help us with that. So 
lots to talk about. My colleagues did a great job of bringing 
up lots of issues, which I am very happy about. You can see we 
have a very active committee, very large and active committee, 
and lots to do.
    So I will start with you, Commissioner Rosenworcel. We 
talked about--a lot of questions about the mapping, starting 
with my colleague, Senator Wicker, down to the last person who 
asked questions, Senator Sinema. So I think the key thing I am 
looking for here is current mapping available by the FCC. What 
flaws do you see in it?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. What flaws do I see in the current maps? A 
whole lot. For more than a decade, the FCC practice has been to 
assume if there was a single subscriber in a census block, 
service was available throughout. So it systematically 
overstated service. And as a result, there are areas in the 
country where we just assume service was, but people on the 
ground will tell you, no, it is not here.
    And so we haven't been always sending our support 
structures and our support systems to the right places as a 
result of those flawed maps. So instead of thinking about 
geographies through census blocks, we have to now think of it 
on a buildable by location, by buildable location basis. 
Because if we don't actually go to that level of granularity, 
our precision will continue to miss communities that are going 
to need assistance, including from the most recent 
infrastructure legislation.
    The Chairwoman. I am glad you said that last phrase, 
because what word would you use for the current mapping?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Well, I recall that Senator Tester said 
that they stink, so maybe I will just quote him.
    The Chairwoman. Well, I definitely think they are 
ludicrous. And I think it led us to making some pretty 
erroneous decisions here. And that is that the mapping that 
Microsoft and others have done in a collaborative fashion that 
is down to the actual household level show us that the majority 
of the problem we have with broadband is affordability.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. It is a very big problem
    The Chairwoman. It is not access. Access is a problem. But 
the majority of the problem, 65 to 70 percent is affordability, 
not the challenges that we face--I want to deal with both, but 
I certainly don't want to shortchange the affordability 
equation in urban areas where people that somewhere we are 
seeing from the Microsoft mapping, that around $50,000 a year, 
you are not investing in broadband because you can't afford it. 
So we can keep going on this ludicrous path here and acting 
like we are solving the broadband problem, or we can actually 
get down to business and solve the broadband problem. But if we 
spend $65 billion and in 10 years from now we still have all 
these people in this unaffordability category.
    The reason I mention it and I am so passionate about it is 
that we also see a nexus here. We see these counties in the 
United States of America with the worst broadband service also 
having the biggest COVID problems. Why? Because maybe we 
couldn't communicate with people. We are not communicating 
effectively with people. And so I just think that the pandemic 
has showed us that we got to get serious about these maps. We 
have got to get serious about urban broadband deficiencies. We 
got to get serious about the reason why people don't have 
broadband and we can't move in some way of spending these 
dollars until we get serious about this.
    So I look forward to working with you on that and I 
appreciate your work. I know you have been to my state. I know 
what you care about affordability. I know you care about the 
rural issues. And we care about that. We care about that too. 
We have a lot of--we are probably better than most states. We 
still have problems, but we are better than most states. But 
got to solve this problem. So, Mr. Bedoya, I would like to turn 
to you. Now, let me just say I, my colleagues--you know, I 
served on Judiciary for 2 years and I learned that lots of 
college professors say things in their professional career that 
they definitely get questioned about when they come for 
positions here.
    And so I also believe that you have a right to express 
yourself. So I think your commitment to continue to serve as--
on the FTC and work on a bipartisan basis, I take your comments 
wholeheartedly and hope that that is what you will be able to 
achieve. I want wanted to--our colleagues brought up this issue 
of privacy many times in the discussion, and I think the issue 
for me is that when we think about where we have started--I 
should start for a second. Let's go to the FTC authority 
actually on manipulation. We authored and wrote anti-
manipulation language that we were successful in getting into 
the FERC, getting into the CFTC, and getting into the FTC.
    We did that after the Enron crisis because manipulation of 
electricity markets had caused havoc in my State and people 
wanted us to pay and be the deep pockets for that. And then we 
saw the same instances, because we are an isolated oil market--
Washington, Oregon, California often have the highest gas 
prices in the Nation because we are an isolated market. All of 
that supply coming from Alaska, so it is hard to impact it. But 
we did have instances when those markets, people we believe, 
were holding supply outside of the United States to just drive 
up costs. I literally had a provider of home heating oil 
testify before the Energy committee that they thought that they 
had the ability to do this and then tried to blame it on the 
Jones Act.
    And I pointed out to them they did not have the ability to 
hold supply outside the United States just to artificially 
create a shortage and jack up prices. So I want to know if you 
will use this FTC authority. I don't know what is happening in 
this instance as it relates to supply, but I definitely want it 
to be investigated by the FTC.
    Mr. Bedoya. Senator, absolutely, yes. I know this is a 
priority for you, and I know that you worked hard to get that 
authority to the Commission, and they issued rules and you are 
eager for enforcement. And I am absolutely committed to do 
everything I can, if confirmed, to move that forward. Yes, 
ma'am.
    The Chairwoman. Well, this is why I think you need an 
aggressive FTC and because for many years, people told us that 
this was not an antitrust issue. We said, well, we don't think 
they are collaborating. We just think, you know, that 
manipulation of supply or moving it outside the country can 
create artificial shortages. And when you look at all the 
schemes that Enron did, get shorty, fat boy, they were all 
about moving supplies somewhere else so that they would create 
a shortage. In fact, we had one instance where people said they 
were--they had to shut down a plant, and then we actually saw 
the actual data from Region 10 that they were still up and 
running when they said they were shut down, which is why they 
said that there was a shortage.
    So look, I believe in aggressive enforcement here and 
appreciate that. OK, back to privacy. So lots of my colleagues 
asked about privacy, and we have a lot of real-world situations 
now that the information age has grown in, you know, many ways, 
probably beyond what people could have even imagined 10 years 
ago. And so now we need a strong privacy law. Chairwoman 
Rosenworcel brought up this dilemma about even the FCC's 
enforcement of privacy as it relates to these agreements on 
binding arbitration.
    And I want to ask you about that because to me, when you 
have victims of domestic violence who really have stalkers who 
are stalking them and you have software that literally enables 
people to help stalk them, or when you say you were having kids 
sign up and now you have kids signing up to binding arbitration 
agreements, what do you think we need to do here to make sure 
that we are standing up for the privacy rights of individuals 
and giving them protection besides binding arbitration that 
they may or may not have to pay for?
    So I don't think a privacy law saying, well, let's go into 
the conference room with the Facebook lawyer that you are 
paying for is the right solution for our privacy woes. And 
having a private right isn't about getting in the box with a 
Facebook lawyer that you may have to pay for on top of it. So 
could you give me your views on that?
    Mr. Bedoya. Definitely, Senator. I think, you know there is 
a place for arbitration in the American legal system, where 
there is two sophisticated corporate entities being able to 
resolve a complex matter quickly and expeditiously. I do not 
think that that is the place where consumer rights should be 
enforced for the reasons you mentioned. You know, arbitration 
typically involves repeat players and oftentimes the players 
who use it the most, i.e., the companies, get to choose the 
forum or pay for the forum.
    And as a result, I think there are serious bias issues. I 
did some work of this on my time in the Senate specifically to 
prevent this kind of thing occurring with respect to sexual 
assault. And I think it is critical that consumers have every 
right available to them and are able to defend that, generally 
speaking, in court.
    The Chairwoman. We saw this Ninth Circuit decision based on 
the driving technology, where the court said, yes, like if you 
are empowering people to monitor how fast they are doing this 
and driving, yes, it was an incentive, in this case for people 
to, you know, drive even faster.
    And so to me, this is a question of if you have these 
technologies that basically are enabling stalking and then 
basically they use them for stalking of domestic violence 
cases, and then you say, that is the limitation, you want them 
to go into a binding arbitration with the company, it hardly 
feels like a fair day in court for the American consumer, 
particularly women who are so much the victims of these kinds 
of stalking attacks.
    Chair Rosenworcel, do you want to comment on this further 
since you brought this case up about the Supreme Court and what 
you think we need to do here?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Well, with respect to the wireless 
location accuracy issues that you described, I know that the 
FCC has enforced against wireless carriers on these issues. I 
just want to say that I agree with the FTC nominee on those 
things. We need to address them. But with respect to consumers, 
you can't have two unequal parties sitting in a room trying to 
resolve something through binding arbitration. I think it puts 
consumers at an extraordinary disadvantage. It just can't be 
the best our legal system can produce.
    The Chairwoman. Well, my sense is there may be issues of 
just, hey, you didn't remove my name from your list in time.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. There is a lot of--yes, you know, there is 
too much that goes on. Sometimes when I think about the number 
of boxes I tick on an app or a device, or as I scroll through 
some information simply to get a service or to get shipping, 
I--you know, you have that brief moment where you recognize you 
might be giving away a whole lot of rights. And it feels to me 
that even though I have been trained as a lawyer, I am not 
reading it. I don't know how most of us are dealing with this 
on a day to day basis, but this is not a system that feels 
especially fair.
    The Chairwoman. Well, it is deceptive--I think it has 
definitely changed in the risk, and the risk that is involved.
    Ms. Rosenworcel. It puts the risk back on the consumer.
    The Chairwoman. Yes, but I am saying it has changed 
dramatically in the enabling of the technology and what it 
actually does. Mr. Bedoya, do you see a line here where 
somewhere, you know, along the harm or along the damage that is 
done? I mean, I also think of data breaching and the fact that 
data breach, you know where your identity and financial 
wherewithal and lots of things can be ruined. Is there 
somewhere you think that we should try to change this? I heard 
your answer to the question of whether we should--you might 
consider a rulemaking here, but what do you think? What do you 
think we should do in trying to address this issue?
    Mr. Bedoya. Thank you for that question, Madam Chair. If we 
are talking about this issue of stalking apps, I think there is 
a couple of things, both targeted and slightly broader. One is 
relentless focus, to be honest with you. It is really a shame 
that this is still an issue, you know, 10 years later, when 
back when I first started working on this, I do think the 
Commission had a critical action recently on this. I would love 
to see more of them. I would love to see more work with 
organizations like the National Network to End Domestic 
Violence, Violence Free Minnesota at the State level, and 
others.
    More broadly, though, I think it is important to recognize 
that harms--we can try to remedy them after the fact. But part 
of preventing them, which I think is everyone's goal, is to 
make sure that the sensitive data that can be used to 
facilitate tragic things like cyber stalking, stalking apps--
and also there need to be rules for the road for and 
protections for. And for example, when it comes to geolocation, 
the ease with which this information can be collected, shared, 
bought, sold, breached facilitates these kinds of harms.
    And so it is important to not just go after the targeted 
harm, but also understand the ecosystem that facilitates it and 
put rules of the road to prevent those harms from occurring in 
the first place, ma'am.
    The Chairwoman. Well, I definitely want to prevent them 
from occurring in the first place. But what kind of rights 
should consumers expect if there has been major harm done to an 
individual?
    Mr. Bedoya. Senator, in my opinion, the right to their day 
in court, to make sure that they have the ability to take their 
rights and defend them to court and ensure their privacy is 
protected. Oftentimes, you know, law enforcers have a lot of 
things they have to worry about, and sometimes privacy harms 
don't go to the top of that list. And so I think that is 
critical in my view.
    The Chairwoman. Does the FCC have the ability to put out a 
new rule on this, Chair Rosenworcel?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. I think I would have to study with our 
General Counsel's Office and get back to you on that.
    The Chairwoman. OK, would you do that for us for the 
record?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Absolutely.
    The Chairwoman. Would definitely appreciate an answer here. 
I do think that there are people who wish that all of these 
entities would be under the same rules. And so that is, you 
know, an issue as well. And as I said, I think there is some--a 
lot of my colleagues have been working on legislation for a 
long time in these areas of just good data hygiene and good 
consumer, you know, information you should be giving to 
consumers.
    And then I think we are just negligent if we don't try to 
figure this out and get some rights for consumers because I 
think you are not going to contain the continued growth of 
these activities if you don't have some strong deterrence. And 
you know, we can see this in so many different aspects. You 
know, I truly believe the information age is a great time to be 
alive, but I also think that we have to figure out how to 
harness it and make it work for us and not work against us. And 
there are certainly some examples where it can work against us. 
And that is what we need to do, our job up here with the 
agencies that we are talking about.
    Mr. Bedoya, I will just end with this. I know you joined us 
remotely because you had someone in the family, someone in your 
household who tested positive. And I hope your son is doing 
well and just appreciate you participating today in the 
hearing. I think that concludes unless we have any other 
witnesses, I mean any other members who want to come and ask 
questions, but I don't believe so.
    At today's hearing, I want to ask all the nominees Chair 
Rosenworcel, Mr. Bedoya, Ms. Bavishi, And Mr. Venkataraman, if 
confirmed, will you pledge to work collaboratively with this 
committee, provide thorough and timely responses to our 
requests for information as we put together and address 
important policy issues, and appear before the Committee when 
requested?
    Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes.
    Ms. Bavishi. Yes. Absolutely.
    Mr. Venkataraman. Yes.
    The Chairwoman. OK. Mr. Bedoya that was a yes--we are----
    Mr. Bedoya. Yes, ma'am.
    The Chairwoman. OK. Senators will have until Monday, 
November 22nd at noon to submit questions for the record to the 
Committee, and witnesses will have one--Senators will have 
until Monday the 22nd to submit questions for the record, and 
witnesses will have one more week to respond to that. So that 
concludes our hearing.
    Again, thank you. Probably one of the longer hearings we 
have had, but certainly appreciate everyone's participation 
today. Thanks.
    [Whereupon, at 1:19 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                            A P P E N D I X


[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                                 ______
                                 
                          Communications Workers of America
                                  Washington, DC, November 15, 2021

Hon. Maria Cantwell,
Chair,
U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington DC, 20510,

Hon. Roger Wicker,
Ranking Member,
U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Washington, DC.

Dear Chair Cantwell and Ranking Member Wicker,

    On behalf of the members and officers of the Communications Workers 
of America (CWA), I am writing in strong support of the nominations of 
Jessica Rosenworcel to serve as Chair of the Federal Communications 
Commission (FCC) and Gigi Sohn for Commissioner. Not only will they 
continue to lead the FCC into the future by encouraging the equitable 
deployment of next-generation broadband networks, they will also ensure 
that the concerns of workers and consumers are the top priority.
    As Commissioner and Acting Chair at the FCC, Rosenworcel has fought 
steadily to ensure access to telecommunications services for all 
Americans. For example, Rosenworcel's work has drawn attention to 
problems with the FCC's collection of data on broadband access. She has 
advocated that in order to close the digital divide, we must have 
access to broadband maps and data that are accurate and reliable. This 
ensures that when broadband access is expanded, it reaches all 
communities, not just some. Further, Rosenworcel has been a champion 
for the protection and expansion of the Lifeline program, which 
connects low-income households to critical telecommunications services. 
She understands that these programs are especially important during 
public health and economic crises like those taking place right now.
    Beyond her understanding of the policy issues, Rosenworcel has 
intimate knowledge of the families and workers behind the policy 
because she takes the time to understand both. Prior to the pandemic, 
Rosenworcel was an advocate for closing the Homework Gap by addressing 
the issue that millions of students take homework home from school but 
don't have the Internet access to complete it. She has been working on 
creative solutions to this issue for years, and since the pandemic has 
widened this gap, this work remains a top priority. Additionally, she 
has engaged CWA members in dialogue to provide perspective on the 
telecommunications issues that are hitting the communities we serve the 
hardest.
    Throughout her career, Gigi Sohn has been a staunch advocate for 
the expansion of affordable Internet access. During the T-Mobile/Sprint 
merger, Sohn was a key ally in the fight to protect the jobs of the 
working families who ultimately ended up being harmed by the merger. 
She believes in fighting to ensure that workers are protected first and 
foremost. Additionally, she supports efforts to hold broadband service 
providers accountable through state regulatory oversight. Her voice, 
experience and expertise are just what the FCC needs.
    The leadership exhibited by these two women focus on greater 
opportunity, accessibility, and affordability in our communications 
services, especially broadband services. Further, their tireless 
advocacy on behalf of workers and consumers has never been more 
important. I strongly urge you to swiftly advance the nominations of 
Jessica Rosenworcel and Gigi Sohn to serve as the next Chair and 
Commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), as they 
are exactly the kind of leaders we need in this moment.
    Thank you in advance for your consideration.
            Sincerely,
                                                 Dan Mauer,
                                    Director of Government Affairs,
                               Communications Workers of America (CWA).
                                 ______
                                 
                   International Association of Fire Chiefs
                                   Chantilly, VA, November 15, 2021

Hon. Maria Cantwell,
Chairwoman,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.

Hon. Roger Wicker,
Ranking Member,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.

Dear Chairwoman Cantwell and Ranking Member Wicker:

    On behalf of the nearly 12,000 members of the International 
Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), I would like to express my strong 
support for the nomination of Jessica Rosenworcel to the office of 
Chairwoman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Through her 
current role as Acting FCC Chairwoman and her distinguished career in 
the communications policy, Acting Chairwoman Rosenworcel has been a 
strong ally of public safety.
    As a staff member on the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation, Commissioner Rosenworcel played a key role 
in facilitating the passage of The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job 
Creation Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-96). This legislation provided the 
necessary 20 MHz of spectrum in the 700 MHz band and $7 billion to 
build a nationwide broadband network dedicated to the mission 
requirements of public safety. It also created the First Responder 
Network Authority (FirstNet), as an independent agency in the U.S. 
Department of Commerce. In the years since, FirstNet has fulfilled the 
9/11 Commission Report's recommendations to improve interoperability 
and establish a nationwide public safety wireless broadband network.
    Through her years as an FCC Commissioner, Acting Chairwoman 
Rosenworcel has distinguished herself as someone who clearly 
understands public safety and how to balance its needs with the many 
important policy objectives before the FCC. As Acting Chairwoman, she 
helped advance proceedings related providing accurate z-axis 9-1-1 
location information to public safety. This information will save first 
responders' lives and reduce the time and effort needed to locate 9-1-1 
callers in need of assistance.
    During her tenure as Acting Chairwoman, Rosenworcel also has worked 
to ensure first responders retain the usage of 4.9 GHz spectrum. In 
October 2020, the FCC issued an order adopting a state-by-state leasing 
framework that would have set up a patchwork regulation of 4.9 GHz 
spectrum. Acknowledging the concerns of public safety, Acting 
Chairwoman Rosenworcel led the effort to place a stay on last October's 
order. This stay was issued by the Commission in May and under Acting 
Chairwoman Rosenworcel's leadership the FCC unanimously rescinded the 
state-by-state leasing rules for the 4.9 GHz band on September 30.
    The IAFC strongly believes that if confirmed, Acting Chairwoman 
Rosenworcel will continue to ensure that public safety has the 
telecommunications resources it needs to best leverage emerging 
technologies to keep those we serve safe. Thank you for your continued 
support of public safety and we appreciate your consideration of this 
important matter.
            Sincerely,
              Fire Chief Kenneth W. Stuebing, BHSc, CCP(f),
                                         President and Board Chair.
                                 ______
                                 
Hon. Chuck Schumer,
Senate Majority Leader,
Washington, DC.

Hon. Maria Cantwell,
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation,
Washington, DC.

Hon. Mitch McConnell,
Senate Minority Leader,
Washington, DC.

Hon. Roger Wicker,
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation,
Washington, DC.

November 16, 2021

Dear Senate Majority Leader Schumer, Minority Leader McConnell, Chair 
            Cantwell and Ranking Member Wicker,

    We are writing to urge the swift and concurrent confirmation of 
Jessica Rosenworcel and Gigi Sohn for the Federal Communications 
Commission and Alan Davidson for the National Telecommunications and 
Information Administration. These agencies urgently need Senate-
confirmed leaders to address the critical need for affordable and 
resilient access to the open Internet in the midst of a global pandemic 
and worsening climate crisis. Through bipartisan infrastructure 
legislation, Congress has given these agencies enormous tasks on tight 
deadlines. These exceptional nominees' appointments so late in the year 
means there can be no delay in confirming them and getting started in 
earnest on all of that urgent work.
    These three nominees each bring decades of experience, a commitment 
to the public interest, and the skills necessary to fulfill the 
missions of these agencies.
    Jessica Rosenworcel's tenure at the FCC makes her an exceptional 
pick for FCC Chair. She is a respected and principled advocate with a 
proven record of fighting for the public interest. She has long 
championed efforts to ensure everyone in America, particularly 
schoolchildren, have affordable and reliable high-speed broadband to 
provide them with the tools they need for a successful future. 
Chairwoman Rosenworcel's efforts to close the ``homework gap'' embody 
that commitment. As Acting Chair, she quickly and successfully launched 
the Emergency Broadband Benefit, a program that is now helping millions 
of Americans afford access to the internet.
    For over 30 years, Gigi Sohn's priority has been ensuring that 
modern communications networks are available to everybody, regardless 
of who they are or where they live. Her life's work has embodied the 
standard on which the FCC bases its decisions: the public interest. She 
served as a top aide to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and helped found and 
lead a non-profit focused on promoting an open and competitive 
communications and technology market. She has a proven record of 
bringing together varied stakeholders, including public interest 
advocates and companies, in bipartisan coalitions to fight for 
equitable broadband policies, consumer protections, competition and the 
open internet.
    Alan Davidson has over 20 years of experience in government, 
industry and public interest advocacy, making him an ideal candidate to 
take up the interagency work of the NTIA, and to guide not only NTIA's 
existing spectrum allocation and broadband policy work, but also its 
greatly increased grantmaking and coordinating role in implementation 
of the bipartisan infrastructure bill's broadband funding provisions.
    Even before the pandemic struck over 21 months ago, 2019 Census 
data showed that nearly 80 million people in the U.S. did not have 
adequate broadband at home.\1\ According to that data, poor families 
and people of color are disproportionately disconnected--only 48 
percent of low-income households had a fixed broadband connection at 
that time, and 13 million Black people, 18 million Latinx people and 
1.3 million Indigenous people lacked this kind of adequate home 
connectivity.\2\ Digital divide indicators like education and income 
disparities demonstrate that many Asian American and Pacific Islander 
(AAPI) communities and ethnic groups are also disproportionately 
impacted, and some AAPI communities and individuals with reduced 
English proficiency levels may adopt broadband at lower rates than the 
national average.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ See Comments of Free Press, FCC GN Docket No. 20-269, at 4 
(filed Sept. 18, 2020), https://www.freepress.net/sites/default/files/
2020-09/free_press_2020_section_706_inquiry_com
ments.pdf.
    \2\ See id.
    \3\ See Asian Americans Advancing Justice, Telecommunications and 
Technology Fact Sheet, https://advancingjustice-aajc.org/sites/default/
files/2020-02/Lifeline%20Backgrounder.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    At the same time communities across the country are facing more 
frequent extreme weather events due to the climate crisis, and those 
events are taking down crucial communications infrastructure on an 
increasingly regular basis.
    And while Congress passed historic legislation to address broadband 
affordability and accessibility for both urban and rural communities in 
the midst of the pandemic, the FCC and NTIA's ability to administer 
these Congressional directives--as well as their ability to promote 
affordability, competition, privacy, sound spectrum policy, and network 
resiliency along with other consumer protections using existing 
authorities--has been limited by the deadlocked FCC and the lack of an 
Assistant Secretary at NTIA.
    Any delay in confirming all three of these nominees will stall 
progress on achieving those goals and ensuring that everyone in the 
United States is able to access robust, affordable high-speed internet.
    We urge you to confirm these three public-interest champions before 
the Senate recesses at the end of the year. Thank you for your 
attention to this urgent matter.
            Sincerely,

18 Million Rising
Access Humboldt
Akaku Maui Community Media
Alliance for Community Media
American Library Association
Appalshop Community Media Initiative
Benton Institute for Broadband & Society
Branford Community Television
California Center for Rural Policy
California Clean Money Campaign
Capital Community Media
CATS Community Access Television Services
Center for Accessible Technology
City of New Bedford Cable Access--New Bedford, MA
Color of Change
Common Sense
Communications Workers of America
Communities Closing the Urban Digital Divide
Community Media Access Collaborative
Decode Democracy
Demand Progress Education Fund
Democracy for America
Derry Community Access Media
Duluth Public Access Community Television
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Engine
FC Public Media
Fight for the Future
Free Press Action
Friends of the Earth
Granby Community Access and Media, Inc.
The Greenlining Institute
Greenpeace USA
Hawaii Consumers
Illinois for Educational Equity
Indivisible Sacramento
Institute for Local Self-Reliance
Libraries Without Borders U.S.
Local TV, inc
Lynn Community Television
Massachusetts Community Media dba MassAccess
Media Alliance
Media, Inequality & Change Center
MediaJustice
Melrose Massachusetts Television
Movement Alliance Project
Mozilla Foundation
National Association of the Deaf
National Consumers League
Native Public Media
The New Hampshire Coalition for Community Media
Newark for Educational Equity & Diversity
North Shore TV
NTEN
OD Action
The OMNI Centre for Public Media, Inc.
OMNI Productions
Open MIC (Open Media and Information Companies Initiative)
Open Technology Institute
OpenMedia
Orion Neighborhood Television (ONTV)
The Other 98%
Our Revolution
PhillyCAM
Presente.org
Progress America
Public Knowledge
Revolving Door Project
RootsAction.org
Salem Community Television, Salem NH
Salina Media Connection; Community Access TV of Salina, Inc.,
San Diego Futures Foundation
Tahoe Truckee Media
Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Inc. (TDI)
TURN--The Utility Reform Network
United Church of Christ Media Justice Ministry
Valley Shore Community Television Inc.
Western New York Library Resources Council
Winchester Community Access & Media, Inc.
Writers Guild of America West
X-Lab
                                 ______
                                 
                          National Hispanic Media Coalition
                                                  November 16, 2021

Hon. Maria Cantwell,
Chairwoman,
U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.

Hon. Roger Wicker,
Ranking Member,
U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.

Dear Chairwoman Cantwell and Ranking Member Wicker:

    On behalf of the National Hispanic Media Coalition (NHMC), I write 
to support the nomination of Jessica Rosenworcel to the Federal 
Communications Commission (FCC) and urge for her quick confirmation. 
The NHMC is a 35-year-old nonprofit 501(c)(3) civil rights organization 
that was founded to eliminate hate, discrimination, and racism towards 
the Latinx community. We are proud to support the nomination of Jessica 
Rosenworcel because of her tireless efforts to close the digital divide 
impacting Latinx, BIPOC, and other vulnerable communities.
    As the current acting Chairwoman of the FCC, Rosenworcel led 
efforts to address broadband affordability and accessibility 
impediments. In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, she successfully led 
the deployment and outreach efforts for the Emergency Broadband Benefit 
(EBB) program, which provided Internet access to numerous Latinx 
households across the United States. With over a third of Latinx 
households lacking access to the internet, the EBB program proved 
essential as Internet access became increasingly vital to our work, 
education, healthcare, and other daily activities. On August 27, under 
Chairwoman Rosenworcel's leadership, the FCC was able to announce that 
five million households enrolled in the EBB program.
    Additionally, Chairwoman Rosenworcel's work to close the ``Homework 
Gap,'' demonstrates her steadfast dedication to provide adequate 
resources to educate our Nation's youth. Through the E-Rate program, 
Chairwoman Rosenworcel worked to guarantee our schoolchildren have 
reliable access to broadband and online resources for their studies. 
Her leadership and advocacy efforts for the public interest make her an 
exceptional nominee for the FCC Chair position.
    The NHMC supports the nomination of Chairwoman Rosenworcel to the 
FCC and urges her quick confirmation. We look forward to her future 
efforts to close the digital divide by providing equitable, affordable, 
and reliable Internet access for our Latinx households and other 
marginalized communities. If you require additional information or have 
any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Georgina Zamora at 
[email protected] or (626) 792-6462. Thank you in advance for 
your attention to this matter.
            Sincerely,
                                  Brenda Victoria Castillo,
                                                   President & CEO,
                                     National Hispanic Media Coalition.
                                 ______
                                 

                                 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                 
                                 
                                 ______
                                 
                                                  November 11, 2021
Re: Confirmation of Alvaro Bedoya

Dear Chair Cantwell and Ranking Member Wicker:

    We are former leaders of the Federal Trade Commission--including 
past Chairs, Commissioners, Bureau Directors, and other senior staff--
writing in support of the nomination of Professor Alvaro Bedoya to 
serve as Commissioner.
    Professor Bedoya is eminently qualified for the position. He worked 
to safeguard consumer privacy as Chief Counsel of the U.S. Senate 
Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law upon the 
Subcommittee's creation in January 2011. In that role, Professor Bedoya 
began working with Commission leadership and staff, inviting the 
Commission to testify at oversight hearings probing the Nation's 
leading technology companies. Under Professor Bedoya's leadership, the 
Subcommittee focused on geolocation technology and biometrics, and 
Professor Bedoya developed a reputation for rigor, fairness, and 
bipartisanship.
    After the Senate, Professor Bedoya founded the Center on Privacy & 
Technology, at Georgetown University Law Center. At the Center, 
Professor Bedoya led groundbreaking research into the accuracy and 
disparate impact of face recognition technology, co-authoring a study 
that helped reshape public attitudes toward the technology and led the 
National Institute of Standards and Technology to establish the first 
comprehensive bias audit of leading face recognition algorithms. More 
broadly, the Center has focused on the disparate impact of different 
forms of tracking on historically marginalized groups, reframing 
contemporary privacy debates to include an emphasis on civil rights.
    The Commission is charged with enforcing more than eighty consumer 
protection laws in addition to the Federal Trade Commission Act. 
Leading the agency requires intelligence, experience, and judgment. We 
believe that Professor Bedoya has each of those attributes and would be 
a welcome addition to the Commission. We urge his confirmation.
            Sincerely,

William Baer, Director of the Bureau of Competition (1995-1999), 
Attorney Advisor to the Chairman and Assistant General Counsel for 
Legislation and Congressional Relations (1975-1980)

Joan Z. Bernstein, Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection (1995-
2001)

Richard Feinstein, Director of the Bureau of Competition (2009-2013), 
Assistant Director of the Bureau of Competition (1998-2001)

M. Eileen Harrington, Executive Director, Federal Trade Commission 
(2010-12); Acting Director Bureau of Consumer Protection (2009)

Heather Hippsley, Chief of Staff, Federal Trade Commission (2013-2017); 
Deputy General Counsel (2017-2020)

Jon Leibowitz, Chair, Federal Trade Commission (2009-2013), 
Commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission (2004-2009)

Terrell McSweeney, Commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission (2014-
2018)

Edith Ramirez, Chair, Federal Trade Commission (2013-2017), 
Commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission (2000-2013)

Jessica Rich, Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection (2013-
2017); Deputy Director, Bureau of Consumer Protection (2010-2013)

Howard Shelanski, Director of the Bureau of Economics (2012-2013), 
Deputy Director of the Bureau of Economics (2009-2011)

Andrew Smith, Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection (2018-2020)

David C. Vladeck, Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection (2009-
2012)

Joel Winston, Associate Director, Division of Financial Practices 
(2000-2005 & 2009-2011), Director of the Division of Privacy and 
Identity Protection (2005-2009)
                                 ______
                                 
                                             Public Citizen
                                  Washington, DC, November 16, 2021

Hon. Maria Cantwell, Chair,
Hon. Roger F. Wicker, Ranking Member,
U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.

Dear Chairwoman Cantwell and Ranking Member Wicker:

    On behalf of Public Citizen's more than 500,000 members and 
supporters nationwide, we write in enthusiastic support of the 
nomination of Professor Alvaro Bedoya as a commissioner for the Federal 
Trade Commission (FTC). Professor Bedoya will bring a wealth of 
experience and expertise in technology and privacy policy to the FTC.
    Public Citizen is a nonprofit advocacy organization focused on 
curbing corporate power and protecting democracy. We represent the 
public interest through legislative and administrative advocacy, 
litigation, research, and public education on a broad range of issues 
including protecting privacy, safeguarding consumers, and curbing 
corporate concentration's impact on our democracy.
    It is a critical time for the FTC, and Professor Bedoya's track 
record of working in a bipartisan way to address complex issues can 
make a powerful difference for America. Over recent decades, the FTC 
has lapsed into chronic underenforcement resulting from anti-consumer 
case law, resistance to bringing cases, and a revolving door to 
industry that casts public doubt on the agency's commitment to serious 
enforcement. As Big Tech companies have grown in power and influence, 
the FTC has not done enough to rein in this power or stop privacy 
abuses, children's privacy breaches, discriminatory data practices, and 
other harms stemming from unchecked concentration.
    Professor Bedoya's depth of experience and expertise in the field 
of privacy and civil rights make him an ideal choice for the FTC. He 
currently serves as a law professor and the founding Director of the 
Center on Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law School. He 
previously served as the first Chief Counsel of the Senate Judiciary 
Subcommittee on Privacy where he worked on a range of privacy issues 
and brought much needed attention to the threats of technology and data 
collection. His leadership in in the field includes his report, The 
Perpetual Line-Up was the first to comprehensively point out the race, 
gender, and age biases in facial recognition technology and his 
lecture, Privacy as Civil Right, which has been recognized as a leading 
treatise on the intersection of privacy and civil rights. A naturalized 
citizen born in Peru and raised in upstate New York, Professor Bedoya 
graduated summa cum laude from Harvard College and holds a J.D. from 
Yale Law School, where he served on the Yale Law Journal.
    Moreover, Professor Bedoya demonstrated a commitment to addressing 
the abuses of Big Tech companies, particularly when those abuses have a 
disproportionate effect on communities of color. The Color of 
Surveillance conference, which he spearheads at the Georgetown Center 
on Privacy and Technology, is a must-attend event for the privacy 
community. The event brings together individuals harmed by private and 
government surveillance, academics, and advocates and creates a space 
where attendees feel empowered and uplifted despite the challenges the 
conference presents.
    He is also a recognized leader in the Latino community, co-founded 
a college scholarship that has awarded $1 million to immigrant and 
first-generation students, and serves on the boards of leading 
organizations advocating for immigrant rights including CASA and the 
Hispanic Bar of D.C.
    Professor Bedoya's expertise and experience as a leading scholar on 
privacy and technology make him the clear choice to serve as a 
Commissioner on the FTC. We urge you and the committee to support 
confirmation of his nomination.
            Sincerely,
                                              Lisa Gilbert,
                                          Executive Vice President,
                                                        Public Citizen.
                                 ______
                                 
                               National Grocers Association
                                        Wahington, DC, May 10, 2022

Dear Senator:

    I am writing on behalf of the National Grocers Association (NGA) to 
express our support for the nomination of Alvaro Bedoya to the Federal 
Trade Commission (FTC). Mr. Bedoya is a strong advocate for much-needed 
antitrust enforcement to ensure a competitive playing field in the 
grocery marketplace. We believe he will deliver results for consumers, 
workers, and independent businesses who rely on the benefits that flow 
from free and fair competition. Therefore, we encourage all Senators to 
support his nomination to the Commission.
    NGA represents independent community grocers across the country, as 
well as their wholesaler partners. The approximately 21,000 independent 
grocers in America are the true entrepreneurs of the grocery industry, 
passionately committed to their customers, employees, and the markets 
they serve. And they are at the heart of local communities, where they 
provide jobs and boost tax revenue while bringing choice, convenience, 
and value to hard-working Americans.
    In recent decades, NGA has witnessed a small handful of companies 
amass incredible power and influence over the food supply chain. Today, 
dominant retail companies and e-commerce giants wield unprecedented 
economic power with little to no antitrust oversight or enforcement. 
These companies exercise their power over the marketplace to dictate 
discriminatory terms and conditions to suppliers, including by 
demanding more favorable pricing and price terms, more favorable 
supply, and access to exclusive products.
    Although these problems are not new, the grocery industry ``power 
buyers'' have taken advantage of recent supply chain disruptions and an 
inflation pressures by leveraging their dominance to gain market share 
while forcing their smaller competitors to bear the brunt of product 
shortages and inflation. These firms successfully demand prioritization 
for distribution of high-demand products while extracting concessions 
on wholesale pricing. As a result, independent grocers have lost access 
to both popular products and promotional pricing, making them unable to 
compete with their larger rivals.
    Increasing economic discrimination at a time of supply chain 
disruption has accelerated the erosion of competition in the grocery 
marketplace. It has harmed consumer welfare by limiting access to 
consumer products and contributing to retail price increases. 
Independent community grocers play a crucial role in ensuring food 
access, especially in smaller, rural communities as well as high 
density urban ones where independents tend to locate. These communities 
have disproportionately suffered from unfair distributions and forced 
to travel longer distances to find the products they need at more 
crowded large chain retailers. What's more, these markets tend to 
feature a high number of low-income shoppers who often live on a fixed 
income, rely on public assistance, and have limited transportation 
options.
    NGA and its members have gotten to know Mr. Bedoya, and it is clear 
that he understands how anticompetitive abuses of market power harms 
competition and consumers, particularly those who rely on independent 
grocers. He recognizes how independent businesses are crucial lifelines 
in communities where they supply the needs of everyday Americans, 
provide employment opportunities, and serve as cornerstones of local 
economic activity. Most importantly, he demonstrates a clear sense of 
urgency for the FTC to assume its important role of ensuring a 
competitive grocery marketplace.
    We believe that confirming Alvaro Bedoya to the FTC is imperative 
at a time when the agency is needed more than ever to fulfill its 
mission to prevent anticompetitive business practices and to enhance 
consumer choice. NGA has seen first-hand how essential appointments are 
for vigorous enforcement--and the stakes today could not be higher. 
This is a defining moment for the FTC, and the appointments to the 
antitrust agencies will impact America for decades to come. For these 
reasons, we urge you to vote YES on the nomination of Alvaro Bedoya to 
serve as a Commissioner of the FTC.
            Sincerely,
                                               Chris Jones,
           Senior Vice President of Government Relations & Counsel,
                                          National Grocers Association.
                                 ______
                                 
             American Association of Franchisees and Dealer
                                 Palm Desert, CA, November 29, 2021

Hon. Maria Cantwell,
Chair--Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.

RE: Support of Professor Alvaro Bedoya for Commissioner at the Federal 
            Trade Commission

Dear Chair Cantwell:

    On behalf of the members of the American Association of Franchisees 
and Dealer (AAFD), we wish to express our support for the confirmation 
of Professor Alvaro Bedoya for Commissioner at the Federal Trade 
Commission.
    AAFD is the oldest and largest national not for profit trade 
association advocating the rights and interests of franchisees and 
independent dealer networks. The AAFD supports affiliated chapters for 
more than 50 brands engaged in franchising, representing thousands of 
franchisee operated business outlets. Since our establishment in 1992, 
the AAFD has focused on its mission to define, identify and promote 
collaborative franchise cultures that respect the legitimate interests 
of both franchisors and franchisees, cultures we describe as embracing 
our vison of Total Quality Franchising. The AAFD came into existence 
in response to a franchising community that has been evolving towards 
increasingly one-sided and controlling franchise agreements and 
cultures whereby franchisee equity and business ownership has been 
continually eroding such that many modern franchise systems have lost 
all vestiges of business ownership.
    From our initial conversations with Professor Bedoya, we believe he 
will support actions to protect small business owners, including 
franchise owners. In his testimony before the Senate Committee on 
Commerce, Science, & Transportation, he commented that the FTC should 
make use of its rulemaking authority to crack down on unfair and 
deceptive practices, which is what franchisee advocates have voiced for 
years. There is a critical power imbalance in the franchise industry 
that needs to be addressed to protect the true investors, the 
franchisees.
    For these reasons, AAFD believes Professor Bedoya will be a good 
steward at the FTC and we ask that you support his nomination and move 
forward with his confirmation as Commissioner.
            Respectfully submitted,
                                      Robert L. Purvin, Jr,
                                          Chair, Board of Trustees,
                       American Association of Franchisees and Dealers.
                                           Keith R. Miller,
                         Director of Public Affairs and Engagement,
                       American Association of Franchisees and Dealers,
                                                         Principal,
                                        Franchisee Advocacy Consulting.
                                 ______
                                 
                                 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                 
                              
                                 ______
                                 
                               National Grocers Association
                                   Washington, DC, February 2, 2022

Senator Maria Cantwell,
Chair,
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
Senator Roger Wicker,
Ranking Member,
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.

Chair Cantwell, Ranking Member Wicker, and Members of the Senate 
            Commerce Committee:

    I am writing on behalf of the National Grocers Association (NGA) to 
express our support for the nomination of Alvaro Bedoya to the Federal 
Trade Commission (FTC). Mr. Bedoya is a strong advocate for much-needed 
antitrust enforcement to ensure a competitive playing field in the 
grocery marketplace. We believe he will deliver results for consumers, 
workers, and independent businesses who rely on the benefits that flow 
from free and fair competition. Therefore, we encourage all Committee 
Members to support his nomination to the Commission.
    NGA represents independent community grocers across the country, as 
well as their wholesaler partners. The approximately 21,000 independent 
grocers in America are the true entrepreneurs of the grocery industry, 
passionately committed to their customers, employees, and the markets 
they serve. And they are at the heart of local communities, where they 
provide jobs and boost tax revenue while bringing choice, convenience, 
and value to hard-working Americans.
    In recent decades, NGA has witnessed a small handful of companies 
amass incredible power and influence over the food supply chain. Today, 
dominant retail companies and e-commerce giants wield unprecedented 
economic power with little to no antitrust oversight or enforcement. 
These companies exercise their power over the marketplace to dictate 
discriminatory terms and conditions to suppliers, including by 
demanding more favorable pricing and price terms, more favorable 
supply, and access to exclusive products.
    Although these problems are not new, the grocery industry ``power 
buyers'' have taken advantage of recent supply chain disruptions by 
leveraging their dominance to gain market share while forcing their 
smaller competitors to bear the brunt of product shortages and 
inflation pressures. These firms successfully demand prioritization for 
distribution of high-demand products while extracting concessions on 
wholesale pricing. As a result, independent grocers have lost access to 
both popular products and promotional pricing, making them unable to 
compete with their larger rivals.
    Increasing economic discrimination at a time of supply chain 
disruption has accelerated the erosion of competition in the grocery 
marketplace. It has harmed consumer welfare by limiting access to 
consumer products and contributing to retail price increases. 
Independent community grocers play a crucial role in ensuring food 
access, especially in smaller, rural communities as well as high 
density urban ones where independents tend to locate. These communities 
have disproportionately suffered from unfair distributions and forced 
to travel longer distances to find the products they need at more 
crowded large chain retailers.
    What's more, these markets tend to feature a high number of low-
income shoppers who often live on a fixed income, rely on public 
assistance, and have limited transportation options.
    NGA and its members have gotten to know Professor Bedoya, and it is 
clear that he understands how anticompetitive abuses of market power 
harms competition and consumers, particularly those who rely on 
independent grocers. He recognizes how independent businesses are 
crucial lifelines in communities where they supply the needs of 
everyday Americans, provide employment opportunities, and serve as 
cornerstones of local economic activity. Most importantly, he 
demonstrates a clear sense of urgency for the FTC to assume its 
important role of ensuring a competitive grocery marketplace.
    We believe that confirming Alvaro Bedoya to the FTC is imperative 
at a time when the agency is needed more than ever to fulfill its 
mission to prevent anticompetitive business practices and to enhance 
consumer choice. NGA has seen first-hand how essential appointments are 
for vigorous enforcement--and the stakes today could not be higher. 
This is a defining moment for the FTC, and the appointments to the 
antitrust agencies will impact America for decades to come. For these 
reasons, we urge you to vote YES on the nomination of Alvaro Bedoya to 
serve as a Commissioner of the FTC.
            Sincerely,
                                               Chris Jones,
           Senior Vice President of Government Relations & Counsel,
                                          National Grocers Association.
                                 ______
                                 
                                                     April 29, 2022

Hon. Chuck Schumer,
Majority Leader,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.

Hon. Mitch McConnell,
Minority Leader,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.

Dear Majority Leader Schumer, Minority Leader McConnell,

    On behalf of the 20 undersigned organizations and our millions of 
members and supporters, we write in strong support for advancing the 
nomination of Jainey Bavishi to serve as the next Assistant Secretary 
for Oceans and Atmosphere, Department of Commerce. Our organizations 
urge that the Senate swiftly confirm this highly qualified nominee.
    Ms. Bavishi's recognized expertise responding to the challenges of 
climate change makes her an inspired choice to serve in a leadership 
position at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 
since the agency is responsible for environmental prediction and 
monitoring as well as protecting the Nation's coasts, oceans, and 
fisheries.
    Climate change jeopardizes everything the ocean does for 
humankind--supplying our food, supporting our coastal economies, 
regulating our weather and climate, buffering our shorelines from 
storms, and serving as a place of inspiration. The recent 
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports released in 
the last 6 months, build on 30 years of warnings from marine scientists 
and underscore the urgent need to take ocean climate action. Congress 
and the Biden-Harris Administration must implement a comprehensive 
approach to ocean climate action to leverage the power of the ocean in 
the fight against climate change to support people, communities and the 
economy. Ms. Bavishi's background working to address the impacts of 
climate change ideally suits her to serve in a leadership role at NOAA.
    In her recent role as the director of the New York City Mayor's 
Office of Climate Resiliency, Ms. Bavishi led the City's OneNYC 
resiliency program, preparing the city for the impacts of climate 
change. This included significant initiatives to strengthen 
neighborhoods, adapt buildings, improve infrastructure, and upgrade the 
coastline all of which have direct relevance to the infrastructure 
challenges that President Biden and Congress have sought to address in 
the bipartisan infrastructure bill.
    Before serving in the New York mayor's office, Ms. Bavishi served 
as the associate director for climate preparedness at the White House 
Council on Environmental Quality and as the director of external 
affairs and senior policy adviser at NOAA. While at the Council on 
Environmental Quality, Ms. Bavishi was responsible for 
institutionalizing climate resilience considerations across Federal 
programs and policies. In her role as the executive director of R3ADY 
Asia-Pacific, she was responsible for initiating, expanding, and 
managing the start-up public-private partnership, which focused on 
enhancing disaster risk reduction and resilience in the Asia-Pacific 
region. She was also the founding director of the Equity and Inclusion 
Campaign, a coalition of community-based leaders in the Gulf Coast 
region that focused on recovery from Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, Gustav 
and Ike, at the Louisiana Disaster Recovery Foundation. All of these 
experiences make her well suited to the climate and resiliency 
challenges that NOAA will be managing in the years to come.
    As we work to address the significant challenges this country faces 
as a result of climate change, particularly as it relates to the ocean, 
we need leaders who are able to understand the magnitude of the problem 
and to develop innovative solutions to support people, communities and 
the economy. Ms. Bavishi possesses those skills, and her confirmation 
will help the Biden Administration meet the Nation's need to address 
the impacts of climate change. We ask that Senate leadership swiftly 
move Ms. Bavishi's nomination to the Senate floor for a confirmation 
vote.
            Sincerely,

National Ocean Protection Coalition
Azul
Brown Girl Surf
Continental Divide Trail Coalition
Defenders of Wildlife
Earthjustice
Environmental Defense Fund
Friends of the Earth
GreenLatinos
Greenpeace USA
Healthy Ocean Coalition
Inland Ocean Coalition
League of Conservation Voters
Monterey Bay Aquarium
National Wildlife Federation
Natural Resources Defense Council
Ocean Conservancy
Oceana
The Ocean Project
Urban Ocean Lab
      
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Radio Altimeters and Safety of Flight. As a result of the Federal 
Communications Commission's (``FCC'') C-band spectrum auction, new 5G 
wireless deployments are scheduled to begin operating in the C-Band on 
or about January 5, 2021.\1\ The FCC's order establishing technical 
rules for the C-band concluded that the power and emission limitations 
it imposed would be sufficient to offer protection against 
interference, even below the level of harmful interference, but 
encouraged stakeholders to convene multi-stakeholder groups to develop 
frameworks for interference prevention, detection, mitigation, and 
enforcement in the band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Although the FCC order authorized service beginning December 4, 
2021, AT&T and Verizon, the only two carriers scheduled to begin 5G 
cellular systems operating in 3.7 GHz before December 2023, announced 
they will delay operations until January 5, 2022. https://www.wsj.com/
articles/at-t-verizon-to-delay-5g-rollout-over-faas-airplane-safety-
concerns-11636039555?mod=
Searchresults_pos3&page=1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Since then, the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics was 
formed and filed a report in October 2020 that showed that 5G services 
would interfere with aircraft altimeters operating in the nearby 4.2-
4.4 GHz band. The Department of Transportation, labor unions, and other 
aviation stakeholders agree that these 5G systems have the potential to 
cause harmful interference to radio altimeters, and recently the 
Federal Aviation
    Administration (``FAA'') released a Special Airworthiness 
Information Bulletin (``SAIB'') titled ``Risk of Potential Adverse 
Effects on Radio Altimeters.'' According to FAA, without a satisfactory 
written set of mitigations, further agency actions beyond this SAIB may 
still be necessary to ensure safety. These FAA actions could have 
enormous economic impacts, resulting in significant travel and shipping 
and supply chain delays, disruption, and cancellations.
    Aviation stakeholders have submitted numerous ex parte filings in 
the FCC's docket, concluding that the public's safety will be impacted 
due to interference to radio altimeters. The communications industry 
has likewise made numerous filings disagreeing with these claims.

    Question 1. Chairwoman Rosenworcel, we know that there are ongoing 
discussions between telecommunications and aviation stakeholders to 
resolve disagreements on the use of this spectrum for 5G. Are we on a 
path to resolving this matter in a way that all stakeholders will have 
been heard? If not, what additional steps are required? Are any 
mitigation efforts being considered to resolve this issue?
    Answer. Yes, I believe we are on a path to resolving this matter in 
a way that all stakeholders will have been heard.
    At the outset, it is important to recognize that supporting public 
safety is a priority for the FCC under the law. The very first sentence 
of the Communications Act charges the agency with promoting the safety 
of life and property through wire and radio communications. It is 
essential that the FCC is mindful of this in everything it does. This 
means that as the Nation's expert Federal agency responsible for 
managing spectrum, the FCC is committed to ensuring air safety when 
moving forward with the development of new technologies that support 
American business and consumer needs.
    To put these principles in practice, I believe it is essential to 
improve the Nation's interagency processes involving spectrum 
decisions. If confirmed, I will work to do so. In fact, since the start 
of this year, I have instructed the FCC staff to work more closely with 
our Federal counterparts in a manner that puts a premium on 
consultation, openness, and the rule of law. These are the values that 
have helped to thoughtfully and safely grow opportunities for wireless 
activity in the past and I believe it is essential that we recommit to 
them now.
    The FCC's C-band rules represent the culmination of more than 15 
years of international and domestic work. The 3.7 GHz band at issue in 
this proceeding has been the subject of global harmonization activity 
for mobile broadband both at the International Telecommunication Union 
and within regional groups around the world. More than 40 countries 
have allocated and assigned this spectrum for wireless deployments, and 
more countries are following suit. In many countries, deployment has 
already occurred or is underway.
    Here at home, the United States has permitted wireless deployments 
in the 3 GHz band since 2007. Today there is robust commercial 
deployment up to 3.7 GHz. The FCC first sought comment on extending 
these deployments in 2017. In 2018, in the MOBILE NOW Act, Congress 
specifically directed the FCC to start a process to examine the 
feasibility of permitting wireless deployments up to 4.2 GHz. In 2020, 
the FCC adopted its C-Band Report and Order, which authorized wireless 
deployments up to 3.98 GHz, in order to create a guard band to protect 
nearby operations.
    The FCC's C-band proceeding carefully and methodically worked 
through very complex technical issues presented in the record. The 
order that resulted reflected thorough analysis and consideration of 
the interests of aviation stakeholders that participated in the 
proceeding, including the adoption of a guard band that was larger than 
what the aviation community requested in the underlying record. This 
process included dozens of parties filing many reports, briefs, 
studies, and letters. The agency worked carefully to survey this record 
and address the issues as the Communications Act and Administrative 
Procedure Act require.
    Nonetheless, as you note, additional information was supplied by 
RTCA after the adoption of the FCC's decision, including a report 
titled, ``Assessment of C-Band Mobile Telecommunications Interference 
Impact on Low Range Radar Altimeter Operations.'' The report, in 
conjunction with other test data in the record, suggested that a subset 
of altimeters may not sufficiently reject unwanted signals that are 
outside or within the 4.2-4.4 GHz band for C-band base stations that 
may be near landing zones. As such, the RTCA report concluded that for 
these altimeters, the presence of nearby C-band operations could cause 
erroneous altimeter readings.
    The FCC is taking this report very seriously. We have an open 
proceeding to review and assess the findings of this report and 
consider whether or not any changes to our C-band rules are warranted. 
We also initiated interagency meetings with the Federal Aviation 
Administration and targeted outreach to the aviation industry to 
understand their concerns and to align on a path forward both in the 
short term and in the long term. Furthermore, we are reaching out to 
our global peers to understand their experiences and to supplement our 
record with additional information, studies, flight tests, and real-
world experiences.
    As the FAA Administrator recently noted at an event in Washington 
on November 16, 2021, the FCC and the FAA ``are having very productive 
discussions and we will figure this out.'' \2\ We are engaging in these 
discussions with the goal of ensuring that we honor the safety needs of 
the aviation industry while C-band deployments proceed. As part of 
these discussions, and out of an abundance of caution, a wide range of 
mitigation measures are being considered while the agencies complete 
their assessments of the RTCA report. These include technical 
mitigations on wireless deployments, such as creating exclusion zones 
for some operations around airports and helipads, reducing power 
nationwide, and limiting transmissions skyward. The FAA also has issued 
specific guidance to the aviation industry via a Special Airworthiness 
Information Bulletin, and we anticipate additional guidance will be 
issued as appropriate. If confirmed, I pledge to continue to work on 
this effort in good faith and keep you updated as it continues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ See Bloomberg, ``FCC and FAA Are Making `Progress' on 5G Signal 
Woes,'' available at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-
16/u-s-aviation-regulators-making-progress-on-5g-signal-woes.

    24GHz Spectrum. Real-time satellite generated information is 
crucial for predictions of severe weather, which is key to protection 
of life, property and successful economic contributions of several 
industries like aviation and marine transportation. That is why I 
expressed concerns with the FCC's decision to auction 24GHz spectrum 
for commercial applications, despite NOAA and NASA's concerns that 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
these applications interfere with their use of this spectrum band.

    Question 2. Will you work with me to ensure that current and future 
auctions are informed by NOAA approved research and include mitigation 
solutions that fully account for the threat to life, property and 
economic interference to weather information?
    Answer. Yes. As I noted above, I believe it is essential to improve 
the Nation's interagency processes involving spectrum decisions. If 
confirmed, I will work to do so. Moreover, since the start of this 
year, I have instructed the FCC staff to work more closely with our 
Federal counterparts in a manner that puts a premium on consultation, 
openness, and the rule of law.
                                 ______
                                 
 Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Richard Blumenthal to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Monitoring the 3G Shutdown. As carriers transition to 5G services, 
all three nationwide wireless providers have announced the shutdown of 
their legacy 3G services over the next year. While it is important that 
consumers have access to faster and more efficient wireless services, 
each transition requires an effort to ensure that customers are not cut 
off based on having older devices or being located in areas where newer 
service is not available.

    Question 1. Would you commit to providing my office an update on 
the legacy 3G transition prior to the shutdown of services?
    Answer. Yes.

    Amateur Radio Operators. Radio amateurs voluntarily provide an 
array of public services, especially emergency and disaster-related 
support communications when infrastructure has been destroyed by a 
hurricane or similar disaster. Their contributions in this area are 
regularly recognized by local and state authorities.

    Question 2. Would you commit to providing my office an update on 
the steps that the FCC is taking to support amateur radio operators, 
including with respect to transitions to digital technologies?
    Answer. Yes.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Question 1. Legacy Technologies. As the telecommunications industry 
transitions to new services and technologies reliant on 5G networks, 
consumers utilizing legacy technologies that operate on 3G--who are 
often seniors or low-income families--may be impacted.
    How do you view the need to protect these consumers still reliant 
on legacy technologies?
    Answer. The transition from 3G wireless networks to more advanced 
4G and 5G networks will produce significant benefits for all consumers, 
including faster speeds, greater capacity, better security, as well as 
new and innovative services. These updates are important because they 
strengthen our communications infrastructure and provide more 
opportunities for innovation and growth at national scale. At the same 
time, the FCC must be mindful that these changes can be challenging for 
those who rely on older networks and work to prevent consumers from 
being left behind.
    To this end, on July 30, 2021, the FCC released a public notice 
seeking comment on a Petition for Emergency Relief filed by the Alarm 
Industry Communications Committee. Additionally, at my direction, the 
agency sent letters to each of the nationwide carriers requesting 
information about their policies, practices, and plans in connection 
with the discontinuance of their 3G service. The FCC also has been 
coordinating with its partners at the Department of Justice as this 
relates to activities under their purview.
    As a result, the FCC is reviewing the wide range of materials it 
has before it on the transition and working to identify the consumers 
and stakeholders that are most likely to be impacted by this change, 
including, but not limited to, low-income households and senior 
citizens. Specifically, we are taking a close look at the plans of the 
nationwide carriers to ensure they are acting in accordance with the 
law and precedent in this area and right now are working with our 
colleagues to identify the steps to take to help ensure consumers are 
not left behind in this transition.

    Question 2. 12 GHz Spectrum. How do you view the challenge of 
adopting a balanced approach to spectrum policy--including modernizing 
the 12 GHz band--that will help the United States achieve the promise 
of 5G, protect our economic security, and bolster competition?
    Answer. I agree that the United States needs a balanced approach to 
spectrum policy. In practice, this means spectrum allocation that 
recognizes the importance of a mix of wireless opportunities, including 
licensed and unlicensed spectrum, Federal and non-federal operations, 
fixed and mobile services, and new and existing uses of our airwaves.
    With respect to next-generation 5G networks, the FCC has identified 
five key principles to help guide our 5G future. First, the agency is 
focused on freeing up more spectrum, and especially mid-band spectrum, 
for 5G. Second, the agency recognizes that we need to expand the reach 
of our fiber facilities, because this kind of ground-based activity is 
key to making next-generation wireless networks work. Third, the agency 
is supporting the diversification of equipment in our networks, with a 
special focus on open and interoperable equipment, like Open Radio 
Access Networks, or Open RAN. Fourth, the agency is building greater 
resiliency and security into our supply chains by taking action to keep 
untrusted equipment and vendors out of our networks. Fifth, the agency 
is working to foster American leadership in setting the technology 
standards of the future.
    Consistent with these principles, the FCC has started a proceeding 
to explore opportunities for making more intensive use of 500 megahertz 
of spectrum in the 12 GHz band. Today, this band is used for Direct 
Broadcast Satellite Service and Multi-Channel Video and Data 
Distribution Service. More recently, proponents of a new generation of 
satellite operations have received authorization from the agency to 
launch and operate constellations of hundreds or thousands of 
satellites using several frequency bands, including the 12 GHz band. 
Thousands of satellites have been launched already, with new commercial 
satellite broadband services rolling out across the country. The FCC is 
reviewing whether there may be additional opportunities to open this 
band up for new terrestrial use, including 5G, without causing harmful 
interference to existing users. That will require examining the 
characteristics of this spectrum band--including its propagation and 
capacity characteristics, the nature of in-band and adjacent band 
incumbent use, and the potential for international harmonization--
before deciding whether and, if so, how to make it available for more 
intensive terrestrial or satellite use. At present, FCC staff is 
carefully assessing the technical record that has been developed thus 
far and is reviewing next steps.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Baldwin to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Text Messaging and 10-Digit Long Codes (10DLC). Earlier this year, 
mobile carriers began implementing rules changes, commonly referred to 
as ``10DLC,'' purportedly to address spam text messages. These rules 
require high-volume text purveyors to either register, pay higher 
messaging fees, or see their messages blocked. There is significant 
concern among non-profit advocacy organizations that these changes will 
substantially limit their ability to effectively communicate with their 
membership and engage voters.

    Question 1. In 2018, you dissented from the Commission's 
Declaratory Ruling that wireless messaging services are Title I 
information services, rather than Title II telecommunications services. 
You warned that ``your carrier now has the legal right to block your 
text messages and censor the very content of your messages.'' Do you 
agree that carriers' shift to 10DLC, and the threat to non-profit 
advocacy organizations, is possible because of the Commission's 
classification of text messaging as an information service? Given your 
prior concerns, should the FCC revisit this classification?
    Answer. Text messaging is an important part of how we communicate 
now, with trillions of these messages sent each year by consumers 
across the country.
    As you note, I dissented from the FCC's decision in 2018 to 
classify text messaging, specifically Short Message Service (SMS) and 
Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS), as an information service. In doing 
so, the agency reduced its oversight of these forms of communication, 
preventing it from serving as a referee in regulatory disputes. As the 
expert agency with responsibility for modern communications, and in 
light of how much we now depend on text messaging in our day-to-day 
lives, I thought this was a mistake.
    In general, I believe problems with text messaging would benefit 
from additional FCC oversight. To this end, I recently shared with my 
colleagues a proposal to use the Telephone Consumer Protection Act or 
other sources of authority to try and reduce the growing number of junk 
messages and robotexts consumers receive. However, more fundamental 
efforts will require revisiting the decision made in 2018. This would 
enable the agency to understand and evaluate carrier practices to see 
if they serve the purpose intended--for example, addressing spam texts 
in the case of 10DLC--or if those practices have other consumer 
impacts.

    Alternative Connect American Fund Model (ACAM) Speeds. Under the 
Connect America Fund's ACAM program, hundreds of thousands of rural 
consumers are gaining access to broadband. However, the ACAM program, 
initiated in 2016, has build-out obligations with minimum broadband 
speeds of 10/1 and 25/3, well below the recognized speeds necessary to 
truly participate in our digital world and inconsistent with more-
recently set standards in other broadband subsidy programs. A coalition 
of ACAM carriers petitioned the FCC in late 2020 to update this program 
by requiring those companies that agree to participate to build to 
higher speeds more quickly in return for extending the term of the 
program.

    Question 2. If confirmed, will you support the FCC acting on a 
petition pending before the Commission to adopt modifications to the 
ACAM program to more quickly bring higher speeds to consumers served by 
participating carriers?
    Answer. The ACAM program provides model-based support to rate-of-
return carriers in return for broadband deployment obligations. There 
have been two offers to rate-of-return carriers to participate in the 
program, which ends in 2028 for most electing carriers. Participating 
carriers receive approximately $1.1 billion in support from the program 
annually.
    On October 30, 2020, the ACAM Broadband Coalition, a coalition of 
providers that participate in the ACAM program, filed a petition for 
rulemaking seeking to extend the program until 2034, in return for 
enhanced obligations to provide higher speeds. Currently, the ACAM 
program requires 804,871 locations to be served at 25/3 Mbps speeds, 
165,725 locations to be served at 10/1 Mbps, and 50,227 locations to be 
served at 4/1 Mbps speeds. The ACAM Broadband Coalition's petition for 
rulemaking proposes that in exchange for six additional years of 
support, at a cost to the Universal Service Fund of approximately $6.6 
billion, participants in the ACAM program will serve 605,373 locations 
at 100/25 Mbps, 300,074 locations at 25/3 Mbps, and 115,376 locations 
at 10/1 Mbps. The FCC sought comment on the petition for rulemaking on 
November 4, 2020. Multiple parties filed comments in response. 
Recently, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act became law, 
providing a significant infusion of funds for broadband deployment and 
generally requiring deployment at speeds of 100/20 Mbps. FCC staff are 
now evaluating the petition for rulemaking in light of the record and 
other developments, like the passage of the Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act.
    Pole Attachments. In many rural areas of Wisconsin, and many other 
states, broadband service is delivered via cables attached to utility 
poles. Carriers looking to expand service in these areas have indicated 
to me that barriers in accessing these poles are delaying the speedy 
deployment of broadband to those in need. However, it is also critical 
that pole owners' interests are taken into account, and that there is a 
fair and transparent process regard pole access.

    Question 3. There is a pending Petition for Declaratory Ruling 
before the Commission requesting clarification of the FCC's existing 
utility pole attachment rules in order to reduce barriers to broadband 
deployment for unserved households in rural areas. In November 2020, I 
wrote to then-Chair Pai encouraging the Commission to promptly consider 
that petition. If confirmed, will you examine this petition and the 
FCC's rules in this space?
    Answer. Yes. The petition that you are referring to asked the FCC 
to clarify its rules with respect to the cost allocation of pole 
replacements in ``unserved areas.''
    On January 19, 2021, under my predecessor, the FCC released a 
declaratory ruling to make clear that it is unreasonable and 
inconsistent with section 224 of the Communications Act, agency rules, 
and past precedent, for utilities to impose the entire cost of a pole 
replacement on a requesting attacher when the attacher is not the sole 
cause of the pole replacement. However, the agency declined to address 
the more specific clarifications requested by the petition, concluding 
that those issues would be more appropriately addressed in the context 
of a rulemaking.
    I believe we need to find a way to ensure 100 percent of us have 
access to affordable, reliable, high-speed broadband in this country. 
If confirmed, I believe that we will need to examine all of our 
policies, including our pole attachment rules, to help achieve this 
objective.
                                 ______
                                 
  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Raphael Warnock to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    3G Sunset. We have heard from a number of industries, including the 
alarm and home heath monitoring industry, about their concern over the 
timeline for the shutdown of 3G networks. Some of these industries have 
filed an emergency relief petition seeking a 10-month delay in AT&T's 
sunset of 3G, scheduled for next February.

    Question 1. Will you commit to a full and fair review of the 
petition?
    Answer. Yes. On July 30, 2021, the FCC issued a public notice 
seeking comment on the Alarm Industry Communications Committee Petition 
for Emergency Relief. Initial comments were due on August 30, 2021, 
with replies to those comments due on September 14, 2021. In addition, 
I sent letters to each of the nationwide carriers requesting 
information about their policies, practices, and plans in connection 
with the discontinuance of their 3G service. The FCC is reviewing the 
record and identifying next steps.

    ACAM. Access to broadband service in some parts of rural Georgia, 
and across the country, are below what is needed to perform basic 
online activities. In Georgia, nine companies that serve some of the 
most rural parts of the state are successfully bringing broadband to 
those residents through the FCC's Alternative Connect America Cost 
Model. Some of those companies have petitioned the FCC to modify its 
rules to enable them to accelerate that deployment and increase the 
speeds they make available to consumers.

    Question 2. Will you commit to expeditiously reviewing this 
petition and to a full and fair review of the petition?
    Answer. The ACAM program provides model-based support to rate-of-
return carriers in return for broadband deployment obligations. There 
have been two offers to rate-of-return carriers to participate in the 
program, which ends in 2028 for most electing carriers. Participating 
carriers receive approximately $1.1 billion in support from the program 
annually.
    On October 30, 2020, the ACAM Broadband Coalition, a coalition of 
providers that participate in the ACAM program, filed a petition for 
rulemaking seeking to extend the program until 2034, in return for 
enhanced obligations to provide higher speeds. Currently, the ACAM 
program requires 804,871 locations to be served at 25/3 Mbps speeds, 
165,725 locations to be served at 10/1 Mbps, and 50,227 locations to be 
served at 4/1 Mbps speeds. The ACAM Broadband Coalition's petition for 
rulemaking proposes that in exchange for six additional years of 
support, at a cost to the Universal Service Fund of approximately $6.6 
billion, participants in the ACAM program will serve 605,373 locations 
at 100/25 Mbps, 300,074 locations at 25/3 Mbps, and 115,376 locations 
at 10/1 Mbps. The FCC sought comment on the petition for rulemaking on 
November 4, 2020. Multiple parties filed comments in response. 
Recently, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act became law, 
providing a significant infusion of funds for broadband deployment and 
generally requiring deployment at speeds of 100/20 Mbps. FCC staff are 
now evaluating the petition for rulemaking in light of the record and 
other developments, like the passage of the Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act.

    Satellite Licensing. The FCC has recently authorized a number of 
low Earth orbit satellite constellations to provide high-speed, low-
latency broadband service in the United States, including in Georgia. 
Historically, satellite licensing has been fairly limited and was able 
to keep pace with comparably low rates of development in the sector.

    Question 3. What resources does the FCC need to ensure that 
regulatory process is thorough and transparent while keeping pace with 
industry growth?
    Answer. The rapid growth of new low Earth orbit constellations 
provides extraordinary new opportunities for connectivity while also 
presenting challenges for old regulatory processes. Among the technical 
and policy challenges are updating spectrum access policy and 
mitigation techniques for orbital debris. To address these and other 
issues created by the growth of these constellations, the FCC will need 
engineers with experience in satellite matters to analyze and resolve 
the issues that arise with applications and requests for modification. 
The FCC also will need attorneys familiar with licensing rules to 
process the increase in applications and requests for modification and, 
where necessary, adopt new rules or amend existing rules. Modernizing 
IT resources, and for example, integrating internal databases used in 
the agency or in coordination with NTIA, may offer opportunities to 
improve the review process. Finally, the demands of these new 
constellations will require FCC staff to coordinate more closely with 
our Federal partners with interest in this area, including NTIA, NASA, 
and the Department of State, especially with respect to our 
participation in international events to help support global 
opportunities for the satellite industry, such as the World Radio 
Conference in 2023.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roger Wicker to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Question 1. Please describe how the repeal of the Federal 
Communications Commission's 2015 Open Internet Order has harmed 
consumers. Please provide specific, real-world examples.
    Answer. I believe that there were negative consequences that 
followed from the decision of the FCC to repeal its net neutrality 
rules and reduce its oversight of broadband service. As a result of the 
repeal, the FCC lacked authority to intervene when firefighters in 
California found their service throttled when they were responding to 
wildfires. In fact, in its remand of the FCC's decision, the D.C. 
Circuit found the agency's ``disregard of its duty to analyze the 
impact of the 2018 Order on public safety renders its decision 
arbitrary and capricious.''
    In addition, there are stories of small providers that have faced 
higher pole attachment rates in the wake of the FCC's decision. For 
example, according to one filing in the FCC's record, two wireless 
Internet service providers reported they had to slow or halt the 
deployment of fiber on poles because pole owners charged higher rates 
or refused to negotiate with them when broadband was no longer 
classified as a telecommunications service.
    Meanwhile, academic research led by Northeastern University 
Professor David Choffnes reviewed crowdsourced data from the Wehe app 
and found that for mobile Internet service providers in the United 
States, ``we don't see evidence of Internet service providers 
throttling only when the network is busy; as far as we can tell, it's 
24/7, and everywhere.'' Professor Choffnes noted that this throttling 
created a ``slippery slope,'' because ``[t]oday it's video, but what is 
it going to be tomorrow? When Internet service providers decide to take 
control and make decisions on behalf of consumers and/or content 
providers, what's going to be the fallout for those decisions? Is it 
actually in everyone's best interests?''
    It is important to note that the above has been observed during a 
period when litigation over the topic of net neutrality has been 
ongoing and some states have had their own laws and regulations in 
place governing these matters. For example, California, Colorado, 
Maine, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington have passed state net neutrality 
laws while Hawaii, Montana, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island have 
put in place net neutrality contracting requirements. Meanwhile, in 
other states, legislation has been proposed over the past several 
years. As a result, Internet service providers may have been cautious 
about their business practices during the time following the FCC 
decision to roll back its open Internet policies. Finally, I should 
note that one consequence of the FCC's decision to relinquish its 
oversight over broadband is that the agency has less visibility into 
what is happening with broadband networks at a time when they are more 
important in our lives than ever before.

    Question 2. In your testimony, you mentioned the difficulty the 
Commission has in actually collecting forfeitures and fines. What is 
your plan for addressing this challenge, and what can Congress do to 
help solve the problem?
    Answer. The FCC works closely with the Department of Justice on a 
wide range of issues, including robocall and fraud matters. The agency 
also assists individual Assistant United States Attorneys to the extent 
they wish to bring enforcement actions against violators of our rules, 
including for robocalls. In addition, the FCC works closely with its 
Federal and state law enforcement partners to coordinate enforcement 
actions, providing support for cases where other law enforcement 
partners can sanction violators.
    Nonetheless, collecting fines from robocall violators has proved 
challenging at times. Through the FCC enforcement process, the staff of 
the agency identifies parties that have may have violated the 
Communications Act, Telephone Consumer Protection Act, and Truth-In-
Caller ID Act. The agency then issues a Notice of Apparent Liability 
and subsequent Forfeiture Order. However, under the law, the FCC must 
refer the matter to the Department of Justice to collect any payment if 
the target refuses to pay the penalty imposed by the Forfeiture Order. 
After the referral, an Assistant United States Attorney may initiate a 
case in court to collect the fine, but that decision is entirely at the 
discretion of the Department of Justice and often rests with a specific 
Assistant United States Attorney, who must weigh the case against a 
range of other criminal and civil priorities. Compounding this 
challenge, the time required to complete the enforcement process can 
provide targets an opportunity to hide assets, making it even more 
difficult to collect the penalty imposed.
    This is frustrating but there are changes that could help improve 
this situation and increase the likelihood that those who violate our 
robocalling laws are held accountable for their actions.
    First, Congress could provide the FCC with authority to freeze the 
assets of violators. Because FCC process requires the agency to issue a 
Notice of Apparent Liability and a Forfeiture Order before referral to 
the Department of Justice, defendants have time to move or hide assets 
to prevent law enforcement from collecting meaningful fines. Granting 
the FCC authority to freeze assets of violators would increase the 
likelihood that a defendant will have assets for an Assistant United 
States Attorney to collect.
    Second, Congress could amend the Communications Act to grant the 
FCC the authority to seek a court-ordered preliminary injunction or 
temporary restraining order when an enforcement target continues to 
engage in apparently unlawful activity, such as robocalling, after the 
issuance of a Notice of Apparent Liability. While such action would not 
directly impact the agency's ability to collect specific fines, it 
would help prevent additional robocalls.
    Third, Congress may also wish to explore other options, including 
providing the FCC with authority to pursue civil enforcement of its 
forfeitures, particularly where Department of Justice declines to do 
so.

    Question 3. The RDOF Phase I auction closed just about a year ago. 
As many winners were already well-established providers using proven 
technology, why has it taken the Commission so long to authorize funds?
    Answer. RDOF is a program that is designed to help bring broadband 
and connect rural communities across the country. I support this effort 
but believe the program requires careful oversight to prevent waste, 
fraud, and abuse.
    As you note, the RDOF Phase I auction was held late last year. 
However, I believe too little work was done on the maps prepared for 
the auction, resulting in a rash of initial funding decisions 
supporting areas where broadband is already present as well as in 
questionable locations like parking lots, traffic medians, and 
international airports. In light of this, FCC staff took a series of 
steps to clean up the program before funding was made available to 
successful bidders.
    First, following the filing of long-form applications at the start 
of this year, each bidder that had won a preliminary commitment in the 
Phase I auction was subjected to a careful technical, financial, and 
legal review. This is important because any further commitment will 
result in Federal payment obligations for the next ten years. As a 
result, the FCC must be assured that the bidder is actually capable of 
both deployment and operation and that the technology they have chosen 
to use will deliver the speeds promised.
    Second, in light of the preliminary commitments made for areas that 
should never have been eligible for support, including, as noted above, 
parking lots and international airports, the FCC staff sent 197 letters 
to bidders seeking to remove these areas from funding. As a result of 
this effort, more than 5,000 census blocks were removed from the 
program to prevent wasteful spending. This also helps ensure that 
future RDOF funding can be spent on the rural locations that truly 
require support.
    Third, every bidder that won a preliminary commitment in the 
auction was required to secure status as an eligible telecommunications 
carrier in the state where they intend to receive support. This is a 
requirement that goes beyond RDOF; it is a necessary precondition for 
the receipt of universal service funds from the high-cost program under 
the Communications Act. Every bidder had until June of this year to 
secure this designation before the relevant state public service 
commissions. Those that did not diligently pursue this designation and 
in the process demonstrated a lack of commitment to actually deploy 
service were removed from the program. These failures to diligently 
pursue applications amounted to removing $344 million in preliminary 
awards from the program.
    With these clean up measures now underway, FCC staff have been 
processing all remaining applications as quickly as possible. More than 
50 staff from across the agency, including engineers, attorneys, and 
policy specialists, have been at work on this effort. This has 
resulted, to date, in approving the applications of 151 providers for 
$1.7 billion in funding in 40 states. To put this in context, this is 
more funding than was approved for the entire Connect America Fund-II 
auction, which was the biggest broadband reverse auction before RDOF.
    Furthermore, now that many of the early efforts to resolve 
outstanding issues with waste, fraud, and abuse are complete, 
additional funding decisions will be announced shortly.

    Question 4. With regard to mapping, you stated that you were 
unaware of the agency's IT and computer processing systems, and 
operation problems before being named acting chairwoman. Should all 
commissioners have access to the same information on the agency's 
operations, budget, and IT plans? Yes or no? If not, why not? And, what 
have you done to correct the problems you found? Please provide 
examples.
    Answer. Under Section 5 of the Communications Act and the rules 
adopted pursuant to it, the Chair of the FCC has unique duties and 
responsibilities to manage and set the priorities of the agency. These 
include, among other things, presiding at all meetings and sessions and 
representing the agency in matters relating to legislation, 
conferences, and communications with other governmental officers, 
departments, and agencies. The Chair is also responsible for 
coordinating and organizing the work of the FCC in a manner that 
promotes the efficient disposition of all matters before the agency. In 
practice, this last responsibility means the Chair oversees the 
operation of the agency, including the financial, budgetary, and 
technical priorities. While this represents the law and customary 
practice of the agency, I believe all commissioners at the FCC should 
have reasonable access to information.
    As you know, the Broadband DATA Act was signed into law in March of 
2020. With this legislation Congress recognized that if we want to 
ensure everyone has access to broadband, we need accurate information 
about where broadband is and is not across the country. Then, in 
December of 2020, Congress provided the FCC with an appropriation to 
help fund implementation of this law.
    When I was designated the Acting Chairwoman in January of 2021, one 
of the very first actions I took was to assess the status of this 
effort. This review made clear that the FCC had an enormous amount of 
work to do to prepare, develop, and support the systems required for 
compliance with the Broadband DATA Act and its objectives.
    As a result, in my first meeting as Acting Chairwoman, I announced 
the formation of the Broadband Data Task Force. This group was designed 
to help coordinate and expedite the design and construction of new 
systems for collecting and verifying new broadband deployment data. 
Since its formation, the FCC has made significant progress standing-up 
the new Broadband Data Collection systems and processes.
    This effort began with the retention of an expert data architect to 
work with the FCC's IT specialists to design and build a prototype of a 
data flow structure and system for the Broadband Data Collection. On 
July 2, 2021, the FCC awarded a contract specifically to build that 
data platform. The Broadband Data Collection will consist of a complex, 
interrelated set of geospatial information systems and processes to 
collect deployment data from Internet service providers, verified 
coverage data from federal, state, local, and Tribal entities, and (in 
certain circumstances) other third parties, as well as challenge data 
and crowdsourced data. Our data architect and staff were able to move 
the design process ahead on a very tight schedule and our decision to 
contract with the same firm to build the Broadband Data Collection 
platform and systems will create efficiencies that will shorten the 
development timeline. While there is still a substantial amount of 
additional system development work, user acceptance testing, and 
independent verification and validation left to be done prior to 
launching the Broadband Data Collection system, we are moving forward 
at a rapid pace.
    The FCC also began a competitive bidding process for the creation 
of the Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric. The Fabric is required by 
the Broadband DATA Act. It is a common dataset of all locations in the 
United States where fixed broadband Internet access service can be 
installed. It represents substantial improvement over past broadband 
data practices at the agency, which focused on census blocks rather 
than individually geocoded locations.
    Under the Broadband DATA Act, the FCC is required to use the 
traditional government procurement process to secure any contract for 
the Fabric. This is the only part of the law that specifies the manner 
of procurement. As a result, consistent with practices under the 
Federal Acquisition Regulation, the FCC issued a Request for 
Information and draft Statement of Objectives on March 8, 2021. The 
agency received multiple responses, which staff carefully reviewed and 
then held feedback sessions with multiple entities based on what was 
learned in this process. The FCC followed this effort with a Request 
for Proposal on June 1, 2021, which, among other things, specified that 
the chosen vendor would be required to deliver an initial production 
version of the Fabric within 120 days of the award. Responses to the 
RFP were due on July 1, 2021. In response to a pre-award protest filed 
at the GAO, which is permitted under the Federal Acquisition 
Regulation, the FCC delivered a revised RFP to all offerors on August 
13, 2021. Revised proposals were due on August 26, 2021. Upon filing, 
agency staff expeditiously reviewed the highly technical and detailed 
responses to the revised RFP, based on the requirements in the FAR. 
Following this review, the FCC's Contracting Officer awarded the 
contract for Fabric development on November 9, 2021. This information 
was made publicly available on the Federal government's system for 
award management website.
    Since the Broadband DATA Act requires that this procurement follow 
the procedures set forth in Federal Acquisition Regulation, non-winning 
bidders may file a protest of the award. We know of one such protest 
filed on November 19, 2021, and there is a possibility that others may 
file similar post-award protests. The GAO will have 100 days to review 
this protest and issue its decision.
    While procuring the Fabric has been challenging due to the 
traditional government procurement process required in the Broadband 
DATA Act, the FCC staff has worked to address other legal and policy 
matters under the law. These include developing the related processes 
for challenging data, crowdsourcing data, and verifying data required 
under the law.
    The Broadband DATA Act specifically requires the FCC to establish 
requirements for a process for a variety of stakeholders to challenge 
data that is filed by carriers with the agency. To facilitate this 
process, the Broadband Data Task Force worked with the Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau, Office of Economics and Analytics, and 
Office of Engineering and Technology, to issue a public notice seeking 
comment on the technical requirements for processing mobile broadband 
challenge and verification data, including submissions from state, 
local, and Tribal governments. While the processes for these 
stakeholders to submit speed test data are relatively simple, the 
processing that will need to go on ``under the hood'' at the FCC is 
complex. That's why in addition to the detailed descriptions set forth 
in the public notice and accompanying technical appendix, the Broadband 
Data Task Force also hosted an online webinar on August 12, 2021, to 
explain these proposals and respond directly to questions. Comments in 
response to this public notice were due on September 10, 2021, and 
reply comments were due on September 27, 2021. FCC staff are reviewing 
the record and developing final specifications to ensure that the 
challenge, crowdsourcing, and verification processes will improve the 
FCC's data on mobile broadband availability and serve the purposes 
envisioned in the Broadband DATA Act.
    The FCC also has accelerated consumer outreach efforts to inform 
stakeholders of the progress made to date and to provide status updates 
on future Broadband Data Collection work. We created a new public-
facing website (https://www.fcc.gov/BroadbandData), which provides a 
go-to source for orders, public notices, and other educational 
materials associated with this effort. As a component of this website, 
we have created a new public portal through which consumers can share 
their broadband experiences to help inform the work of the Broadband 
Task Force. More than 13,000 have done so and we continue to analyze 
the submissions they provided.
    The agency is also expanding its efforts to encourage people across 
the country to download the FCC Speed Test app, which is currently used 
to collect speed test data as part of the FCC's Measuring Broadband 
America program. This app has already been downloaded more than 200,000 
times. It both provides consumers with an opportunity to test the 
performance of their wireless broadband network and offer the test 
results to the FCC while protecting the privacy and confidentiality of 
those who use it. An updated version of this app is now being designed 
so that it can be used in the future as a platform for consumers to 
challenge provider-submitted maps when the Broadband Data Collection 
systems become available.
    We are also continuing to talk directly with stakeholders, 
including state, local, and Tribal governmental entities, to ensure 
that they are prepared and able to participate in the data collection, 
challenge, and verification processes. We will host an initial online 
workshop for Tribal governments on December 8, 2021, to provide 
information about the Broadband Data Collection program and technical 
assistance on the procedures that Tribes will use to submit primary 
broadband availability data. As our systems and data specifications are 
finalized, we will continue to reach out to state, local, and Tribal 
partners to ensure that they are aware of the types and formats of data 
we will need to ensure a consistent and standardized nationwide data 
collection. At the same time, we are in the process of procuring 
additional outside resources to assist the FCC in providing technical 
assistance to small Internet service providers as well as to 
participants in the challenge process, as required under the Broadband 
DATA Act.
    In addition, we are working with a number of broadband providers to 
obtain more granular and consistent real-world data to help expedite 
our development of the Broadband Data Collection IT systems and data 
structures that will support the new collection, and to inform our 
effort to develop training and other outreach to providers in advance 
of their Broadband Data Collection filings. As part of this effort, on 
August 6, 2021, the FCC released new 4G LTE wireless coverage maps 
based on the new Broadband Data Collection parameters, using data 
submitted voluntarily by AT&T Mobility, T-Mobile, U.S. Cellular, and 
Verizon Wireless. In addition to providing the FCC with real-world data 
that we can use to build and test our Broadband Data Collection 
systems, we created a public map that shows, for the first time, 
consistent nationwide 4G LTE mobile coverage according to the Broadband 
Data Collection parameters. This map is now available at www.fcc.gov/
BroadbandData/MobileMaps.
    Collectively, this work addresses the problems identified during 
the initial review of FCC capacity to ensure that the agency was 
prepared to support the objectives in the Broadband DATA Act. If 
confirmed, I pledge to keep you--and my colleagues at the agency--
apprised of further efforts to implement this law.

    Question 5. You have previously criticized the Commission's 
Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS), and called it ``a stain on the 
FCC and [the Restoring Internet Freedom] proceeding'' that ``needs to 
be addressed.'' As the alleged problems with the ECFS have not yet been 
addressed, do you pledge to overhaul the ECFS before undertaking any 
controversial proceedings likely to receive similar attention and 
public comment? If not, please provide your explanation for how future 
notice and comment proceedings under your tenure can be relied upon. 
Please also detail your plans to address the problems with the ECFS to 
ensure that future proceedings under your tenure enjoy a comment record 
beyond reproach.
    Answer. Providing the public with notice and opportunity to comment 
is an essential duty of any agency subject to the Administrative 
Procedure Act. This includes the FCC. The agency's electronic comment 
filing system, known as ECFS, has long served as the way that 
stakeholders from across the country can comment and participate in 
communications matters at the FCC.
    As you note, in 2017 this system was overwhelmed by public comments 
and the underlying proceeding at issue--involving net neutrality--was 
blemished as a result. This became the subject of intense study by the 
New York Attorney General, GAO, and others.
    In light of this situation, the FCC recognized that ECFS should be 
modernized. Work on this began under my predecessor that involves a 
multi-phased approach to update the system. This is an effort I 
wholeheartedly support. During the first phase, which is presently 
underway, the agency is moving ECFS to a cloud architecture to improve 
security and scalability. This phase will also include the development 
of tools like a bot manager to distinguish human filers from bot 
submissions. Internal testing relating to the first phase is presently 
underway. The second phase of work to update ECFS will include 
examination of additional software tools to analyze filings as well as 
authentication processes for frequent filers.
    While this work continues, I believe it is important to note that 
the agency has duties under the law to continue to provide notice and 
opportunity to comment in a range of proceedings--including under the 
recently-enacted Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

    Question 6. Please discuss the steps the FCC will take with NTIA, 
the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Treasury to 
prevent overbuilding using Federal funds.
    Answer. I believe that in the past the FCC has worked closely with 
its Federal partners when it comes to efforts to close the digital 
divide. However, in light of the expanded work to do so in the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, it is essential that we work 
even closer.
    On June 25, 2021, the FCC, NTIA, and Rural Utilities Service at the 
USDA entered into an Interagency Agreement that specifically 
``require[s] coordination. . .for the distribution of broadband 
deployment.'' As a result, the FCC, NTIA, and RUS share information on 
a regular basis about our respective funding programs, including the 
entities seeking and receiving funding to provide service in a given 
area, the speed and technology funded, and the terms and conditions of 
the funding under the law. In addition, the Department of Treasury has 
sought FCC input for the purposes of implementing the Coronavirus State 
and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund and the Coronavirus Capital Projects 
Fund. FCC staff also has engaged with representatives of the Department 
of Treasury, both separately and alongside NTIA and RUS 
representatives, to share information and insight on programs and 
identify coordination opportunities. With respect to the Rural Digital 
Opportunity Fund, this engagement includes keeping other agencies, as 
well as state, local, and Tribal governments, apprised of our actions 
by releasing lists of census blocks that are the subject of default by 
winning bidders, as well as lists of census blocks where winning 
bidders have been authorized.
    However, it is important to note that the programs each agency 
oversees may be different under the law. In other words, these efforts 
each have unique elements like eligibility criteria, funding purposes, 
and speed thresholds. In some instances, those features could result in 
separate funding in the same location working together--like, for 
instance, where one program funds capital expenditures and another 
supports operating expenditures. I believe it is essential to make sure 
that these programs, consistent with the law, operate in a 
complementary manner. At the same time, it is essential that those 
responsible for these programs--including the FCC--coordinate to ensure 
funding is directed to areas without adequate service and avoid 
unnecessary duplication. If confirmed, I pledge to have the FCC work 
with its Federal partners to do so.

    Question 7. What are your plans for the Rural Digital Opportunity 
Fund Phase II auction, in light of the enactment of the Infrastructure 
Investments and Jobs Act? Do you plan to carry out the RDOF Phase II 
auction? If yes, when? If no, please explain why not and how you plan 
to use the funds.
    Answer. As you know, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act 
provides $65 billion in support for new broadband initiatives. A 
significant part of this funding is dedicated to broadband deployment. 
This is in addition to other funding initiatives like the RDOF auction. 
If confirmed, I believe it is essential to carefully review the record 
in the first phase of the RDOF auction and consider how the landscape 
has changed as a result of new efforts under the Infrastructure and 
Jobs Act. However, I believe that under the Communications Act the FCC 
unequivocally has a duty to support rural, insular, and high-cost areas 
of the country through its universal service system, which may include 
support for recurring operations as well as new deployment.

    Question 8. Do you plan to directly or indirectly regulate 
broadband rates? Yes or no?
    Answer. No. I voted to support the decision in 2015 to adopt net 
neutrality rules. That decision stated that it ``expressly eschew[s] 
future use of prescriptive, industry-wide rate regulation.'' I 
supported this approach in the past and would do so again in the 
future.

    Question 9. During your confirmation hearing, you noted that you 
support net neutrality. Do you support pursuing polices that go beyond 
the 2015 net neutrality rules, such as applying additional Title II 
requirements on broadband and prohibiting ``unreasonable 
discrimination'' in transmitting network traffic?
    Answer. I voted to support the decision in 2015 to adopt net 
neutrality rules. I continue to believe, based on court precedent, that 
Title II is at the foundation of legally sustainable net neutrality 
rules. As I testified, I believe that any effort to reinstate the Title 
II classification of broadband Internet access service would require a 
new rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act. Such a 
rulemaking would provide the basis to develop an updated public record 
on open Internet policies, which must inform the agency as it proceeds. 
I believe this is especially important in light of changes since the 
initial 2015 decision in technology, state law, and consumer usage.

    Question 10. Does the FCC have authority to determine the 
reasonableness of broadband rates, and if so, how would it make such 
determinations?
    Answer. As a result of the 2017 decision to roll back net 
neutrality, the FCC currently lacks authority to determine whether 
rates for broadband service are just and reasonable.
    However, under section 254 of the Communications Act, the agency is 
required to ensure that eligible telecommunications carriers that 
receive high-cost support from the Universal Service Fund charge rates 
for broadband service that are ``reasonably comparable to rates charged 
for similar services in urban areas.'' To determine the rates charged 
for fixed broadband services in urban areas, the FCC conducts an annual 
Urban Rate Survey. Eligible telecommunications carriers that receive 
high-cost support from the Universal Service Fund must offer broadband 
service at rates that are at or below the relevant comparability 
benchmark based on the Urban Rate Survey or may be subject to 
reductions in support.

    Question 11. What commitments were you required to make to the 
administration in order to secure your nomination?
    Answer. I made no commitments to the White House to secure this 
nomination, nor were any commitments made to me.

    Question 12. Has the White House committed to you that you will be 
able to serve as chairwoman for the entirety of this administration?
    Answer. I made no commitments to the White House to secure this 
nomination, nor were any commitments made to me.

    Question 13. A number of companies have filed applications with the 
FCC to build new satellite-based broadband networks or to expand 
existing networks. These filings add to the backlog of applications 
that the FCC is working through. The FCC has emphasized the importance 
of next-generation satellite technologies, like low Earth orbit 
systems, for helping to close the digital divide. Companies rely on the 
FCC to move efficiently on applications and when delays stack up 
consumers can be denied services despite sufficient capacity to serve 
them. This has very real consequences for people on the ground--people 
who would benefit from closing the digital divide.

   If confirmed, what will you do to ensure filings are 
        processed in a timely manner, especially given the fact that 
        many of these filings are ``placeholder'' filings that will not 
        come to fruition? Do you believe that the FCC should prioritize 
        applications for immediate service, rather than the current 
        first-come, first-served approach?
    Answer. New satellite broadband technologies have extraordinary 
potential to help close the digital divide. That is why I agree that 
the FCC must work expeditiously to ensure the right conditions for 
these new technologies to succeed. I also believe that each and every 
application filed with this agency is entitled to due consideration and 
a level playing field, so that consumers can realize the benefits of 
more competition and greater choice.
    Since the start of the year, the FCC has taken a number of steps to 
support new space-based services and to clear some of the backlog that 
previously had built up within the agency. In April, for the first time 
ever, the FCC allocated spectrum to support new commercial space 
operations based on proposals that were first made more than seven 
years ago. Specifically, the FCC allocated the 2200-2290 MHz band on a 
secondary basis for use in service of space launch operations, pursuant 
to coordination with NTIA. The FCC also sought comment on the use of 
additional spectrum for commercial space launches, including the 420-
430 MHz, 2025-2110 MHz, and 5650-5925 MHz bands and associated 
licensing and service rules. In August, the FCC initiated a new V-band 
processing round that has resulted in proposals for nearly 38,000 new 
satellites to provide global broadband. In addition, in November, the 
FCC cleared the way for two new low earth orbiting constellations that 
will bring broadband and the Internet of things services to consumers, 
businesses, and government customers in the United States and globally.
    In parallel, to ensure that filings are processed in a timely 
manner, the FCC has devoted resources over the past several months to 
speed up the processing of pending earth station applications--both 
large ground stations and consumer terminals. While these applications 
often involve complex issues, this year the FCC has already granted 
more than 90 such applications. The FCC also continues to process new 
applications for smaller satellites under new streamlined application 
procedures that were adopted in 2019. If confirmed, I commit to working 
with you to explore additional opportunities to ensure that filings 
before the FCC are processed in a timely manner.

   Do you support implementing a comment period deadline for 
        satellite applications and a ``sunshine period'' for the FCC 
        staff to adjudicate comments in a timely way, as opposed to the 
        current open-ended FCC process? Yes or no? If not, why not?
    Answer. The FCC's review of satellite applications involves careful 
review of very complex technical and safety issues. I believe that our 
work is best when it reflects a thorough analysis that surveys the full 
record and addresses all of the questions presented to the FCC. That 
said, if confirmed, I would be happy to work with you to consider how 
our regulatory processes could be improved consistent with the 
Administrative Procedure Act so that stakeholders cannot use their 
filings to cause undue delay in our decision-making. This could include 
clearer deadlines for review and the adjudication of comments and 
avoiding open-ended processes, provided that these adjustments 
safeguard the rights of parties to a full and fair hearing of the 
relevant issues.

   On average, it appears that the FCC process for approving 
        satellite gateways takes about 300 days--nearly a year--and is 
        applied to each individual gateway site. Will the FCC commit to 
        processing gateway applications more efficiently?
    Answer. Yes. Satellite constellations are evolving in ways that are 
resulting in far more applications for satellite gateways at the FCC. 
Aa a result, earlier this year I had the agency reach out to our 
counterparts at the United States Space Force to explore ways to 
collaborate better and leverage the broader resources of the United 
States Federal government to speed up this kind of review. If 
confirmed, I will continue to explore those and other opportunities to 
ensure that gateway applications are processed efficiently.

    Question 14. In January, the FCC adopted an NPRM on 12 GHz. What is 
your impression of the record thus far? What additional information, if 
any, would you like to see about whether it is possible to add mobile 
service throughout the 12 GHz band without causing harmful interference 
to incumbent licensees? When will you determine if the data is 
sufficient or insufficient to show that incumbent licensees can be 
protected, or if the data shows that incumbents will or will not 
receive harmful interference?
    Answer. The FCC has started a proceeding to explore opportunities 
for making more intensive use of 500 megahertz of spectrum in the 12 
GHz band. Historically, this band was used for Direct Broadcast 
Satellite Service and Multi-Channel Video and Data Distribution 
Service. More recently, proponents of a new generation of satellite 
operations have received authorization from the agency to launch and 
operate constellations of hundreds or thousands of satellites using 
several frequency bands, including the 12 GHz band. Thousands of 
satellites have been launched already, with new commercial satellite 
broadband services rolling out across the country. With this 
proceeding, the FCC is reviewing whether there may be additional 
opportunities to open this band up for new terrestrial use, including 
5G, without causing harmful interference to existing users. That will 
require carefully examining the characteristics of this spectrum band--
including its propagation and capacity characteristics, the nature of 
in-band and adjacent band incumbent use, and the potential for 
international harmonization--before deciding whether and, if so, how to 
make it available for more intensive terrestrial or satellite use.
    Initial comments on the 12 GHz NPRM were due on May 7, 2021, and 
reply comments were due on July 7, 2021. The response in this 
proceeding was especially robust, with more than 140 filings submitted 
by stakeholders thus far. The record includes technical studies, as 
well as legal and policy advocacy about the feasibility for coexistence 
among the various current and planned operations in the band. FCC staff 
is digging into the technical record that has been developed so far and 
determining what, if any, additional information is required. Among 
other things, we are evaluating the technical showings that have been 
submitted purporting to demonstrate the potential for coexistence, as 
well as any critiques of those studies, to determine if adequate 
information is in the record to determine whether incumbent licensees 
can be protected. Some commenters have criticized certain aspects of 
the technical studies that have been submitted by 5G proponents, while 
the advocates for 5G or mobile services counter that satellite 
broadband advocates should provide greater technical details to help 
evaluate whether additional operations can be accommodated in the band 
while protecting incumbents. Among the areas that the FCC staff are 
evaluating are the interference criteria used in one study in the 
record, the level of increase in probability of interference that 
should be acceptable, assumptions regarding the operational parameters 
and technical specifications of satellite user terminals in the band, 
and the appropriate propagation model to be considered. Further 
clarification on these points will assist the FCC staff in evaluating 
the feasibility for coexistence in this band. The engineering analysis, 
which is unusually complex, is underway right now and will help 
identify possible next steps. I agree that the FCC should work through 
these issues expeditiously.

    Question 15. The FCC adopted rules governing the 2.5 GHz 
Educational Broadband Service--making that spectrum available for 
commercial auction--more than two years ago. Yet, the spectrum remains 
un-auctioned, despite the Commission seeking comment on auction 
procedures nearly a year ago. Is the process for reviewing applications 
during the Rural Tribal Priority Window nearly completed? And is the 
Commission able to establish auction procedures and set a date for the 
auction even while it finishes processing those applications?
    Answer. Yes, the process for reviewing applications during the 
Rural Tribal Priority Window is nearly complete. Over 400 applications 
were received in the Rural Tribal Priority Window, with some 
voluntarily withdrawn by applicants and others dismissed due to lack of 
eligibility or lack of available spectrum. Of the remainder, the FCC 
has granted 292 licenses to Tribes or Tribally-controlled entities. 
Seventy-nine applications remain pending and under evaluation. However, 
36 of these applications were listed on an Accepted for Filing Public 
Notice that was released by the agency on November 18, 2021. Depending 
on the record that develops in response, many of these 36 applications 
could be eligible for grant before the end of the year. Of the 43 
pending applications, several are mutually exclusive with each other, 
which if not resolved by the applicants through voluntary amendment to 
their applications would require one or more closed auctions of those 
licenses pursuant to Section 309 of the Communications Act. On 
September 22, 2021, the FCC released a public notice encouraging 
applicants to take voluntary steps to resolve mutual exclusivity. Some 
other pending applications require the agency to evaluate requests for 
rule waivers to access spectrum over non-reservation Tribal lands. The 
FCC staff continues to individually review each of the pending 
applications and assist applicants as appropriate.
    The FCC's decisions on the pending applications may have an impact 
on the inventory of spectrum licenses that will be available at the 
auction. That is why the agency is working to resolve the pending 
applications as soon as possible in order to provide maximum certainty 
to bidders in advance of the auction. In light of these efforts, I 
expect the auction of the remaining 2.5 GHz band licenses to proceed 
next year but only after the ongoing 3.45 GHz band auction concludes.

    Question 16. As you know, Congress passed a Resolution of 
Disapproval of the FCC's 2016 ISP Privacy Rules. The law prohibits the 
FCC from adopting ``substantially similar'' rules. If the FCC 
reclassifies broadband service as common carriage subject to Title II 
requirements, what privacy rules, if any, do you believe the FCC could 
legally impose on ISPs? Please explain.
    Answer. Were the FCC to reclassify broadband under Title II, the 
agency would have the opportunity to conduct a rulemaking regarding the 
scope of privacy rules applicable to Internet service providers as 
telecommunications carriers under Section 222 of the Communications 
Act. In such a rulemaking, the FCC would need to consider the effect of 
the Congressional Resolution of Disapproval of the rules adopted in 
2016, which prohibits the FCC from enacting rules in ``substantially 
the same form'' as those that were disapproved.

    Question 17. The FCC now prohibits a single entity from owning two 
of the top-four rated television stations in a single market--unless 
the FCC gives special permission. Some argue that this rule is no 
longer necessary. Others argue that the rule promotes diversity and 
helps keep prices down.

   Do you think that the dual network rule is still necessary?
    Answer. Yes, the dual network rule is important. It does not 
address station ownership or combinations of licensees in any single 
market but instead prohibits mergers among the top four national 
television broadcast network companies.

   Do you think the reduction in competition caused by such 
        combinations can cause financial harm to consumers?
    Answer. Yes.

   In your view, what purpose does the rule serve? Do you see a 
        link between television ownership and pricing? Please explain.
    Answer. In general, the power to negotiate for the carriage of two 
top-four stations in a market can result in higher retransmission fees, 
which often are passed on to the consumer in the form of higher bills 
for pay television. The local television ownership rule helps to 
prevent this harm and the higher consumer costs that might result. 
Additionally, a lack of competition among local television stations 
could result in higher costs for local businesses seeking to purchase 
advertising time on those stations, costs that may likewise be passed 
on to consumers.

   Do you believe that such consolidation can maintain 
        diversity of voices in news and other local content?
    Answer. Competition is important in these markets because it helps 
ensure that a diversity of voices serve the community of license, as 
contemplated by the Communications Act.

    Question 18. The FCC under the previous administration permitted 
broadcasters to ``voluntarily'' transmit in a new digital format, 
called ``ATSC 3.0.'' As I understand it, use of this format gives 
broadcasters the flexibility to offer new services like broadband and 
pay television. And, the rules may permit broadcasters to degrade 
existing free television service in favor of these new services.

   Do broadcasters have any particular obligation to maintain a 
        robust, free over-the-air service? If so, why? And what should 
        such an obligation look like?

   How should the FCC balance concerns about maintaining a 
        robust broadcast television service as the television broadcast 
        industry takes on new lines of business?
    Answer. In 2017, the Commission authorized television broadcasters 
to use the Next Generation broadcast television transmission standard, 
also called ATSC 3.0, on a voluntary, market-driven basis. The new 
standard creates the opportunity for features such as higher quality 
television viewing experience with ultra-high-definition picture 
resolutions and immersive audio, enhanced emergency alerts, and 
innovative interactive services.
    While work on this standard continues, I agree with you that we 
need to ensure that consumers are not left behind. The ATSC 3.0 
decision from 2017 specifically requires broadcasters to air a local 
simulcast of their ATSC 3.0 primary video programming stream in ATSC 
1.0 format. This local simulcasting is a critical component of the 
FCC's authorization of ATSC 3.0 as a voluntary transmission standard. 
That is because the marketplace is still evolving and devices 
compatible with the new ATSC 3.0 transmission standard are not present 
in every home. This requirement ensures that viewers do not have to 
procure new equipment to watch their favorite news and programming. In 
other words, it supports maintenance of free, over-the-air service 
while permitting licensees to develop new and innovative services using 
the same airwaves.
    I think this approach makes sense. Moreover, I think it honors the 
Communications Act and thoughtfully takes into account the consequences 
of this change in standard on consumers, including those relying on 
free, over-the-air viewing.

    Question 19. As you know, the FCC included datacasting end-user 
equipment as eligible for reimbursement under the Emergency 
Connectivity Fund rulemaking. Technology has advanced to the point 
where consumers can benefit from using hybrid networks composed of 
disparate spectrum bands. These network designs are very efficient but 
may require regulators to give some regulatory flexibility to spectrum 
licensees to enable the deployment of these hybrid networks? Do you 
support flexible network use for new technologies that benefit 
consumers?
    Answer. As you note, in the decision establishing the Emergency 
Connectivity Fund, the FCC made the customer premises equipment used to 
receive datacasting eligible for program support in areas where there 
is no commercially available Internet access service options. Under 
these circumstances, the FCC found that datacasting can help meet 
students' remote learning needs by providing them with access to 
educational content outside of a school building through end user 
devices at students' homes that could download learning materials. 
Datacasting delivers educational content over broadcast spectrum, which 
is made possible by FCC rules. I understand that there are a handful of 
applications requesting support for datacasting end user equipment that 
are under review at the agency.
    More generally, I believe flexible use policies can help advance 
these and other opportunities by permitting licensees to put their 
spectrum resources together to best serve the public. That is why, 
where appropriate, I support providing flexibility to licensees to 
enable them to use new and innovative technologies to better serve 
consumers where it can be done in a way that maximizes the efficiency 
of use of the spectrum and provides appropriate protection to 
incumbents and other spectrum users. Evaluating such opportunities 
requires highly technical and fact-specific analyses to which the FCC 
open and transparent administrative processes are well-suited.

    Question 20. There have been some well-publicized cyberattacks on 
schools that have had insufficient cybersecurity protections in place. 
Some advocates have proposed allowing schools to use their E-Rate 
broadband dollars to purchase cybersecurity services, relieving schools 
of the obligation of purchasing those services, themselves. What 
statutory authority is there for such a change in eligible services, 
and what impact would such a change have on E-Rate's budget in the 
short and long term?
    Answer. E-Rate, which got its start as part of the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996, is the Nation's largest education 
technology program. It is responsible for connecting schools and 
libraries across the country to essential broadband services. Under the 
existing program, E-Rate funds basic firewalls. However, as you note, 
some stakeholders have called for funding next-generation firewalls and 
other cybersecurity services, including endpoint protection and 
advanced services. According to a study conducted by some of these 
stakeholders, funding a broad range of these kind of cybersecurity 
services would increase demand in the program as much as an additional 
$2.389 billion a year.
    In light of this, I think it is important to note that last month 
the President signed into law the K-12 Cybersecurity Act. This 
legislation requires the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security 
Agency, one of the government's leading authorities on cybersecurity 
matters, to study cybersecurity risks facing K-12 schools, develop 
recommendations to assist schools, and create an online toolkit for 
school officials. If confirmed, I believe that CISA's work to implement 
the K-12 Cybersecurity Act should inform any FCC efforts in this area 
going forward.

    Question 21. During your hearing, you agreed that we need accurate 
maps fully in place before we start sending money out. As you know, I 
have raised concerns about the 5G Fund and the previously proposed 
Mobility Fund Phase II moving forward based on unreliable data that 
overstated wireless coverage. As new maps and data are made available, 
will you commit to revisiting the current 5G Fund Order and update the 
budget based on new data?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 22. In July, President Biden signed an Executive Order on 
``Promoting Competition in the American Economy'' that, in part, 
encouraged the FCC to consider a number of policy actions, including 
reinstating net neutrality and on broadband access to multi-tenant 
buildings. Since the publication of the Executive Order, the FCC has 
sought comment on the latter topic, raising a potential concern that 
the FCC is taking direction from the White House on telecommunications 
policy.

   To what extent has your office or FCC bureaus communicated 
        with any official in the White House on the contents or 
        development of the Executive Order?
    Answer. My office and the Office of General Counsel offered 
technical assistance on various proposals during the development of the 
Executive Order.

   Is your office currently developing or planning to develop 
        any policy similar to any of the enumerated policies outlined 
        in the Executive Order?
    Answer. The Executive Order encourages the Federal Communications 
Commission, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to 
consider a range of policies designed to improve the conditions of 
competition in communications industries.
    There is ongoing work at the agency with respect to three 
initiatives specifically mentioned in the Executive Order--competitive 
spectrum auctions, support for Open Radio Access Networks to create a 
more competitive market for network equipment, and expanded broadband 
choice for residents of multi-dwelling units. In addition, there is 
work that has begun that is related to the Executive Order because it 
is a requirement in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
    First, in October, the FCC began an auction of 100 megahertz of 
mid-band spectrum in the 3.45 GHz band. This auction will introduce new 
competition to the provision of mid-band 5G services and features pre-
auction aggregation limits to support this effort. It is still 
underway, but it is likely be one of the highest-grossing auctions in 
FCC history.
    Second, in February the FCC began an inquiry to develop the first 
public record on the state of Open RAN. To further support the 
development of this technology in the United States, in July the FCC 
hosted an Open RAN showcase to educate the carrier community about the 
availability and growth of this new competitive equipment market. In 
August, the FCC designated two new innovation zones for qualified 
licensees to test new advanced technologies and prototype networks, 
including Open RAN--in Boston, Massachusetts and Raleigh, North 
Carolina. In October, the FCC also opened the filing window for the 
$1.9 billion reimbursement program available to carriers for 
replacement of untrusted equipment pursuant to the Secure and Trusted 
Communications Networks Act. Under the rules for this program, the 
agency has made clear that carriers may choose to deploy Open RAN 
technologies as replacement equipment.
    Third, in September, the FCC issued a public notice seeking comment 
on practices that landlords and Internet service providers may engage 
in that have the effect of reducing choice and competition in multi-
tenant environments. This was an effort to build on an earlier record 
on this subject that began with a notice of inquiry in 2017 and 
specific proposals in a rulemaking in 2019. Comments and reply comments 
have been filed and the agency is reviewing next steps.
    Finally, as a related matter, the Infrastructure Investment and 
Jobs Act directs the FCC to adopt regulations requiring broadband 
providers to display a ``broadband consumer label'' similar in format 
to the food nutrition labels used by the Food and Drug Administration 
and proposed by the FCC's Consumer Advisory Committee. The agency is 
preparing a rulemaking to implement this legislative directive, which 
aligns with policies in the Executive Order.

   If confirmed, do you commit to maintaining the independence 
        of the FCC from the White House and Executive Branch agencies?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 23. The recently-enacted Infrastructure Investment and 
Jobs Act (IIJA) provides $65 billion for broadband and also directs the 
FCC to conduct several rulemakings on broadband price transparency and 
on digital discrimination.

   The law directs the FCC to adopt a final order on digital 
        discrimination within two years. What are your views on digital 
        discrimination and will you commit, as Chairwoman, to pursue 
        this rulemaking through a consensus-based process with all 
        Commissioners?
    Answer. Section 60506 of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act 
requires the FCC to adopt rules to ``facilitate equal access'' to 
broadband, taking into account technical and economic feasibility, 
including by preventing digital discrimination of access based on 
income, race, ethnicity, color, religion, or national origin. If 
confirmed, I will implement this provision consistent with the law. 
Moreover, in doing so I will consult, as directed, with the Attorney 
General of the United States. As you know, the first sentence of the 
Communications Act charges the FCC ``to make available, so far as 
possible, to all the people of the United States, without 
discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, 
or sex'' communications networks, and I believe that the effort in this 
legislation to develop a proceeding regarding digital discrimination is 
consistent with this broader directive in the Communications Act. If 
confirmed, I will develop a rulemaking on this subject and work with my 
colleagues on this effort.

   The law directs the Government Accountability Office to 
        examine whether theFCC's current definition of high speed 
        broadband (25/3 Mbps) is appropriate. Do you believe that the 
        current definition is appropriate? If not, what do you believe 
        should be the appropriate definition?
    Answer. I do not believe the current definition used by the FCC is 
adequate. The definition of ``advanced telecommunications 
capability''--or broadband--that has been used by the agency since 2015 
is 25/3 Mbps. I have consistently expressed concern that the FCC should 
be more forward-looking with its broadband speed standard. As a result, 
I have dissented several times in proceedings concerning this standard 
in connection with the report required under Section 706 of the 
Telecommunications Act.
    I believe we need to set audacious goals if we want to do big 
things. With the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act generally 
requiring projects to meet a 100/20 Mbps threshold for funding and 
providers rolling out higher speeds across the country, I believe we 
need to think bigger. I have previously called for raising the download 
speed to at least 100 Mbps and rethinking our approach to upload 
speeds, and my views have not changed.

    Question 24. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) 
establishes a $42 billion program for broadband investment, on top of a 
wide range of existing broadband investment programs across a number of 
Federal agencies. There are concerns that these funds may not be used 
efficiently without effective cost saving measures such as permitting 
reform.

   Given the significant infusion of Federal funding into 
        broadband, do you believe that the FCC should pursue permitting 
        reforms to ensure that taxpayer dollars do not go to waste? If 
        not, why not? If yes, what permitting reforms do you believe 
        are appropriate for FCC action?

   The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has recently 
        proposed rules to modify the National Environmental Policy Act 
        (NEPA) that would make it more difficult and expensive to 
        pursue infrastructure projects, including broadband deployment. 
        Do you believe that overly onerous environmental reviews can 
        deter greater broadband infrastructure deployment?
    Answer. I agree that if we want broad economic growth and 
widespread mobile opportunity, we need to avoid unnecessary delays in 
state and local permitting processes. That's because they can slow 
deployment.
    In 2018 the FCC amended its rules to clarify that the deployment of 
small wireless facilities by non-federal entities does not constitute 
either a ``federal undertaking'' within the meaning of National 
Historic Preservation Act or a ``major Federal action'' under National 
Environmental Policy Act and as a result, certain Federal historic 
preservation and environmental reviews were not required. This action 
was taken, in part, because historic and environmental reviews may be 
time consuming and result in delay. However, in 2019, the D.C. Circuit 
vacated that action, finding that the FCC had not justified its 
decision under administrative law. In particular, the court noted that 
the agency had not explained why its action was necessary in light of 
the streamlined procedures already in place for wireless construction 
and had not demonstrated why its action was consistent with FCC's 
decades-long history of carefully tailored review. Following the 
court's decision, the FCC repealed the affected rules and, as a result, 
deployments of small wireless facilities currently are subject to NHPA 
and NEPA review. I believe that in light of this ruling, the FCC will 
need to identify new ways to move forward.
    More broadly, I believe we should acknowledge that we have a 
history of local control in this country but also recognize that more 
uniform policies can help us reach more parts of the country with 
broadband. So while we can develop model codes for small cell and 5G 
deployment--we need to make sure they are supported by a wide range of 
industry and state and local officials. Then it would be valuable to 
review every policy and program--including those newly established 
pursuant to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act--and build in 
incentives to use these models. In the process, we can create a more 
common set of practices nationwide, but to do so, we would use carrots 
instead of sticks.

    Question 25. We are currently experiencing an ongoing semiconductor 
shortage, impacting the supply chain across many sectors. As a result, 
manufacturers have been forced to modify components of their devices in 
order to continue shipments. However, as a result of these 
modifications, manufacturers may be forced to resubmit the devices for 
FCC equipment approval, which can further delay the shipment and supply 
of communications equipment.

   What steps has the FCC taken in recent months to assist 
        manufacturers in their efforts to maintain their supply of 
        devices?

   Are there interim measures that the FCC can implement to 
        alleviate the challenges that manufacturers are experiencing? 
        Specifically, when the change in the device is a result of the 
        ongoing chip shortage, are there ways to expedite the approval 
        process or provide conditional approval for devices that meet 
        the specifications in the rules?
    Answer. I agree that it is necessary for the FCC to study ongoing 
supply chain matters, including those involving semiconductors.
    On May 11, 2019, the FCC released a public notice seeking detailed 
information about the global semiconductor shortage. The agency 
specifically sought comment on the impact of semiconductor supply chain 
constraints on the communications sector in the United States and what 
this might mean for FCC priorities and initiatives. In addition, the 
agency asked what steps it might take to ensure a resilient supply 
chain for communications technologies now and in the future. FCC staff 
also notified their counterparts at the Department of Commerce to make 
them aware of our efforts in this area. In response to the public 
notice, we received more than two dozen submissions. Commenters 
generally expressed concern about semiconductor supply chain shortages 
and how they may be exacerbated by the ongoing pandemic. Some 
commenters suggested that these shortages might impact the ability to 
comply with regulatory deadlines or efforts to maintain and upgrade 
networks. The record also includes broad support for Federal government 
efforts to level the global playing field and encourage greater 
collaboration between industry participants.
    I believe the FCC will need to keep this record in mind as it 
proceeds with its work. At the same time, the agency will need to 
continue to look for opportunities to improve the efficiency and 
effectiveness of its processes, including the equipment authorization 
system. To this end, on June 17, 2021, the FCC adopted a decision 
updating its device marketing and importation rules to accelerate the 
time-frame for developing and releasing new devices before receiving 
full approval. The updated rules give manufacturers greater flexibility 
to import, market, and conditionally sell equipment while the equipment 
authorization process is ongoing.
    These revisions will help get new devices into the hands of 
consumers more quickly, while still ensuring that the underlying 
purposes of the equipment authorization program are served. I believe 
the FCC will need to continue to evaluate processes like this in order, 
to determine if there are additional steps the agency can take to 
update its practices and alleviate the challenges manufacturers may 
experience due to supply chain challenges.
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. John Thune to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Question 1. USDA recently announced that it would provide 
additional scoring points to broadband providers that commit to net 
neutrality. Were you or anyone at the FCC consulted by USDA when it 
made its determination of what constitutes ``net neutrality'' in the 
Reconnect Program?
    Answer. As part of the established coordination process between the 
agencies, the Rural Utilities Service staff notified FCC staff before 
publicly releasing the text of the recent funding announcement. 
However, neither myself nor FCC staff provided any input on this 
portion of the funding announcement.

    Question 2. Ensuring there is a pipeline of licensed and unlicensed 
spectrum is critical to the development of 5G, next-generation devices, 
and ultimately to the United States' economic growth and global 
competitiveness. To maintain competitiveness in the 5G space, the FCC 
has requested roughly $130 million to plan spectrum auctions for Fiscal 
Year 2022. Could you explain both the engineering expertise and related 
depth of analysis these auction planning funds allow the FCC to bring 
to the difficult questions regarding spectrum management?
    Answer. I agree that ensuring there is a pipeline of licensed and 
unlicensed spectrum is important for the development of 5G wireless 
service, next-generation services and devices, and our national 
economic growth and global competitiveness.
    The spectrum management practices required to support this effort 
involve a complex, multi-year process that relies on significant input 
from the public and private sector. It also requires extensive 
technical, economic, legal, and policy expertise from across the FCC. 
The engineering work on any spectrum band contemplated for new 
commercial use typically begins years before an auction or 
authorization. Among other things, this involves analysis of 
characteristics of the airwaves at issue and the potential for 
coexistence between incumbent operations in the frequency band or 
adjacent band and new commercial uses that might, for instance, enter 
the band following auction. This analysis is often done in the context 
of a rulemaking proceeding in order to collect public comment that will 
shape the technical service rules for the new band. If the band at 
issue has incumbent Federal users, FCC engineers also will work closely 
with our Federal partners, through a range of formal and informal 
coordination processes, including the NTIA's Interdepartment Radio 
Advisory Committee, the interagency Policy and Plans Steering Group, 
and regularly scheduled meetings between FCC staff and their 
counterparts at NTIA and other Federal agencies.
    However, every reallocation presents unique engineering and policy 
issues, so careful attention and planning is vital. This is especially 
true for auction-related efforts, which require agency-wide work to 
ensure the appropriate amount of cost and overhead supports the 
repurposing of airwaves for new commercial use. In addition, the 
complexity of spectrum auctions has increased steadily as the agency 
works through more difficult technical and policy matters in an 
environment where there is less and less vacant spectrum. You can see 
this clearly in many of the auctions the FCC has run in recent years, 
including the incentive auctions in the 600 MHz and 39 GHz band, as 
well as the innovative approach taken in the 3.5 GHz band mixing 
federal, non-federal, licensed, and unlicensed use.
    In Fiscal Year 2022, the FCC will need to continue to engage in 
this kind of planning for future spectrum auctions. It also will need 
to leverage this expertise in ongoing work associated with universal 
service, specifically auctions-based efforts associated with supporting 
the high-cost fund for rural areas. Furthermore, the FCC will need to 
continue to implement the MOBILE NOW Act and RAY BAUMS Act, including 
working with NTIA to identify additional spectrum for mobile and fixed 
use. In addition, pursuant to this legislation the agency will need to 
prepare annual reports on upcoming systems of competitive bidding, 
coordinate with NTIA on efforts to incentivize Federal agencies to 
share spectrum allocations, continue work on bidirectional sharing 
initiatives, continue assessment of commercial wireless use in the 
lower 3 GHz band, and monitor post-auction operations in bands subject 
to spectrum sharing or transitioning to new flexible uses. Finally, the 
FCC will need to devote significant resources in the coming year toward 
post-broadcast incentive auction implementation, including monitoring 
progress of stations authorized to continue to operate on their new 
channels on interim facilities for a limited time pending construction 
of their final facilities and continuing to reimburse the repacked 
stations, certain multichannel video service providers and FM radio 
stations affected by the repack, and transitioning the C-band from 
incumbent to new flexible use. The budget, as requested, will help 
ensure that the agency is able to accomplish these efforts.

    Question 3. There have been a number of disputes with respect to 
the spectrum decisions made by the FCC. Do you believe the FCC employs 
engineers capable of understanding and ensuring the safest use of the 
public airwaves, and please share whether you believe the FCC conducts 
its spectrum policy decision-making in a way that provides for any 
interested party, including any in the Federal government, to 
meaningfully engage.
    Answer. Yes, I have the utmost confidence in the engineers at the 
FCC. They have a long history of working to navigate complex 
technological issues and always keep public safety at the core of their 
analysis. I also believe that the FCC conducts its spectrum 
policymaking in a manner consistent with the Administrative Procedure 
Act. If confirmed, I will continue to ensure the agency does so in an 
open and transparent way that provides all parties, including those in 
the Federal government, the opportunity to meaningfully engage.

    Question 4. The FCC's Alternative Cost Model (ACAM) program is 
helping bring broadband to rural Americans who are the hardest to 
serve. However, the benefits of the ACAM program are constrained by 
specific terms that deny consumers faster broadband speeds. Does the 
FCC plan to act on a petition pending before the Commission to adopt 
modifications to the program to more quickly bring higher speeds to 
consumers served by the ACAM program?
    Answer. The ACAM program provides model-based support to rate-of-
return carriers in return for broadband deployment obligations. There 
have been two offers to rate-of-return carriers to participate in the 
program, which ends in 2028 for most electing carriers. Participating 
carriers receive approximately $1.1 billion annually.
    On October 30, 2020, the ACAM Broadband Coalition, a coalition of 
providers that participate in the ACAM program, filed a petition for 
rulemaking seeking to extend the program until 2034, in return for 
enhanced obligations to provide higher speeds. Currently, the ACAM 
program requires 804,871 locations to be served at 25/3 Mbps speeds, 
165,725 locations to be served at 10/1 Mbps, and 50,227 locations to be 
served at 4/1 Mbps speeds. The ACAM Broadband Coalition's petition for 
rulemaking proposes that in exchange for six additional years of 
support, at a cost to the Universal Service Fund of approximately $6.6 
billion, participants in the ACAM program will serve 605,373 locations 
at 100/25 Mbps, 300,074 locations at 25/3 Mbps, and 115,376 locations 
at 10/1 Mbps. The FCC sought comment on the petition for rulemaking on 
November 4, 2020. Multiple parties filed comments in response. 
Recently, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act became law, 
providing a significant infusion of funds for broadband deployment and 
generally requiring deployment at speeds of 100/20 Mbps. FCC staff 
currently are evaluating the petition for rulemaking taking into 
consideration marketplace developments and the funding available in 
this new law.

    Question 5. Preventing illegal robocalls from reaching consumers 
continues to be a high priority and Congress made that clear when it 
passed the bipartisan TRACED Act.

   How is implementation of that law going in your view?

   It is more difficult to identify trustworthy calls with 
        certain networks, primarily those without IP technology. What 
        can the FCC do to help authenticate calls across networks?
    Answer. The FCC has made substantial progress implementing the 
TRACED Act and its provisions designed to reduce robocalls. These 
efforts have helped combat robocalls by promoting efforts to stop these 
junk calls using technology; adopting policies that require providers 
to take steps to better protect their customers; and aggressively 
enforcing against those who make and facilitate these calls.
    Since this legislation was signed into law in 2019, the FCC has put 
in place a caller ID authentication mandate using STIR/SHAKEN 
technology, developed a safe harbor to encourage carriers to block 
illegal calls, including one-ring scam calls, and set up a process for 
registration of a consortium to conduct private-led efforts to 
traceback the origin of suspected unlawful robocalls. In addition, the 
FCC has released reports on the Reassigned Numbers Database, one-ring 
scams, complaint and enforcement activities, traceback efforts, and 
caller ID authentication implementation progress by voice service 
providers. The agency also established a Hospital Robocall Protection 
Group, which published best practices to protect hospitals from 
robocalls.
    Despite these efforts, more work remains. After all, scam artists 
responsible for robocalls move fast and look for ways to bypass each 
new effort we put in place to stop them.
    Going forward, it is essential for the FCC to close whatever 
remaining gaps it can in the STIR/SHAKEN regime. To this end, the 
agency is working to shorten the extension for implementing this caller 
authentication technology for small service providers if the carrier at 
issue has been identified as a source of illegal robocalls. The agency 
is also working to require providers that serve as a gateway for 
foreign-originated calls to participate in the STIR/SHAKEN framework. 
This is essential because we understand that a large number of these 
junk calls are now originating overseas.
    It is also important to note that the TRACED Act identified a gap 
in the use of STIR/SHAKEN when it directed the FCC to grant an 
extension to voice service providers without Internet Protocol network 
technology until a caller ID authentication protocol for their networks 
is developed. To ensure that this protocol is in fact developed, the 
FCC required those voice service providers with non-IP network 
technology to participate in efforts including through industry trade 
associations, working groups, or industry standards bodies to develop 
caller ID authentication solutions for such networks. At the same time, 
the North American Numbering Council has developed recommended steps to 
promote greater implementation of IP network technology. The FCC will 
continue to monitor the efforts of these groups in order to expand the 
effective use of caller ID authentication technologies because we know 
when they are put in place they can help reduce illegal robocalls.

    Question 6. What do you believe the FCC's role should be relating 
to Section 230 and do you support Congressional action to address 
online transparency concerns like my bipartisan PACT Act?
    Answer. I support efforts in Congress to address online 
transparency. Moreover, if confirmed, I will ensure the agency works 
with Congress to help inform its efforts to consider any changes it may 
wish to make to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
    More generally, I recognize that social media can be frustrating. 
However, it is a medium that is ultimately protected by the First 
Amendment. That means Section 230 does not modify this underlying set 
of rights. Instead, the law provides those who host or moderate 
Internet content with some protection from liability from what their 
users say or do online. Specifically, it provides, among other things, 
that ``[n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall 
be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by 
another information content provider.'' It further provides that ``[n]o 
provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held 
liable on account of . . . any action voluntarily taken in good faith 
to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or 
user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively 
violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such 
material is constitutionally protected.'' With respect to the FCC, it 
is important to note that the agency is not referenced in this law. 
Nonetheless, as noted above, if confirmed, I would be willing to work 
with Congress to help address any of its concerns--or implement any new 
legal directives--regarding online transparency.

    Question 7. In addition to the FCC's programs aimed at closing the 
digital divide, NTIA, USDA, and the Department of Treasury are 
disbursing funds to support the buildout of broadband networks. How 
would you characterize the coordination between the FCC, NTIA, and USDA 
given that they all have programs that support broadband? Are you 
concerned that programs administered by NTIA, Treasury, and RUS are 
going to overbuild FCC-funded locations? What steps is the FCC taking 
or will be taking to ensure these programs do not overbuild other 
federally funded networks?
    Answer. I believe that in the past the FCC has worked closely with 
its Federal partners when it comes to efforts to close the digital 
divide. However, in light of the expanded work to do so in the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, it is essential that we work 
even closer.
    In June of this year, the FCC, NTIA, and Rural Utilities Service at 
the USDA entered into an Interagency Agreement that specifically 
``require[s] coordination . . . for the distribution of funds for 
broadband deployment.'' As a result, the FCC, NTIA, and RUS share 
information on a regular basis about our respective funding programs, 
including the entities seeking and receiving funding to provide service 
in a given area, the speed and technology funded, and the terms and 
conditions of the funding under the law. In addition, the Department of 
Treasury has sought FCC input for the purposes of implementing the 
Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund and the Coronavirus 
Capital Projects Fund. FCC staff also has engaged with representatives 
of the Department of Treasury, both separately and alongside NTIA and 
RUS representatives, to share information and insight on programs and 
identify coordination opportunities.
    However, it is important to note that the programs each agency 
oversees may be different under the law. In other words, these efforts 
each have unique elements like eligibility criteria, funding purposes, 
and speed thresholds. In some instances, those features could result in 
separate funding in the same location working together--like, for 
instance, where one program funds capital expenditures and another 
supports operating expenditures. I believe it is essential to make sure 
that these programs, consistent with the law, operate in a 
complementary manner. At the same time, it is essential that those 
responsible for these programs--including the FCC--coordinate to ensure 
funding is directed to areas without adequate service and avoid 
unnecessary duplication. If confirmed, I pledge to have the FCC work 
with its Federal partners to do so.

    Question 8. In 2014, Congress directed the FCC to ``commence a 
rulemaking to review its totality of the circumstances test for good 
faith negotiations.'' Notwithstanding the request, the full Commission 
has never concluded the proceeding. Do you support completing the work 
that Congress requested be undertaken in 2014?
    Answer. In 2015, with my support, the FCC adopted a rulemaking 
seeking to review and update the totality of the circumstances 
concerning good faith negotiations for retransmission consent. There 
was a high level of interest in this proceeding and the record that 
resulted featured a wide range of different views about the need for 
additional specificity with respect to good faith negotiation. After 
reviewing these comments, the Chairman at the time announced that he 
would take no further action.
    Since that time the FCC has revised its good faith retransmission 
consent rules in order to implement Section 1003 of the Television 
Viewer Protection Act of 2019. It did so in 2020 specifically to 
support smaller multichannel video programming distributors by allowing 
them to operate as a buying group in retransmission consent 
negotiations with large broadcast station groups.
    Since that time the FCC also has investigated alleged violations of 
the good faith requirement and continues to do so when potential 
violations arise. This effort has resulted in several significant 
enforcement actions, including more than $8.7 million in forfeitures 
against parties that failed to negotiate in good faith and more than 
$57 million in settlement payments for failure to comply with our rules 
in this area, including the obligation to negotiate in good faith.
    As a result, some of the specific practices identified in the 
agency's rulemaking from 2015 have become less common, as the market 
has evolved. Nonetheless, other practices may be emerging that could 
create new challenges for good faith negotiation in the current 
environment. I believe this means that the flexibility in the totality 
of the circumstances test is important because it allows the agency to 
update and evolve its policies and enforcement regarding good faith 
negotiations. However, given the changes in this market during the last 
several years, I believe the FCC should first refresh the record it has 
on this subject in order to ensure it has the most up-to-date 
information to inform efforts to complete the rulemaking Congress 
requested in 2014.

    Question 9. How can the FCC account for both public and non-public 
spectrum needs while considering the national security consequences?
    Answer. Wireless spectrum is a finite resource. Modern civic and 
commercial life now depend on its availability--as do essential Federal 
missions. This means that thoughtfully managing this resource is vital 
for our continued economic growth and national security.
    For this reason, I believe that it is important that we explore new 
models for federal-commercial information sharing, cooperation, and 
collaboration. This requires a whole-of-government approach to spectrum 
policy that treats spectrum innovation in the United States as it 
should be treated: in strategic terms that ensure we identify creative 
ways to remain the global leader in technology-driven innovation.
    To do so, and to advance both non-federal and Federal spectrum 
needs, we need to embrace the range of new wireless access technologies 
available. This requires recognizing that traditionally our system of 
spectrum access has had a binary quality. Either it is licensed or 
unlicensed, Federal or non-federal. But this duality is not the result 
of physics. It is the result of an intentional set of policy choices 
that can create scarcity when there are other choices we can make to 
facilitate abundance. To understand how, it is instructive to consider 
the model the FCC created in the 3.5 GHz band several years ago. Here 
the agency took 150 megahertz of spectrum and opened it up to a mix of 
government, licensed, and unlicensed uses. It did this by proposing a 
spectrum access database to dynamically manage the different kinds of 
wireless traffic using these airwaves. This multi-tiered approach to 
spectrum access was not just unprecedented--it was creative, efficient, 
and forward looking. Today this band accommodates important government 
radar operations that protect our safety while also making much-needed 
mid-band spectrum available to advance our wireless leadership. These 
kinds of creative efforts should continue to be developed as the FCC 
works to accommodate public and non-public demands on our airwaves.
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roy Blunt to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Question 1. Chairwoman Rosenworcel, you have been in the 
telecommunications world a long time, as both a staffer and as a 
commissioner. You have seen an incredible change in a number of 
industries that the Commission oversees, both in terms of technology 
and the marketplace.
    I wanted to specifically highlight the local broadcast industry, 
which is of vital importance to both local communities and our country 
as a whole, and serves a key role in providing access to trusted, 
objective news. Both Congress and the FCC have consistently affirmed 
the importance of local broadcasting, from its inception through its 
transition to digital and high definition, and by allowing local 
stations to pursue spectrum innovation and offer local listeners and 
viewers more information and a better experience.
    You have made public statements consistent with this view. For 
example, in your testimony at a Senate Commerce FCC oversight hearing 
from last year, you stated: ``we should scour the FCC's rules to 
identify how to support local media . . . [W]e need to do our part to 
try to support local journalism and jobs. We need to help bring the 
capacity for program origination back to the communities where stations 
serve.''

   Given the importance of local broadcasting, can you commit 
        to continuing to work with me and the Members of this committee 
        to keep the local broadcast medium vibrant and stations on a 
        level regulatory playing field with their competitors in the 
        audio, video, and advertising marketplaces?
    Answer. Yes.

   Years ago, Congress enacted a law which allowed certain low 
        power television stations to apply for and receive enhanced 
        rights to their spectrum licenses, giving them certainty to 
        invest in their stations and grow their audiences in mainly 
        small and rural markets. I'm working on legislation to open 
        another, similar window to allow for additional low power 
        stations to once again apply for these ``Class A'' rights. Can 
        I have your commitment that you will work with me and this 
        Committee in enacting that law so that we can help expand and 
        protect television stations in small markets and the viewers 
        that they serve?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 2: President Biden signed into law the bipartisan 
infrastructure legislation this week, which I supported in no small 
part because of the tremendous investment it will make to close 
broadband gaps in rural America. This is an incredibly important issue 
in Missouri, where approximately one third of rural residents still 
lack access to broadband. At the same time, it's crucial that this 
historic investment is spent efficiently and not used to duplicate 
networks where high speed service already exists or where providers are 
subject to legally enforceable deployment obligations. For example, 
this funding is going to co-exist with multiple broadband funding 
programs at multiple Federal agencies--U.S. Department of Agriculture, 
NTIA, Treasury--as well as state and local agencies, and we need to 
coordinate these programs to avoid a situation where the Federal 
government is competing against itself or undermining and discouraging 
the private sector's own tremendous infrastructure investments. This is 
key because every dollar that goes to subsidized overbuilding is a 
dollar diverted from unserved Americans who lack any access to 
broadband whatsoever.
    Accurate broadband maps are a helpful step in preventing subsidized 
overbuilding, but further coordination is going to be needed, to avoid 
subsidizing overbuilding in areas where providers are subject to 
legally enforceable deployment obligations but haven't yet made service 
available--either on account of government funding or otherwise.

   Chairwoman Rosenworcel, do you agree that it's important to 
        ensure that Federal funding is spent efficiently and not used 
        to overbuild high speed networks?

   How would you characterize current coordination efforts 
        among the FCC, NTIA, USDA, and Treasury, as well as with state 
        and local broadband authorities to prevent duplication?

   Are you concerned that programs administered by NTIA, 
        Treasury, and USDA are at risk of overbuilding FCC-funded 
        locations, such as locations funded by the 2020 Rural Digital 
        Opportunity Fund auction?

   What are you doing to prevent that from happening?
    Answer. I agree that it is important to spend Federal funding 
efficiently, especially because, as you note, there are too many 
communities across the country that still lack access to high-speed 
service. In light of this, the FCC has increased its efforts to work 
closely with our counterparts on new initiatives to help close the 
digital divide.
    On June 25, 2011, the FCC, NTIA and Rural Utilities Service at the 
USDA entered into an Interagency Agreement that specifically 
``require[s] coordination . . . for the distribution of funds for 
broadband deployment.'' As a result, the FCC, NTIA, and RUS share 
information on a regular basis about our respective funding programs, 
including the entities seeking and receiving funding to provide service 
in a given area, the speed and technology funded, and the terms and 
conditions of the funding under the law. In addition, the Department of 
Treasury has sought FCC input for the purposes of implementing the 
Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund and the Coronavirus 
Capital Projects Fund. FCC staff also has engaged with representatives 
of the Department of Treasury, both separately and alongside NTIA and 
RUS representatives, to share information and insight on programs and 
identify coordination opportunities. With respect to the Rural Digital 
Opportunity Fund, this engagement includes keeping other agencies, as 
well as state, local, and Tribal governments, apprised of our actions 
by releasing lists of census blocks that are the subject of default by 
winning bidders, as well as lists of census blocks where winning 
bidders have been authorized.
    However, it is important to note that the program each agency 
oversees may be different under the law. In other words, these efforts 
each have unique elements like eligibility criteria, funding purposes, 
and speed thresholds. In some instances, those features could result in 
separate funding in the same location working together--like, for 
instance, where one program funds capital expenditures and another 
supports operating expenditures. I believe it is essential to make sure 
that these programs, consistent with the law, operate in a 
complementary manner. At the same time, it is essential that those 
responsible for these programs--including the FCC--coordinate to ensure 
funding is directed to areas without adequate service and avoid 
unnecessary duplication. If confirmed, I pledge to have the FCC work 
with its Federal partners to do so.

    Question 3. Chairwoman Rosenworcel, you voted for the 2015 Title II 
Order adopting net neutrality rules. Paragraph 5 of that order stated, 
``We expressly eschew the future use of prescriptive, industry-wide 
rate regulation. Under this approach, consumers can continue to enjoy 
unfettered access to the Internet over their fixed and mobile broadband 
connections, innovators can continue to enjoy the benefits of a 
platform that affords them unprecedented access to hundreds of millions 
of consumers across the country and around the world, and network 
operators can continue to reap the benefits of their investments.''
   Do you agree that declining to impose rate regulation on the 
        broadband industry was the right decision?

   Are you committed to maintain a policy that rejects rate 
        regulation of broadband service?
    Answer. As you note, I voted to support the decision in 2015 to 
adopt net neutrality rules. That decision stated that it ``expressly 
eschew[s] future use of prescriptive, industry-wide rate regulation.'' 
I supported this approach in the past and would do so again in the 
future.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Deb Fischer to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Question 1. During the hearing, you responded that the Federal-
State Joint Board on Universal Service should examine and provide 
recommendations on contribution reform for the Universal Service Fund. 
However, the Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service has not met 
this year. In fact, records indicate that the Board last met on 
February 11, 2019.

   Are there plans at the Commission to schedule the next 
        meeting for the Board?

   If yes, could you please confirm the date on which the Board 
        will convene for the next meeting?

   Can you commit that the Board will meet in the first quarter 
        of 2022, if you are confirmed?
    Answer. I support efforts to have Federal and state authorities 
work together to identify the policies that best support universal 
service nationwide. The Communications Act sets up a framework for 
doing so, as Sections 254 and 410 establish the Federal-State Joint 
Board on Universal Service. Under the law, the board is comprised of 
three Federal commissioners, four state utility commissioners, and a 
state consumer advocate representative. The FCC appointed three new 
state members on December 30, 2020, but there is currently a Federal 
commissioner vacancy. If confirmed, I will, as soon as there is a full 
complement of commissioners at the FCC, work to appoint an additional 
Federal commissioner to join the board and schedule a meeting with the 
new members.

    Question 2. While there are a number of significant funding 
opportunities for broadband deployment through new Federal grants, the 
Universal Service Fund's mission remains important when it comes to 
building and maintaining sustainable networks in high cost areas. The 
Commission's Alternative Connect America Cost Model (ACAM) program is 
helping to bring broadband to hundreds of thousands of rural consumers 
in the hardest to reach communities.

   Does the Commission plan to act on a pending petition to 
        address modifications to the ACAM program to more quickly bring 
        higher speeds to consumers served by the program?

   If yes, what is the timeline by which the Commission plans 
        to proceed on the petition?
    Answer. The ACAM program provides model-based support to rate-of-
return carriers in return for broadband deployment obligations. There 
have been two offers to rate-of-return carriers to participate in the 
program, which ends in 2028 for most electing carriers. Participating 
carriers receive approximately $1.1 billion in support from the program 
annually.
    On October 30, 2020, the ACAM Broadband Coalition, a coalition of 
providers that participate in the ACAM program, filed a petition for 
rulemaking seeking to extend the program until 2034, in return for 
enhanced obligations to provide higher speeds. Currently, the ACAM 
program requires 804,871 locations to be served at 25/3 Mbps speeds, 
165,725 locations to be served at 10/1 Mbps, and 50,227 locations to be 
served at 4/1 Mbps speeds. The ACAM Broadband Coalition's petition for 
rulemaking proposes that in exchange for six additional years of 
support, at a cost to the Universal Service Fund of approximately $6.6 
billion, participants in the ACAM program will serve 605,373 locations 
at 100/25 Mbps, 300,074 locations at 25/3 Mbps, and 115,376 locations 
at 10/1 Mbps. The FCC sought comment on the petition for rulemaking on 
November 4, 2020. Multiple parties filed comments in response. 
Recently, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act became law, 
providing a significant infusion of funds for broadband deployment and 
generally requiring deployment at speeds of 100/20 Mbps. FCC staff 
currently are evaluating the petition for rulemaking in light of the 
record and other recent developments, including the passage of the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Question 1. I understand that when it comes to engineers and other 
highly-desired positions, it is difficult for Federal agencies to 
compete with the private sector for recruits. What challenges does the 
FCC face when hiring engineers and other technical staff, and what can 
the FCC do to overcome these challenges?
    Answer. Engineers are an integral part of the day-to-day work of 
the FCC. With communications technologies always evolving, their input 
is essential in every major proceeding at the agency. However, 
attracting and retaining top talent can be a challenge, especially when 
private sector employers may be able to offer higher salaries and 
greater benefits. For this reason, in 2013 I proposed that the FCC 
create an engineering honors program to recruit young engineers and 
bring new vigor to the ranks of our technical experts. I am glad that 
my predecessor adopted this idea and made it a reality. If confirmed, I 
would look forward to continuing the engineering honors program and 
exploring other opportunities to create a workplace that attracts the 
technical expertise that is necessary for the agency to successfully 
perform its work.

    Question 2. Congress has fully-funded the creation of granular maps 
made by the FCC and it is now dependent on the FCC to complete those 
maps. Additionally, the new state broadband deployment grant program at 
NTIA is dependent on these update FCC maps. When will the maps 
authorized by the Broadband DATA Act be finished?
    Answer. I agree that maps are crucial to ensuring that the FCC has 
accurate information about where broadband service is and is not 
available across the country. With better data we can more precisely 
target our policymaking efforts and financial resources, including the 
FCC's universal service funding and the funding included in the 
recently enacted Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, to those 
unserved and underserved communities where support is needed most.
    As you know, the Broadband DATA Act was signed into law in March of 
2020. With this legislation Congress recognized that if we want to 
ensure everyone has access to broadband, we need accurate information 
about where broadband is and is not across the country. Then, in 
December of 2020, Congress provided the FCC with an appropriation to 
help fund implementation of this law.
    As a result, in my first meeting as Acting Chairwoman, I announced 
the formation of the Broadband Data Task Force. This group was designed 
to help coordinate and expedite the design and construction of new 
systems for collecting and verifying new broadband deployment data. 
While it was made clear that we had an enormous amount of work to do, I 
am pleased to report that we have made significant progress since 
January.
    The FCC is developing the data architecture and systems required 
for the receipt of broadband data from a wide variety of sources and 
has completed several aspects of the data collection system design. 
This is important because when I took the reins at the agency these 
systems were not in place and having them is a prerequisite for the 
data collection and mapping required under the Broadband DATA Act.
    In addition, the FCC has awarded a competitively bid contract to 
create and maintain the Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric, which is 
the foundation for its mapping efforts. The Fabric was specifically 
required in the Broadband DATA Act. The law also required that the FCC 
procure the Fabric through the traditional Federal government 
contracting process. This has presented a challenge because, while the 
agency has awarded the contract, another bidder has filed a protest at 
the GAO. As a result, the contract is stayed while the GAO has a 100-
day period to review the protest and the FCC's response.
    While this effort is underway at the GAO, the agency has worked on 
other efforts to support the Broadband DATA Act and its objectives. 
This includes writing the rules for the challenge and verification 
processes required under the law and working to update the FCC Speed 
Test App contract so that it can be more broadly used by consumers to 
support mobile challenges and data gathering through crowdsourcing. The 
agency also is moving forward with procurements to implement the 
technical assistance functions for providers, state, local, and Tribal 
governments, and consumers.
    As to the precise timing of our collection and release of maps, we 
have many workstreams in motion to make that happen as quickly as 
possible. However, as noted above, the ongoing GAO review of the 
protest associated with the procurement of the Fabric makes identifying 
a precise date difficult. Nonetheless, we are building and testing the 
new systems we have and finalizing data specifications and challenge 
procedures. To this end, the FCC will shortly open its next Form 477 
data filing window, which will be the last submission under the current 
data collection paradigm without carriers having access to the Fabric. 
However, as soon as the Fabric is compiled by the vendor and reviewed 
by FCC staff, the agency will release a public notice providing details 
on implementation of the Fabric and share the geocoded location data 
with broadband providers so their fixed broadband availability data can 
be easily ingested into our updated broadband data collection. At the 
same time, the agency will provide information regarding the process 
for FCC review and approval of third-party speed test applications for 
use in the mobile challenge process and will complete development and 
testing of the challenge and crowdsource data collection components.
    While planning for all this work has been underway, the FCC has 
worked with a number of broadband providers to test our systems and 
develop a prototype for improved mapping at the agency. As part of this 
effort, on August 6, 2021 the FCC released new 4G LTE wireless coverage 
maps based on the new updated parameters, using data submitted 
voluntarily by AT&T Mobility, T-Mobile, U.S. Cellular, and Verizon 
Wireless. This resulted in a public map that shows, for the first time, 
nationwide 4G LTE mobile coverage according to the updated parameters 
that were uniformly used by every carrier submitting data. This map is 
now available at www.fcc.gov/BroadbandData/MobileMaps.
    If confirmed, I pledge to keep you--and my colleagues at the 
agency--apprised of further efforts to implement the Broadband DATA Act 
and further develop the mapping the law contemplates.

    Question 3. As you are aware, the FAA issued a Special 
Airworthiness Information Bulletin in regards to the planned deployment 
of 5G equipment in the portion of spectrum known as the C-Band. This 
bulletin caused mobile carriers to delay the deployment of this 
equipment until the safety concerns can be addressed. How can the 
review process for spectrum auctions and reallocation be improved to 
prevent similar delays in the future?
    Answer. Wireless spectrum is a finite resource. Modern civic and 
commercial life now depend on its availability--as do essential Federal 
and public safety missions. This means that thoughtfully managing this 
resource is vital for our continued economic growth and our safety.
    At the outset, it is important to recognize that supporting public 
safety is a priority for the FCC under the law. The very first sentence 
of the Communications Act charges the agency with promoting the safety 
of life and property through wire and radio communications. It is 
essential that the FCC is mindful of this in everything it does. This 
means that as the Nation's expert Federal agency responsible for 
managing spectrum, the FCC is committed to ensuring air safety when 
moving forward with the development of new technologies that support 
American business and consumer needs.
    To put these principles in practice, I agree with you that it is 
essential to improve the Nation's interagency processes involving 
spectrum decisions. If confirmed, I will work to do so. In fact, since 
the start of this year, I have instructed the FCC staff to work more 
closely with our Federal counterparts in a manner that puts a premium 
on consultation, openness, and the rule of law. These are the values 
that have helped to thoughtfully and safely grow opportunities for 
wireless activity in the past and I believe it is essential that we 
recommit to them now.
    I also believe that it is important that we explore new models for 
federal-commercial information sharing, cooperation, and collaboration. 
Among other things, this requires a whole-of-government approach to 
spectrum policy that treats spectrum innovation in the United States as 
it should be treated: in strategic terms that ensure we identify 
creative ways to remain the global leader in technology-driven 
innovation.
    Relatedly, the Memorandum of Understanding governing the 
interagency coordination processes between NTIA and FCC on spectrum 
matters is nearly 20 years old. Some have suggested that it may be time 
to revisit and revise the MOU. I agree this is a good idea, and if 
confirmed I will direct the FCC's expert staff to evaluate whether 
there may be opportunities for beneficial improvement to the MOU, 
including through revision of its current provisions or addition of new 
ones. These kinds of efforts will help ensure that we avoid delays in 
the deployment of next generation technologies in the future.

    Question 4. In June 2020, Senator Tester and I wrote to the 
Commission about the importance of the Americans with Disabilities Act 
(ADA) and the FCC's responsibility to administer the Telecommunications 
Relay Service (TRS) Fund in the manner required by the ADA. In 
particular, the ADA requires that people with hearing disabilities have 
access to communications services that are functionally equivalent to 
those provided to the hearing population. What will you do if confirmed 
by the Senate to ensure that the FCC administers the TRS Fund in a 
manner that complies with the ADA's functional equivalence requirement?
    Answer. If confirmed, I would commit to making sure functional 
equivalence remains at the center of the FCC's work on its 
Telecommunications Relay Service programs.
    More than thirty years ago, the Americans with Disabilities Act 
paved the way for the meaningful inclusion of millions of Americans 
with disabilities in modern civic and commercial life. I recognize that 
FCC responsibilities under this law help ensure that individuals who 
are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability are 
able to pick up the phone; connect with family, friends, and business 
associates; and participate fully in the world.
    Under the ADA, as updated by the Twenty-First Century 
Communications and Video Accessibility Act, the FCC has made strides in 
its policies to expand access to modern communications to individuals 
with disabilities. These efforts include continued support for 
Telecommunications Relay Services, including Video Relay Service, 
Internet Protocol Captioned Telephone Service, and Internet Protocol 
Relay Service.
    I support these efforts because I believe they are essential for 
functionally equivalent access to communications services. But I also 
believe that as time and technology advance, it is incumbent upon the 
FCC to review these policies to keep them up to date. To help meet the 
functional equivalency mandate, our rules contain operational, 
technical, and functional minimum standards that govern the provision 
of supported services. The FCC must continue to review, revise, and 
update these rules to ensure they continue to meet the standard for 
functional equivalency in the ADA.

    Question 5. What is the importance of middle mile broadband 
investment for networks in rural communities?
    Answer. Investing in middle mile infrastructure is an 
underappreciated but vitally important part of supporting broadband 
deployment. It helps improve resiliency by providing network redundancy 
and alternative routing in disruptions and disaster. It enhances 
opportunities for competition in last-mile infrastructure. Middle mile 
services are also important because they connect rural broadband 
networks to global Internet access providers. Finally, middle mile 
infrastructure supports wireless deployment by providing backhaul, 
which is especially important for new 5G wireless services in light of 
their higher capacities and increased antenna requirements.
    I am pleased that Congress recognized the significance of middle 
mile investment and established a $1 billion competitive grant program 
for middle mile infrastructure in the Infrastructure Investment and 
Jobs Act. If confirmed, I would ensure the FCC is ready to assist NTIA 
to develop this program.

    Question 6. What are the next steps in the 12GHz band rulemaking 
process? Please explain in detail the factors the FCC is considering.
    Answer. The FCC has started a proceeding to explore opportunities 
for making more intensive use of 500 megahertz of spectrum in the 12 
GHz band. Historically, this band was used for Direct Broadcast 
Satellite Service and Multi-Channel Video and Data Distribution 
Service.
    More recently, proponents of a new generation of satellite 
operations have received authorization from the agency to launch and 
operate constellations of hundreds or thousands of satellites using 
several frequency bands, including the 12 GHz band. Thousands of 
satellites have been launched already, with new commercial satellite 
broadband services rolling out across the country. With this 
proceeding, the FCC is reviewing whether there may be additional 
opportunities to open this band up for new terrestrial use, including 
5G, without causing harmful interference to existing users. That will 
require carefully examining the characteristics of this spectrum band--
including its propagation and capacity characteristics, the nature of 
in-band and adjacent band incumbent use, and the potential for 
international harmonization--before deciding whether and, if so, how to 
make it available for more intensive terrestrial or satellite use.
    Initial comments on the 12 GHz rulemaking were due on May 7, 2021, 
and reply comments were due on July 7, 2021. The response in this 
proceeding was especially robust, with more than 140 filings submitted 
by stakeholders thus far. The record includes technical studies, as 
well as legal and policy advocacy about the feasibility for coexistence 
among the various current and planned operations in the band. FCC staff 
is digging into the technical record that has been developed so far and 
determining what, if any, additional information is required. Among 
other things, we are evaluating the technical showings that have been 
submitted purporting to demonstrate the potential for coexistence, as 
well as any critiques of those studies, to determine if adequate 
information is in the record to determine whether incumbent licensees 
can be protected. Some commenters have criticized certain aspects of 
the technical studies that have been submitted by 5G proponents, while 
the advocates for 5G or mobile services counter that satellite 
broadband advocates should provide greater technical details to help 
evaluate whether additional operations can be accommodated in the band 
while protecting incumbents. Among the areas of debate that the FCC 
staff are evaluating are the interference criteria used in one study in 
the record, the level of increase in probability of interference that 
should be acceptable, assumptions regarding the operational parameters 
and technical specifications of satellite user terminals in the band, 
and the appropriate propagation model to be considered. Further 
clarification on these points will assist the FCC staff in evaluating 
the feasibility for coexistence in this band. This engineering 
analysis, which is highly complex, is underway right now and will need 
to be completed in order to identify possible next steps.

    Question 7. I understand that basic cybersecurity measures are an 
eligible expense for E-Rate. Do you see a benefit to including more 
advance cybersecurity measures as an eligible expense for E-Rate as 
well? Please explain in detail.
    Answer. E-Rate, which got its start in the Telecommunications Act 
of 1996, is the Nation's largest education technology program. It is 
responsible for connecting schools and libraries across the country to 
essential broadband services. Under the existing program, E-Rate funds 
basic firewalls. However, as you note, some stakeholders have called 
for funding next-generation firewalls and other cybersecurity services, 
including endpoint protection and advanced services. According to a 
study conducted by some of these stakeholders, funding a broad range of 
these kinds of cybersecurity services would increase demand in the 
program as much as an additional $2.389 billion a year.
    In light of this, I think it is important to note that last month 
the President signed into law the K-12 Cybersecurity Act. This 
legislation requires the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security 
Agency, one of the government's leading authorities on cybersecurity 
matters, to study cybersecurity risks facing K-12 schools, develop 
recommendations to assist schools, and create an online toolkit for 
school officials. If confirmed, I believe that CISA's work to implement 
the K-12 Cybersecurity Act should inform any FCC efforts in this area 
going forward.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Question 1. The FCC has taken significant steps in recent years to 
identify and make available spectrum for commercial use, including for 
5G deployment that is critical to ensure U.S. leadership over China. I 
understand that the FCC is currently examining the potential of 5G in 
the 12Ghz band through extensive engineering reviews. Do you see this 
as an opportunity to advance U.S. 5G leadership? Will you commit to 
complete your review in a timely manner if you find that coexistence is 
possible between satellite and terrestrial users in the band?
    Answer. I believe we need more spectrum to support next generation 
wireless technologies like 5G, and especially mid-band spectrum. That 
is why the FCC has started a proceeding to explore opportunities for 
making more intensive use of 500 megahertz of spectrum in the 12 GHz 
band. If confirmed, I commit to completing the FCC's review of this 
band in a timely manner should we find that coexistence is possible 
between satellite and terrestrial users in the band without harmful 
interference.

    Question 2. As you know, Alaska requires unique and creative 
solutions for broadband deployment. Low Earth orbit satellites (LEOs) 
have the potential to help provide high-speed, low-latency broadband to 
rural parts of America. However, some relevant approvals at the FCC, 
such as for licensing, earth stations, and gateways, can take up to a 
year or longer to be approved. What steps can you take to accelerate 
these kinds of satellite authorizations?
    Answer. New satellite broadband technologies have extraordinary 
potential to help close the digital divide, especially in hard-to-reach 
parts of the country like Alaska. That is why I agree that the FCC must 
work expeditiously to ensure the right conditions for these new 
technologies to succeed. I also believe that each and every application 
filed with this agency is entitled to due consideration and a level 
playing field, so that consumers can realize the benefits of more 
competition and greater choice.
    Since the start of the year, the FCC has taken a number of steps to 
support new space-based services and to clear some of the backlog that 
previously had built up within the agency. In April, for the first time 
ever, the FCC allocated spectrum to support new commercial space 
operations based on proposals that were first made more than seven 
years ago. Specifically, the FCC allocated the 2200-2290 MHz band on a 
secondary basis for use in service of space launch operations, pursuant 
to coordination with NTIA. The FCC also sought comment on the use of 
additional bands for commercial space launches, including 420-430 MHz, 
2025-2110 MHz, and 5650-5925 MHz, as well as licensing and service 
rules for all of these bands. In August, the FCC initiated a new V-band 
processing round that has resulted in proposals for nearly 38,000 new 
satellites to provide global broadband. In addition, in November, the 
FCC cleared the way for two new low earth orbiting constellations that 
will bring broadband and the Internet of things services to consumers, 
businesses, and government customers in the United States and globally.
    In parallel, to ensure that filings are processed in a timely 
manner, the FCC has devoted resources over the past several months to 
speed up the processing of pending earth station applications--both 
large ground stations and consumer terminals. While these applications 
often involve complex issues, since January, the FCC has granted more 
than 90 such applications. The FCC also continues to process new 
applications for smaller satellites under new streamlined application 
procedures that were adopted in 2019.
    With respect to Alaska, the FCC has granted three Alaska gateway 
earth stations for LEO broadband systems in recent years. The first of 
these, for a gateway at Talkeetna, Alaska for use with the OneWeb 
system, was processed and granted before that system was providing end 
user service. Two other applications have been granted for use with the 
Starlink system at locations in Alaska, in Kuparuk and Nome. There are 
two pending applications for Starlink gateways in Alaska--in Ketchikan 
and Fairbanks--both filed in April of this year. FCC staff are 
reviewing these applications now, and I anticipate prompt action once 
that review is complete. If confirmed, I commit to working with you to 
ensure that filings before the FCC are processed in a timely manner.
                                 ______
                                 
  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Marsha Blackburn to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Question 1. There have been efforts by some of our colleagues in 
the House of Representatives to pressure MVPDs into removing Fox News, 
Newsmax and other conservative channels from their line ups. There have 
also been calls by some liberal organizations to have the FCC revoke 
the licenses of broadcasters like Sinclair. Are you in favor of these 
calls to use the FCC to remove certain viewpoints from the airwaves?
    Answer. No.

    Question 2. When we spoke recently, we talked about steps the FCC 
can take to make sure U.S. companies are poised to compete with China. 
Senator Rubio and Senator Markey's Secure Equipment Act, which I 
cosponsored, was just signed into law, and I'm glad the FCC will be 
moving quickly to help make the devices sold in the U.S. more secure. 
Earlier this year, the FCC sought comment on the global semiconductor 
shortage and its impacts on the communications industry. What are your 
next steps for sharing the information that you learned? Is there 
anything you can share now?
    Answer. I believe that it is necessary for the FCC to study ongoing 
supply chain matters, including those involving semiconductors.
    On May 11, 2019, the FCC released a public notice seeking detailed 
information about the global semiconductor shortage. The agency 
specifically sought comment on the impact of semiconductor supply chain 
constraints on the communications sector in the United States and what 
this might mean for FCC priorities and initiatives. In addition, the 
agency asked what steps it might take to ensure a resilient supply 
chain for communications technologies now and in the future. FCC staff 
also notified their counterparts at the Department of Commerce to make 
them aware of our efforts in this area. In response to the public 
notice, we received more than two dozen submissions. Commenters 
generally expressed concern about semiconductor supply chain shortages 
and how they may be exacerbated by the ongoing pandemic. Some 
commenters suggested that these shortages might impact the ability to 
comply with regulatory deadlines or efforts to maintain and upgrade 
networks. The record also includes broad support for Federal government 
efforts to level the global playing field and encourage greater 
collaboration between industry participants. The record in this 
proceeding is publicly available, and I would be happy to work with you 
and your staff to share the information we have collected.
    Moreover, I believe the FCC will need to keep this record in mind 
as it proceeds with its work. At the same time, the agency will need to 
continue to look for opportunities to improve the efficiency and 
effectiveness of its processes, including the equipment authorization 
system, to help offset the impacts of this shortage. To this end, on 
June 17, 2021, the FCC adopted a decision updating its device marketing 
and importation rules to accelerate the time-frame for developing and 
releasing new devices before receiving full approval. The updated rules 
give manufacturers greater flexibility to import, market, and 
conditionally sell equipment while the equipment authorization process 
is ongoing. These revisions will help get new devices into the hands of 
consumers more quickly, while still ensuring that the underlying 
purposes of the equipment authorization program are served. I believe 
the FCC will need to continue to evaluate processes like this in order 
to determine if there are additional steps the agency can take to 
update its practices and alleviate the challenges manufacturers may 
experience due to supply chain challenges.

    Question 3. As the wireless industry is actively building and 
deploying 5G connectivity across the country, I'm interested in your 
thoughts on new rules for terrestrial spectrum licensees that operate 
in the 12 GHz band. I believe the Commission should continue to explore 
as many feasible options as possible for transitioning to 5G to keep 
the U.S. internationally competitive. Will you commit to move quickly 
to establish new 12 GHz rules if you find coexistence is possible 
between terrestrial and satellite users in the band?
    Answer. I agree that the FCC should continue to explore as many 
options as possible to develop spectrum for new 5G wireless use. If 
confirmed, I commit to moving quickly to establish new 12 GHz rules 
should we determine coexistence without harmful interference among new 
5G and incumbent users is feasible.

    Question 4. In October 2020, a group of broadband providers 
petitioned the FCC to open a rulemaking on the A-CAM broadband program 
to increase the speeds the program requires to align them with the 
speeds required under the new Infrastructure law. It would also speed 
up the deployment timetables with the goal of bringing broadband more 
quickly to consumers in rural and remote areas of Tennessee. Will you 
commit to making it a priority to initiate a rulemaking proceeding to 
consider changes to the ACAM program that would enhance its ability to 
bring higher speed broadband to Americans living in rural high-cost 
areas rapidly?
    Answer. The ACAM program provides model-based support to rate-of-
return carriers in return for broadband deployment obligations. There 
have been two offers to rate-of-return carriers to participate in the 
program, which ends in 2028 for most electing carriers. Participating 
carriers receive approximately $1.1 billion in support from the program 
annually.
    On October 30, 2020, the ACAM Broadband Coalition, a coalition of 
providers that participate in the ACAM program, filed a petition for 
rulemaking seeking to extend the program until 2034, in return for 
enhanced obligations to provide higher speeds. Currently, the ACAM 
program requires 804,871 locations to be served at 25/3 Mbps speeds, 
165,725 locations to be served at 10/1 Mbps, and 50,227 locations to be 
served at 4/1 Mbps speeds. The ACAM Broadband Coalition's petition for 
rulemaking proposes that in exchange for six additional years of 
support, at a cost to the Universal Service Fund of approximately $6.6 
billion, participants in the ACAM program will serve 605,373 locations 
at 100/25 Mbps, 300,074 locations at 25/3 Mbps, and 115,376 locations 
at 10/1 Mbps. The FCC sought comment on the petition for rulemaking on 
November 4, 2020. Multiple parties filed comments in response. 
Recently, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act became law, 
providing a significant infusion of funds for broadband deployment and 
generally requiring deployment at speeds of 100/20 Mbps. FCC staff 
currently are evaluating the petition for rulemaking in light of the 
record and other recent developments, including the passage of the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

    Question 5. When we spoke at your hearing about NTIA's role, you 
mentioned the possibility of revising the memorandum of understanding 
between the NTIA and FCC including with regard to ``what harmful 
interference looks like.'' Could you please clarify what you mean about 
a possible update to what harmful interference looks like?
    Answer. The Memorandum of Understanding governing the interagency 
coordination processes between NTIA and FCC on spectrum matters is 
nearly 20 years old. Some have suggested that it may be time to revisit 
and revise the MOU. I agree this is a good idea.
    While there are various aspects that might be fit for consideration 
in the context of updating the MOU, one idea might be to commit the 
agencies to working together to develop mutually agreed methodologies, 
metrics, and best practices to assess the potential for, and address 
concerns related to, possible harmful interference. In recent years, 
many of the spectrum policy controversies in the United States have 
involved whether a proposed technology or service will cause ``harmful 
interference'' to existing spectrum users. Resolving these issues can 
take time and require careful assessment of the airwaves at issue and 
incumbent use. I believe that progress clarifying what constitutes 
harmful interference would be helpful for both spectrum incumbents and 
wireless innovators by reducing existing regulatory uncertainties. This 
effort could be led by a working group leveraging the technical 
expertise of the two agencies, including the engineers at the FCC and 
technical experts at NTIA's Institute for Telecommunication Sciences.
                                 ______
                                 
      Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Mike Lee to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Question 1. I have a bill called the Government Spectrum Valuation 
Act (S. 553), which would require the NTIA (in consultation with the 
FCC and OMB) to conduct a market valuation of government spectrum 
allocations. The goal is to assess the ``opportunity cost'' associated 
with Federal spectrum. You have expressed support for my efforts in 
this space in the past. Do you still support my Government Spectrum 
Valuation Act? What other actions should the FCC take to ``replenish'' 
our depleted commercial spectrum pipeline as well as get the data 
needed to identify new bands for reallocation?
    Answer. Yes, I support the Government Spectrum Valuation Act. 
Federal authorities have substantial spectrum assignments. After all, 
critical missions throughout the government are dependent on access to 
our airwaves. Nonetheless, we are on a hunt for new opportunities for 
commercial spectrum. I believe part of that effort will require taking 
a fresh look at Federal uses, and that developing a valuation of 
Federal spectrum could help facilitate repurposing of these airwaves 
for modern use. For example, we could use this information to build 
structural incentives for repurposing, so that our Federal colleagues 
see gain and not just loss from reallocation.
    There are other actions we can take to ensure a robust spectrum 
pipeline going forward. For one thing, I believe that it is important 
that we explore new models for federal-commercial information sharing, 
cooperation, and collaboration. This requires a whole-of-government 
approach to spectrum policy that treats spectrum innovation in the 
United States as it should be treated: in strategic terms that ensure 
we identify creative ways to remain the global leader in technology-
driven innovation.
    For another, I believe that we need to embrace the range of new 
wireless access technologies available. This requires recognizing that 
traditionally our system of spectrum access has had a binary quality. 
Either it is licensed or unlicensed, Federal or non-federal. But this 
duality is not the result of physics. It is the result of an 
intentional set of policy choices that can create scarcity when there 
are other choices we can make to facilitate abundance. To understand 
how, it is instructive to consider the model the FCC created in the 3.5 
GHz band several years ago. Here the agency took 150 megahertz of 
spectrum and opened it up to a mix of government, licensed, and 
unlicensed uses. It did this by proposing a spectrum access database to 
dynamically manage the different kinds of wireless traffic using these 
airwaves. This multi-tiered approach to spectrum access was not just 
unprecedented--it was creative, efficient, and forward looking. Today 
this band accommodates important government radar operations that 
protect our safety while also making much-needed mid-band spectrum 
available to advance our wireless leadership. These kinds of creative 
efforts should continue to be developed as the FCC works to accommodate 
public and non-public demands on our airwaves.

    Question 2. Regarding spectrum coordination, the FCC and the NTIA 
have operated under an MOU that is the main mechanism for coordination 
of spectrum management decisions. Is the existing MOU's framework 
sufficient for today's spectrum coordination between the FCC and NTIA? 
Do you think the MOU needs to be updated? If so, how?
    Answer. The Memorandum of Understanding governing the interagency 
coordination processes between NTIA and FCC on spectrum matters is 
nearly 20 years old. Some have suggested that it may be time to revisit 
and revise the MOU. I agree this is a good idea.
    While there are various aspects that might be fit for consideration 
in the context of updating the MOU, one idea might be to commit the 
agencies to working together to develop mutually agreed methodologies, 
metrics, and best practices to assess the potential for, and address 
concerns related to, possible harmful interference. In recent years, 
many of the spectrum policy controversies in the United States have 
involved whether a proposed technology or service will cause ``harmful 
interference'' to existing spectrum users. Resolving these issues can 
take time and require careful assessment of the airwaves at issue and 
incumbent use. I believe that progress clarifying what constitutes 
harmful interference would be helpful for both spectrum incumbents and 
wireless innovators by reducing existing regulatory uncertainties. This 
effort could be led by a working group leveraging the technical 
expertise of the two agencies, including the engineers at the FCC and 
technical experts at NTIA's Institute for Telecommunication Sciences.

    Question 3. In your view is the Interdepartment Radio Advisory 
Committee (IRAC) operating efficiently? In your view, is there room for 
improvement in the IRAC process? If so, how?
    Answer. The NTIA's Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee is 
comprised of various executive agencies that assist NTIA in performing 
its duties of assigning frequencies to United States government radio 
stations and developing and executing policies, programs, procedures, 
and technical criteria pertaining to the allocation, management, and 
use of the electromagnetic spectrum. While FCC is a liaison to the 
IRAC, it is not a member. One of the primary ways the FCC engages with 
the IRAC is in the context of formal coordination of spectrum 
management activities pursuant to the FCC's Memorandum of Understanding 
with NTIA. As I noted above, I believe that it may be time to revisit 
and revise this MOU to improve coordination between the FCC and NTIA.

    Question 4. Do you have any concerns about Chinese influence at the 
International Telecommunication Union (ITU)? Does China's influence at 
the ITU have implications for the Chinese setting global standards for 
telecommunications? As Chair of the FCC, what priorities do you have to 
prevent Chinese control of the ITU?
    Answer. Standards setting organizations like the International 
Telecommunication Union play a significant role shaping the future of 
technologies like 5G. That means it is in our national interest to 
ensure that these organizations operate in a fair, impartial, balanced, 
and consensus-based manner and in accordance with fundamental rules of 
due process.
    I share your concerns about reports that some foreign governments, 
including the People's Republic of China, may seek to use the 
standardization process at the ITU to increase their share of emerging 
global 5G standards and extend their influence into 6G and beyond. In 
practice this may mean governments providing funding to companies to 
help them submit technical contributions to increase participation in 
the standardization decision-making process. It may also entail 
directing those companies to vote with others as a block.
    At the FCC, I believe we need to work closely with our allies on 
setting the technology standards of the future. To this end, I am 
making the FCC's participation in standards setting organizations a 
priority. Earlier this year, I announced that the FCC has increased the 
number of our staff dedicated to standards development issues by 
roughly 50 percent. I believe it is imperative that the United States 
government invest the resources necessary to lead in these processes 
because when we do, we can lead the world by example, encourage 
innovation at international scale, and support the democratizing 
possibilities of access to modern communications.
    I also believe that we need to start preparing for 6G and beyond. 
To do that, I believe we should take a page from the 2019 National 
Defense Authorization Act, which set up a ``Project Solarium'' on 
cybersecurity. That effort resulted in more than 80 recommendations on 
how to overhaul the Nation's approach to cybersecurity. Twenty-five of 
them have been signed into law, and dozens more are on track to be 
implemented. A 6G Solarium would help bring together government, 
business, the non-profit sector, and the rest of civil society and the 
public to chart a new course toward wireless leadership. It would help 
us be much more coordinated and pulling in the same direction toward 
clear, consistent goals. That way, we can pursue policymaking that 
works. To start this effort, in July, I announced that the FCC will re-
establish its Technology Advisory Council and charge it with looking 
beyond 5G and conceptualizing 6G--to help set the stage for our 
leadership.
    Finally, I am working closely with the Department of State and 
other agencies to promote the candidacy of Doreen Bogdan-Martin to be 
the next Secretary-General of the ITU. Ms. Bogdan-Martin is a proven 
leader who is well regarded around the world. Her election and 
leadership from the United States will send a powerful message that the 
ITU will operate fairly and in a manner that is accountable to all of 
its members.

    Question 5. It's no secret that you supported the 2015 ``Net 
Neutrality'' requirements. And it's no secret that I oppose reinstating 
the Title II classification of broadband. As Chair, will you be moving 
to reinstate the Title II classification of broadband?

   In your view, did the 2015 ``Net Neutrality'' Rule go far 
        enough? If you bring the classification back, would you go 
        further than the 2015 rule?

   Does the Title II classification include supporting the rate 
        regulation of broadband? What about requiring minimum or basic 
        tier affordable broadband plans for low-income individuals?

   How would you go about determining whether the FCC should 
        ``forbear'' a rule from taking effect? And how would you 
        approach this in the ``net neutrality context''?

   ``Net Neutrality'' has been a ``ping-pong'' action as of 
        late with the imposition of Title II classification dependent 
        on who controls the White House. Congress has and continues to 
        actively debate ``net neutrality'' legislation. Shouldn't the 
        FCC wait for Congress to act on ``Net Neutrality'' legislation 
        before the FCC takes any action?
    Answer. I voted to support the decision in 2015 to adopt net 
neutrality rules. As I testified, I continue to support net neutrality 
rules and I continue to believe, based on court precedent, that Title 
II is at the foundation of legally sustainable net neutrality rules. I 
believe that any effort to reinstate the Title II classification of 
broadband Internet access service would require a new rulemaking under 
the Administrative Procedure Act. Such a rulemaking would provide the 
basis to develop an updated public record on open Internet policies, 
which must inform the agency as it proceeds. I believe this is 
especially important in light of changes since the initial 2015 
decision in technology, state law, and consumer usage.
    With regard to rate regulation, I voted to support the decision in 
2015 to adopt net neutrality rules. That decision stated that it 
``expressly eschew[s] future use of prescriptive, industry-wide rate 
regulation.'' I supported this approach in the past and would do so 
again in the future. However, under section 254 of the Communications 
Act, the agency is required to ensure that eligible telecommunications 
carriers that receive high-cost support from the Universal Service Fund 
charge rates for broadband service that are ``reasonably comparable to 
rates charged for similar services in urban areas.'' To determine the 
rates charged for fixed broadband services in urban areas, the FCC 
conducts an annual Urban Rate Survey. Eligible telecommunications 
carriers that receive high-cost support from the Universal Service Fund 
must offer broadband service at rates that are at or below the relevant 
comparability benchmark based on the Urban Rate Survey or may be 
subject to reductions in support.
    Section 10 of the Communications Act provides that the FCC 
``shall'' forbear from applying any provision of the law or its rules 
with respect to telecommunications carriers or telecommunications 
services if the FCC determines that enforcement of the provision is not 
necessary to ensure that the charges, practices, classifications, or 
regulations by, for, or in connection with that telecommunications 
carrier or telecommunications service are just and reasonable and are 
not unjustly or unreasonably discriminatory; enforcement of the 
provision is not necessary for the protection of consumers; and 
forbearance is in the public interest. In 2015, in the same order 
establishing net neutrality rules, the FCC exercised this forbearance 
authority to forbear from 27 provisions of Title II of the 
Communications Act and over 700 agency regulations for broadband and 
broadband providers. I supported this approach with respect to 
forbearance in 2015 and would do so again in the future.
    As I testified, I would faithfully implement any congressional 
directive as to net neutrality or any other subject. That being said, I 
voted to support the FCC's decision to adopt net neutrality rules in 
2015, a decision that was upheld by the D.C. Circuit, and believe that 
the FCC continues to have the authority to adopt net neutrality rules.

    Question 6. Our current video marketplace is governed by Title VI 
of the Communications Act and it dates mostly back to laws that 
Congress passed in 1992. But technology has changed since 1992 and the 
wire that used to just bring video now also brings broadband to 
American households. Should Title VI be modernized to reflect current 
technologies? Is there a relationship between effective broadband 
deployment to urban and rural areas with Title VI reform?
    Answer. Yes. Many of the laws governing our video marketplace are 
from decades ago, including Title VI of the Communications Act. While 
the underlying values that are in the statute remain valid, updating it 
to reflect the current state of video is prudent. However, because 
broadband is not a Title VI service, updates would not necessarily 
directly affect broadband deployment.

    Question 7. Conducting cost-benefit analyses for proposed 
regulations has been a practice undertaken by agencies under both 
Democrat and Republican Administrations. Please explain your views on 
the use of cost-benefit analysis when considering proposed regulations. 
Should all FCC regulations be considered with a cost-benefit analysis? 
If regulatory costs outweigh the benefits, should that be a determining 
factor that prevents the FCC from moving forward with a proposed 
regulation?
    Answer. I agree that conducting cost-benefit analysis has been a 
practice of Democratic and Republican Administrations alike. Moreover, 
this practice has been the subject of executive orders over the course 
of the last several decades. While the FCC is an independent agency, it 
has adopted a requirement in its rules for its Office of Economics and 
Analytics to prepare ``a rigorous, economically-grounded cost-benefit 
analysis for every rulemaking deemed to have an annual effect on the 
economy of $100 million or more.'' I support this approach. 
Nonetheless, I recognize that at the same time the agency will need to 
take into account other legal obligations it has, like those outlined 
in the Communications Act supporting universal service in rural, 
insular, and high-cost areas and expanding access to underserved 
communities under the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video 
Accessibility Act.

    Question 8. Should agencies exercise only power that Congress 
expressly gives? Absent that ``express delegation'' should agencies 
exercise restraint in rulemaking or is allegedly ambiguous language an 
opportunity for rulemaking?

   Regulations that are highly prescriptive can create a higher 
        regulatory compliance burden, which hits harder on smaller 
        companies with fewer resources. What is your opinion on the 
        relationship between rules and the ability for market 
        incumbents to use rules to insulate themselves from 
        competition?
    Answer. I believe that there should be a firm connection between an 
agency's rules and its statutory authority. I also recognize that 
Congress as a practical matter cannot specify every circumstance in 
which a statute might apply. For this reason, agencies may need to rely 
on their subject matter expertise to reasonably interpret ambiguous 
statutory language and adopt rules on the basis of that interpretation. 
However, and above all, I believe an agency cannot act in the face of 
clearly expressed contrary intent.
    I agree that regulators need to understand the relationship between 
regulation and its impact on entrepreneurship and economic growth. To 
this end, I recognize that our economy thrives on competition. Over 
history, it has inspired innovation, increased consumer choice, and 
improved our resourcefulness and efficiency. It is the reason the 
United States is the home of some the most dynamic companies in the 
world. I believe that the FCC must tailor its actions to promote 
competition and not insulate incumbents from competitive forces. I also 
believe the FCC must recognize how regulatory changes may affect 
smaller companies with fewer resources and ensure that it considers 
this when it does its work under the law.

    Question 9. Section 706 of the Telecommunication Act of 1996 
requires the FCC to do an annual notice of inquiry regarding the 
reasonable and timely deployment of advanced telecommunications 
capability to all Americans. What does ``advanced telecommunications 
capability'' mean to you? What does ``reasonable and timely fashion'' 
mean to you?

   If the FCC determines that there isn't ``advanced 
        telecommunications capability being deployed to all 
        Americans,'' the Commission is authorized to take ``immediate 
        action to accelerate deployment of such capability.'' Are there 
        any limits to the authorities that the FCC can exercise under 
        this section? If so, what are they?
    Answer. Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 defines 
``advanced telecommunications capability'' as ``high-speed, switched, 
broadband telecommunications capability that enables users to originate 
and receive high-quality voice, data, graphics, and video 
telecommunications using any technology.'' The FCC has consistently, 
for the purposes of its annual notice of inquiry and report pursuant to 
Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act, defined ``advanced 
telecommunications capability'' as an evolving standard of what 
constitutes broadband. The decision to do so is consistent with other 
aspects of communications law, including Section 254 of the 
Communications Act, which details the services eligible for universal 
service support and defines them as an ``evolving level of 
telecommunications services.''
    The speed benchmark for ``advanced telecommunications capability'' 
or broadband that has been used by the agency since 2015 is 25 megabits 
per second download and 3 megabits per second upload.
    I have consistently pushed the FCC to be more forward-looking with 
its broadband speed standard and have dissented several times when the 
FCC decided to maintain the 25/3 Mbps threshold. I believe we need to 
set audacious goals if we want to do big things. With the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act generally requiring projects to 
meet a 100/20 Mbps threshold for funding and providers rolling out 
higher speeds across the country, I believe we need to think bigger. I 
have previously called for raising the download speed to at least 100 
Mbps and rethinking our approach to upload speeds, and my views have 
not changed.
    The pandemic shined a spotlight on how important broadband is for 
all of us and also showed how far we still are from connecting 
everyone. I believe that we need to connect 100 percent of our people 
to broadband. In passing the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs 
Act, Congress made clear that our mandate under Section 706 is to 
deliver broadband to everyone in this country, referring to Section 706 
as containing ``the statutorily mandated goals of universal service for 
advanced telecommunications capability.'' In my view, the ``reasonable 
and timely fashion'' language is included in Section 706 to make 
evident that ensuring universal broadband coverage is not merely an 
aspirational goal for the FCC, it is a mandate for action and Section 
706 requires the FCC to regularly examine how well we are doing in 
achieving that mandate.
    The FCC has previously found that Section 706(b) constitutes a 
grant of regulatory authority to accelerate broadband deployment, a 
conclusion upheld by the D.C. Circuit in 2014 in Verizon v. FCC. As the 
D.C. Circuit found in that case, to the extent that the agency 
exercises its authority under Section 706(b), such authority is limited 
by the FCC's subject matter jurisdiction, including other limitations 
within the Communications Act, and by the requirement that any 
regulation be tailored to the specific statutory goal of accelerating 
broadband deployment.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ron Johnson to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Question 1. During your opening statement you said you want to 
``make sure 100 percent of this country has access to fast and 
affordable and reliable broadband.'' In the two years after the FCC 
2015 rules, broadband investment dropped more than 5 percent and over 
80 percent of wireless providers in rural areas incurred additional 
expenses.

   How does reclassifying the Internet as a utility under Title 
        II support your goals of fast, affordable and reliable 
        broadband?

   How will such reclassification affect investment in rural 
        areas?
    Answer. America's Internet economy is the envy of the world because 
it is built on a foundation of openness. The principles of net 
neutrality are fundamental to that openness and helped create 
investment on the edges of the network, which network operators 
responded to by building networks that allow consumers to access the 
services of their choosing. I believe that returning to that successful 
framework is the strongest foundation for broader investment in the 
Internet economy.
    I also believe that the hands-off policies of the past have left 
rural areas behind. In too many remote communities in this country, 
broadband service is not available. Reducing the oversight of the FCC 
over broadband service has not accelerated deployment in these areas. 
Moreover, it has made the FCC's universal service programs pursuant to 
its authority under Section 254 of the Communications Act to assist 
with broadband deployment more legally tenuous because the statute 
itself defines universal service as an ``evolving level of 
telecommunications service,'' which is itself a Title II service.
    In the end, I hope we can agree that we do need to get 100 percent 
of us connected to broadband because it is essential for modern life. 
This infrastructure effort has a clear historical precedent in the 
effort to ensure rural electrification a century ago. I am mindful that 
the effort to do this was not one that involved the deregulated private 
sector acting strictly on its own, but instead featured cooperatives 
along with publicly owned companies. I think this effort in the past is 
instructive and it should inform our work today.

    Question 2. When the FCC replaced the heavy-handed Open Internet 
Order with the light-touch Restoring Internet Freedom Order in 2017, 
the move did not ``end the Internet as we know it,'' as some feared. 
Has the Internet been less free and open since the Open Internet Order 
was replaced with the Restoring Internet Freedom Order in 2017? If so, 
how?
    Answer. I believe that there were negative consequences that 
followed from the decision of the FCC to repeal its net neutrality 
rules and reduce its oversight of broadband service. As a result of the 
repeal, the FCC lacked authority to intervene when firefighters in 
California found their service throttled when they were responding to 
wildfires. In fact, in its remand of the FCC's decision, the D.C. 
Circuit found the agency's ``disregard of its duty to analyze the 
impact of the 2018 Order on public safety renders its decision 
arbitrary and capricious.''
    In addition, there are stories of small providers that have faced 
higher pole attachment rates in the wake of the FCC's decision. For 
example, according to one filing in the FCC record, two wireless 
Internet service providers had to slow or halt the deployment of fiber 
on poles because pole owners charged higher rates or refused to 
negotiate with them when broadband was no longer classified as a 
telecommunications service.
    Meanwhile, academic research led by Northeastern University 
Professor David Choffnes reviewed crowdsourced data from the Wehe app 
and found that for mobile Internet service providers in the United 
States, ``we don't see evidence of Internet service providers 
throttling only when the network is busy; as far as we can tell, it's 
24/7, and everywhere.'' Professor Choffnes noted that this throttling 
created a ``slippery slope,'' because ``[t]oday it's video, but what is 
it going to be tomorrow? When Internet service providers decide to take 
control and make decisions on behalf of consumers and/or content 
providers, what's going to be the fallout for those decisions? Is it 
actually in everyone's best interests?''
    It is important to note that the above has been observed during a 
period when litigation over the topic of net neutrality has been 
ongoing and some states have had their own laws and regulations in 
place governing these matters. For example, California, Colorado, 
Maine, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington have passed state net neutrality 
laws while Hawaii, Montana, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island have 
put in place net neutrality contracting requirements. Meanwhile, in 
other states, legislation has been proposed over the past several 
years. As a result, Internet service providers may have been cautious 
about their business practices during the time following the FCC 
decision to roll back its open Internet policies. Finally, I should 
note that one consequence of the FCC's decision to relinquish its 
oversight over broadband is that the agency has less visibility into 
what is happening with broadband networks at a time when they are more 
important in our lives than ever before.

    Question 3. Will you commit to ensuring the FCC does not factor 
political content or viewpoints when issuing licenses, making 
regulatory decisions, or approving mergers and acquisitions?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 4. Will you commit to ensuring the continued independence 
of the FCC?
    Answer. Yes.
                                 ______
                                 
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Shelley Moore Capito to 

                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Question 1. You state in your testimony that we need to make sure 
that 100 percent of the country has access to fast, affordable, and 
reliable broadband. As the floor manager of the infrastructure bill 
that was just signed into law, it looks like we are going to get a 
significant amount of money in my home state of West Virginia for 
broadband. How do we speed up deployment in my state to hit 100 
percent?
    Answer. Getting to broadband to 100 percent of us--everyone, 
everywhere--will take an all hands on deck approach, and if confirmed, 
I look forward to working with you to reach that goal.
    One of the most important things that we have to get right is 
mapping. You simply can't speed deployment to unserved areas when you 
don't know with precision what is truly unserved.
    For this reason, from the start of my tenure as Acting Chairwoman, 
I have prioritized mapping, by creating a Broadband Data Task Force to 
coordinate and expedite the design and construction of new systems for 
collecting and verifying new broadband deployment data, known as the 
Broadband Data Collection. The Broadband Data Collection is designed to 
create--for the first time--a standardized, data-based, and publicly 
accessible nationwide map of locations where broadband is truly 
available throughout the United States. But the maps will not be based 
solely on data from broadband service providers. Other Federal 
agencies, state, local, and Tribal governmental entities, and consumers 
will all contribute information and data to help refine and validate 
the maps. If confirmed, I look forward with working with you and your 
constituents to get this right because that is how we will figure out 
where we need to target funds in West Virginia and nationwide.
    Another important piece of the puzzle is building out networks that 
connect everyone. Thanks in part to your work, the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act will provide billions to connect currently 
unserved areas with high-speed quality broadband. This is a 
generational investment in broadband that can connect millions of 
people who currently lack access.
    It is vitally important that the programs funded under the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, including the Broadband Equity, 
Access, and Deployment Program, which will provide $42.5 billion in 
grants to states, are coordinated with existing programs, including the 
FCC's Rural Digital Opportunity Fund and Alternative Connect America 
Model and the Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service's 
programs. That's why on June 25, 2021, the FCC, NTIA and USDA entered 
into an Interagency Agreement that specifically ``require[s] 
coordination. . .for the distribution of funds for broadband 
deployment.'' As a result, the FCC, NTIA, and RUS share information on 
a regular basis about our respective funding programs, including the 
entities seeking and receiving funding to provide service in a given 
area the speed and technology funded, and the terms and conditions of 
the funding under the law. In addition, the Department of Treasury has 
sought FCC input for the purposes of implementing the Coronavirus State 
and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund and the Coronavirus Capital Projects 
Fund. FCC staff also has engaged with representatives of the Department 
of Treasury, both separately and alongside NTIA and RUS 
representatives, to share information and insight on programs and 
identify coordination opportunities. I believe it is essential to make 
sure that all of these programs, consistent with the law, operate in a 
complementary manner. At the same time, it is essential that those 
responsible for these programs--including the FCC--coordinate to ensure 
funding is directed to areas without adequate service and avoid 
unnecessary duplication. If confirmed, I pledge to have the FCC work 
with its Federal partners to do so.
    Finally, we can't forget that deployment is not sufficient if 
people can't afford it. That's why Congress created the Emergency 
Broadband Benefit Program and less than a year later, created the 
Affordable Connectivity Program in the Infrastructure Investment and 
Jobs Act. The Affordable Connectivity Program will provide qualifying 
low-income households a $30 subsidy towards the monthly cost of a 
broadband plan, and households on Tribal lands or in high-cost areas 
can qualify for a $75 per month subsidy. The FCC is hard at work 
preparing for the upcoming December 31, 2021 transition to the 
Affordable Connectivity Program. If confirmed, I look forward to 
developing outreach efforts so that this program is available for those 
who need it most.

    Question 2. What is the FCC doing to make sure recipients of 
Universal Service Fund (USF) support are qualified and are deserving of 
the funding they receive?
    Answer. Many recipients of high-cost funding from the Universal 
Service Fund receive 10 years of support, including bidders authorized 
to receive Rural Digital Opportunity Fund support. That is why it is so 
important to make sure they are qualified for the funding they receive. 
The FCC staff have put significant effort into ensuring that carriers 
seeking support from RDOF are capable of providing service before any 
funding goes out the door.
    Under the Communications Act, states have the primary 
responsibility to designate carriers in their state as eligible for 
universal service funding. The process for receiving this designation, 
known as Eligible Telecommunications Carrier status, is different in 
different states but generally operates under a public interest 
standard. The FCC cannot provide a carrier high-cost support until it 
has received an ETC designation. However, if a state declines 
jurisdiction, the FCC may designate carriers as ETCs.
    For the RDOF Phase I auction winning bidders, once a carrier has 
been designated as an ETC, the FCC must review and approve a long-form 
application that is submitted to the agency. I have directed staff to 
conduct a searching technical, financial, and legal review of each of 
the long-form applicants, because we want to make sure that applicants 
are qualified before we commit to paying them for 10 years to deploy 
broadband. More than 50 staff from across the agency, including 
engineers, financial analysts, and attorneys have been working on the 
program, combing through network diagrams and financial statements to 
doublecheck qualifications of winning bidders in the auction. On top of 
this, before the FCC starts actual writing checks to the provider, they 
must receive a letter of credit and a bankruptcy opinion letter, so 
that if the provider goes out of business, the FCC can recover the lost 
support from the financial institution that issued the letter of 
credit.
    However, accountability measures do not end when funding begins. In 
RDOF, carriers must meet interim and final deployment milestones and 
report the locations that they have deployed to in the public High Cost 
Universal Broadband database. In addition, staff will verify that the 
carriers are actually serving the locations they claim to serve, 
through audits and other accountability measures. If the provider fails 
to meet their interim deployment obligations, the FCC withholds an 
increasing amount of support depending on how far they are out of 
compliance. If a provider fails to meet final deployment obligations, 
they must pay the Universal Service Fund back approximately twice the 
amount they received for the location, to ensure that they face 
consequences for failed deployment. I believe these accountability 
measures are important and going forward they should be a feature of 
similar Universal Service Fund efforts.

    Question 3. Big tech makes a lot of money off advertising over 
broadband networks. What are your thoughts on requiring them to help 
pay for the deployment of high-speed broadband?
    Answer. Congress established the Universal Service Fund in the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996. As I testified, the idea then was that 
a fee on consumer long distance phone bills would help support the 
upkeep of communications networks designed for voice services 
throughout the country. A lot has changed since that time. As our 
networks and the ways we communicate have changed, the high-cost 
Universal Service Fund has evolved well beyond support for voice 
services and analog-era communications. It now also supports broadband 
in rural areas. This makes sense given that it is the most important 
communications infrastructure of our time. However, it also would make 
sense for Congress to take a fresh look at the system to reflect the 
changes of the last quarter of a century. With respect to the 
contribution mechanism, I believe that the idea of assessing major 
technology companies as you suggest is intriguing, though it would 
likely require a statutory change. If confirmed, I would be willing to 
work with you and others in the Congress on this or other proposals to 
update our system for universal service.

    Question 4. What is the status of updating the FCC Broadband maps? 
Once completed, how do we keep them up to date?
    Answer. I believe the FCC needs accurate information about where 
broadband service is and is not available across the country. With 
better data and more precise maps we can target our policymaking 
efforts and financial resources, including the FCC's universal service 
funding and the funding included in the recently enacted Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act, to those unserved and underserved communities 
where support is needed most.
    As you know, the Broadband DATA Act was signed into law in March of 
2020 and directs the FCC to improve its mapping efforts. Then, in 
December of 2020, Congress provided the FCC with an appropriation to 
help fund implementation of this law.
    As a result, in my first meeting as Acting Chairwoman, I announced 
the formation of the Broadband Data Task Force. This group was designed 
to help coordinate and expedite the design and construction of new 
systems for collecting and verifying new broadband deployment data. 
While it was made clear that we had an enormous amount of work to do, I 
am pleased to report that we have made significant progress since 
January.
    The FCC has stood up the data architecture and systems required for 
the receipt of broadband data from a wide variety of sources and has 
completed several aspects of the data collection system design. This is 
important because when I took the reins at the agency these systems 
were not in place and having them is a prerequisite for developing the 
kinds of data collection and mapping required under the Broadband DATA 
Act.
    In addition, the FCC has awarded a competitively bid contract to 
create and maintain the Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric, which is 
the foundation for its mapping efforts. The Fabric was specifically 
required in the Broadband DATA Act. The law also specifically required 
that the FCC procure the Fabric through the traditional Federal 
government contracting process. This has presented a challenge because, 
while the agency has awarded the contract, another bidder has protested 
at the GAO. As a result, the contract is stayed while the GAO has a 
100-day period to review the process.
    While this effort is underway at the GAO, the agency has worked on 
other efforts to support the Broadband DATA Act and its objectives. 
This includes writing the rules for the challenge and verification 
processes required under the law and working to update the FCC Speed 
Test App contract so that it can be more broadly used by consumers to 
support mobile challenges and data gathering through crowdsourcing. The 
agency also is moving forward with procurements to implement the 
technical assistance functions for providers, state, local, and Tribal 
governments, and consumers.
    As to the precise timing of our collection and release of maps, we 
have many workstreams in motion to make that happen as quickly as 
possible. However, as noted above, the ongoing GAO review of the 
protest associated with the procurement of the Fabric makes identifying 
a precise date difficult. Nonetheless, we are building and testing the 
new systems we have and finalizing data specifications and challenge 
procedures. To this end, the FCC will shortly open its next Form 477 
data filing window, which will be the last submission under the current 
data collection paradigm without carriers having access to the Fabric. 
However, as soon as the Fabric is compiled by the vendor and reviewed 
by FCC staff, the agency will release a public notice providing details 
on implementation of the Fabric and share the geocoded location data 
with broadband providers so their fixed broadband availability data can 
be easily ingested into our updated broadband data collection. At the 
same time, the agency will provide information regarding the process 
for FCC review and approval of third-party speed test applications for 
use in the mobile challenge process and will complete development and 
testing of the challenge and crowdsource data collection components.
    The maps that the agency eventually develops will ultimately be 
kept up to date through the biannual filing process for carriers--and 
related challenge processes--contemplated in the Broadband DATA Act. I 
believe it is essential that the FCC do our work now carefully so that 
the agency has a strong platform on which to evolve and iterate the 
maps it develops.
    While planning for all this work has been underway, the FCC has 
worked with a number of broadband providers to test our systems and 
develop a prototype for improved mapping at the agency. As part of this 
effort, on August 6, 2021, the FCC released new 4G LTE wireless 
coverage maps based on the new updated parameters, using data submitted 
voluntarily by AT&T Mobility, T-Mobile, U.S. Cellular, and Verizon 
Wireless. This resulted in a public map that shows, for the first time, 
nationwide 4G LTE mobile coverage according to the updated parameters 
that were uniformly used by every carrier submitting data. This map is 
now available at www.fcc.gov/BroadbandData/MobileMaps.
    If confirmed, I pledge to keep you--and my colleagues at the 
agency--apprised of further efforts to implement the Broadband DATA Act 
and further develop the mapping the law contemplates.

    Question 5. Unlicensed and shared spectrum are crucial to advancing 
innovation and entrepreneurship. What's next from your perspective in 
supporting innovation in unlicensed and shared bands?
    Answer. I agree that unlicensed and shared spectrum are crucial for 
advancing innovation and entrepreneurship. By some recent estimates, 
unlicensed spectrum has added more than $500 billion to the economy 
annually and as much as $2 trillion globally. It has democratized 
Internet access, helped carriers manage their networks, and fostered 
all kinds of innovation. In fact, it is the perfect sandbox for 
experimentation, because access does not require contract or 
permission.
    As exciting as this is, it means these airwaves are getting 
crowded. Already our current Wi-Fi bands are congested because they are 
used by more than 9 billion devices. By the end of this decade, we will 
see billions more devices connecting to our networks through the 
Internet of things. It is clear that we are going to need a significant 
swath of unlicensed spectrum to keep up with demand.
    We are making progress. Last year, the FCC opened the 6 GHz band 
for expanded Wi-Fi use. In some cases, our rules require new Wi-Fi 
devices to protect existing spectrum users by employing an automated 
frequency coordination system. In September, the FCC adopted a public 
notice to begin the process for authorizing these AFC systems. The 
window for submitting applications for authorization as an AFC system 
is open now, with initial proposals due by November 30, 2021. These 
proposals will be open for public comment and then, if conditionally 
approved, will be open for a public trial period to provide parties an 
opportunity to check the accuracy of the system. Authorizing AFC 
systems will be a big step toward enabling the deployment of 6 GHz 
devices around the country in a way that opens up the benefits of this 
new unlicensed frequency band for consumers while also ensuring 
protection of incumbents.
    In addition, we are continuing to explore opportunities to increase 
the spectrum resources we devote to Wi-Fi. To this end, the FCC has 
pending further rulemakings involving the 5.9 GHz and 6 GHz bands 
seeking comment on the potential for further unlicensed use.
    Finally, to advance innovation and entrepreneurship through 
spectrum policy, I believe we need to embrace the range of new wireless 
access technologies available, including through spectrum sharing. To 
understand how, it is instructive to consider the model the FCC created 
in the 3.5 GHz band several years ago. Here the agency took 150 
megahertz of spectrum and opened it up to a mix of government, 
licensed, and unlicensed uses. It did this by proposing a spectrum 
access database to dynamically manage the different kinds of wireless 
traffic using these airwaves. This multi-tiered approach to spectrum 
access was not just unprecedented--it was creative, efficient, and 
forward looking. Today this band accommodates important government 
radar operations that protect our safety while also making much-needed 
mid-band spectrum available to advance our wireless leadership. If 
confirmed, I will seek out further opportunities for these kinds of 
creative efforts to promote innovation through efficient spectrum use.
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Rick Scott to 
                        Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
    Question 1. The FCC has authority over broadcast licenses. As a 
nominee for this bipartisan commission, do you believe the government 
has the authority to censor opinions?
    Answer. No. FCC authority is limited by the First Amendment and 
Section 326 of the Communications Act.

    Question 2. As Congress gives out billions in new funding to build 
out broadband through the FCC, how would you ensure that Federal 
taxpayer dollars spent on broadband buildout projects are protected 
from fraud, waste, and abuse?
    Answer. While the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act does not 
direct broadband deployment funds to the FCC, the FCC's existing 
programs feature safeguards that might be instructive to help protect 
against fraud, waste and abuse.
    For example, in the FCC's Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, carriers 
must meet interim and final deployment milestones and report the 
locations that they have deployed to in a public High Cost Universal 
Broadband database. FCC staff also verify that the carriers are 
actually serving the locations they claim to serve, through audits and 
testing of the speed and latency of their offerings. If the provider 
fails to meet their interim deployment obligations, the FCC withholds 
an increasing amount of support depending on how far they are out of 
compliance. If a provider fails to meet final deployment obligations, 
they must pay the Universal Service Fund back approximately twice the 
amount they received for the location, to ensure that they face 
consequences for failed deployment. I believe these accountability 
measures are important and if confirmed, I would be willing to further 
discuss them with your office and the NTIA, which will distribute the 
bulk of the broadband deployment funds under the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act.

    Question 3. Do you support low earth orbit satellites as a 
technology to bridge the digital divide where other technologies may 
not reach? Do you believe that private investment in this technology 
will help reduce the need for the U.S. government to provide billions 
in taxpayer-funded broadband buildout?
    Answer. I believe next-generation satellite technologies have the 
potential to help close the digital divide in unserved areas of the 
United States. Moreover, I think many of these services may be able to 
deploy more rapidly than terrestrial alternatives in hard-to-reach 
areas. The cost of customer premises equipment for these technologies, 
however, which is decreasing, may create challenges for adoption.
    Recognizing the potential of these new constellations of satellites 
in low earth orbit to deliver Internet access, the FCC has worked to 
ensure the right conditions for these new technologies to succeed. In 
fact, the FCC's recent public notice announcing a new processing round 
in the V-band has garnered applications from nine constellations for 
more than 38,000 satellites. In light of this kind of interest, I 
believe this is an area where there will be further growth and 
opportunities to use this technology to serve many more places in the 
United States and worldwide.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Kyrsten Sinema to 
                             Alvaro Bedoya
    Competition. As you know, in addition to its consumer protection 
mission, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) also enforces antitrust 
law. This function protects Arizona families from anticompetitive 
practices that can result in higher prices and declining quality in 
goods and services.

    Question 1. Please describe your experience with antitrust law and 
your competition priorities if you are confirmed for this role.
    Answer. I am committed to rigorous enforcement of antitrust laws, 
and believe that robust competition is critical to innovation and 
flourishing of small business.
    As a general matter, I am acutely concerned with the level of 
concentration in the technology sector, and, if confirmed, plan to make 
antitrust enforcement on Big Tech a top priority. As I indicated in my 
confirmation hearing, I am also deeply concerned with anti-competitive 
practices affecting small businesses across all sectors.
    As chief counsel to Senator Al Franken (D.-Minn.) I helped advise 
the Senator on his oversight of the Comcast-NBC merger. As a privacy 
scholar at Georgetown Law, I have also become attuned to the privacy 
impacts of concentration in the tech sector. Many mergers and 
acquisitions in the tech sector create ever-larger pools of data.

    Social Media. During the hearing, several committee members 
highlighted past statements you have posted or shared on social media 
and used those posts to ask whether you could serve as an unbiased, 
open-minded FTC commissioner.

    Question 2. Given the posts highlighted by committee members during 
the hearing, are there any social media posts for which you would like 
to provide additional context? If so, please provide that context.
    Answer. I appreciate the opportunity to address this. I left the 
Senate in August 2014. From that time until this day, I have been a 
private citizen, law professor, and policy advocate.
    In those capacities, I have spoken out against statements and 
actions by elected officials and political candidates, typically in 
circumstances where institutions or people I cared about were being 
harmed. This harm was not hypothetical. For example, during the 2016 
presidential campaign my wife and other Muslim family members often 
asked me if they would have to ``register'' with the government. My 
daughter and son have never met their living great-grandmother and 
dozens of other relatives as a result of the travel ban.
    That said, looking back there are many instances in which I said or 
shared things that I regret today. What's more, it could not be clearer 
to me that the role of commissioner is a law enforcement function that 
will require me to set aside all of my personal political beliefs and 
work across the aisle to protect American consumers and businesses.

    Question 3. Do you believe your social media posts or other past 
public statements negatively impact your ability to serve as an 
unbiased, open-minded commissioner?
    Answer. No. My bipartisan work as a Senate staffer, my research and 
advocacy at Georgetown Law, and statements of support from Republicans, 
including both Commissioner Noah Phillips and Commissioner Christine 
Wilson and various former Senate staff colleagues, speak to my 
commitment to impartiality and bipartisanship.
    In the Senate, I worked across the aisle (1) to build a bipartisan 
coalition of Senators to press the FTC and the Department of Justice to 
investigate and prosecute stalking app developers; (2) with the office 
of Senator Mike Lee to protect small businesses in the 2013 
comprehensive immigration reform bill; and (3) with the office of 
Senator Dean Heller to help negotiate and craft the transparency 
provisions that eventually became part of the USA FREEDOM Act.
    At Georgetown Law, the Center on Privacy & Technology my team's 
research on the Federal biometric exit program supported bipartisan 
oversight of Customs and Border Protection by Senators Ed Markey and 
Mike Lee. My team's research on DHS face recognition searches of DMVs 
led to a bipartisan and bicameral oversight letter led by Senator Ron 
Johnson and Gary Peters.
    If confirmed, I am committed to serving as an unbiased and 
impartial commissioner.
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Gary Peters to 
                             Alvaro Bedoya
    Topic. Mr. Bedoya, in an Op Ed you wrote for the New York Times, 
you discussed the dangers of the improper use of personal data 
collected and distributed by Data Brokers. Specifically, you pointed 
out an instance where information from a data broker was used to 
defraud a 92-year-old Army Veteran and steal his life savings. My bill 
the Data Broker List Act would require Data Brokers to register with 
the Federal Trade Commission and provide information about the ways 
they use and share personal data.

    Question. Mr. Bedoya, how would the Data Broker List Act help the 
Federal Trade Commission to protect Americans fraud and improper use of 
their personal data?
    Answer. One of the key issues with data brokers is their ability to 
operate in an opaque manner. Another issue regards their ability to 
disclaim liability surrounding the downstream uses of the data they 
aggregate and sell. Two of the strengths of the Data Broker List Act 
lie in its requirement that data brokers register publicly, and in the 
bill's prohibition on sale of data where the data broker has reason to 
know that such sale will result in stalking, fraud, or discrimination. 
Both of these provisions are powerful steps forward in addressing the 
privacy and security concerns arising out of the data broker industry. 
If confirmed, I will look forward to working with you on this important 
issue.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to 
                             Alvaro Bedoya
    Question. Made in USA. As a Commissioner on the Federal Trade 
Commission, how will you think about the ``Made in the USA'' labeling 
program and ensure that the FTC sufficiently balances the need to 
protect consumers against modern supply chain realities and the 
important policy goal of encouraging investment in U.S. manufacturing?
    Answer. American consumers should be able to confidently buy 
products that are marked Made in the USA. If confirmed, I plan to 
continue the Commission's long-term commitment to helping companies 
that create jobs in the United States promote the good work they do 
without deceiving consumers.
    At the same time, in recognition of other agencies' primary 
authority over origin labels for many products, particularly imported 
products, I will commit to communicating with other agencies and with 
you and other members of Congress to reduce confusion and maintain 
consistency.
                                 ______
                                 
 Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Richard Blumenthal to 
                             Alvaro Bedoya
    Anticompetitive nature of pharmaceutical rebate walls. As a result 
of continued consolidation in the pharmaceutical industry, patients 
today face a number of hurdles in accessing innovative, affordable 
prescription drugs. In some circumstances, this access is foreclosed 
because of pharmaceutical ``rebate walls''--a tactic that prevents 
healthcare plans from choosing the lowest cost and most efficacious 
drugs--leading to higher prices.

    Question 1. If confirmed as FTC Commissioner, will you commit to 
supporting the full use of the FTC's authorities to combat 
anticompetitive practices, including rebate walls, that limit patients' 
choice and raise costs?
    Answer. Yes, I do.

    Question 2. If confirmed as FTC Commissioner, will you commit to 
engaging with the Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services, the Food 
and Drug Administration, and other relevant agencies to address rebate 
walls and other anticompetitive practices in health care?
    Answer. Yes, I do.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roger Wicker to 
                             Alvaro Bedoya
    Question 1. Mr. Bedoya, do you support Congress developing 
comprehensive data privacy legislation that preempts state laws? Yes or 
no?
    Answer. Yes. In an ideal world, Congress would develop and pass 
strong comprehensive data privacy legislation that would preempt state 
law. However, if the law were insufficiently strong, I would in turn 
support floor preemption.

    Question 2. Wht would a strong data privacy law look like to you?
    Answer. It is difficult to summarize in the abstract, but the 
following principles strike me as important. In my view, a strong data 
privacy law would:

   Not be technology-specific, anticipating future data streams 
        and technologies, particularly with respect to biometrics;

   Include both consent-based collection restrictions and post-
        collection use restrictions;

   Include general fiduciary duties, such as a duty of loyalty; 
        and

   Include provisions allowing for robust enforcement.

    Question 3. Do you think consumers would be best served if all 
companies in the Internet ecosystem are subject to the same privacy 
requirements (e.g., we should have the same rules for broadband 
providers, tech companies, advertisers, and retailers)? Why or why not?
    Answer. I absolutely agree that ideally, all such companies would 
be subject to the same standard. The sectoral system has its strengths, 
but clarity and uniformity is not one of them.

    Question 4. A study commissioned by the California Attorney General 
says that small businesses with fewer than 20 employees could incur up 
to $50,000 in compliance costs for the CCPA. This is a cost that 
doesn't account for complying with other privacy laws. Do you believe 
that small businesses should be subject to a patchwork of state privacy 
laws? What protection would FTC rules give small businesses?
    Answer. Ideally, all consumers and businesses would be subject to 
one uniform Internet privacy law rather than a patchwork of state laws; 
such a uniform law could include special provisions to address the 
needs of small businesses. Should the FTC use its authority under the 
Magnuson-Moss statutory framework to issue rules to address privacy 
violations, I would support provisions in that rulemaking to account 
for the specific needs of small business.

    Question 5. Do you support the FTC developing privacy rules? Yes or 
no?
    Answer. Yes. In an ideal world, the FTC would only issue such rules 
after passage of a bipartisan comprehensive privacy bill giving the FTC 
statute-specific rulemaking authority.
    However, as I indicated in my opening remarks at my confirmation 
hearing, I think that we are in a privacy crisis. Therefore, I support 
the FTC using its congressionally granted authority to issue rules to 
combat unfair or deceptive trade practices affecting privacy. Those 
rules are issued under notice and comment rulemaking, including 
consultation with the public, stakeholders, and members of Congress, 
are only issued when a majority of the Commission supports them, and 
are of course subject to judicial oversight.

    Question 6. If the FTC were to promulgate privacy rules, should 
those rules preempt state privacy laws? Why or why not?
    Answer. If the FTC were poised to issue strong privacy rules, I 
would support preemption. If the FTC rules would undermine important 
state protections, then I would in turn support floor preemption. (In 
our earlier conversation, I had been under the misimpression that such 
rules would be preemptive as a matter of default; I now understand that 
is not the case.)

    Question 7. Do you think FTC privacy rules should be considered a 
substitute for Federal legislation? Why or why not?
    Answer. No. It is imperative that Congress pass comprehensive 
privacy legislation. The FTC would only be able to issue privacy rules 
under its Magnuson-Moss rulemaking authority, which would reach only 
unfair or deceptive trade practices deemed to be ``prevalent.'' This 
likely does not encompass the full range of privacy invasions Americans 
face today.

    Question 8. Mr. Bedoya, the FTC has long been known as a bipartisan 
agency. However, prior to Commissioner Chopra's departure from the 
agency, there have been several 3-2 votes, the elimination of long-
standing bipartisan policy statements at the Commission, and efforts to 
exclude minority commissioners from agency investigations. I am 
concerned about the growing politicization of the agency.

   What will you do to help restore bipartisanship to the 
        Commission, if confirmed?

   Will you publicly commit to supporting a return to regular 
        order at the FTC by restoring the FTC minority Commissioners' 
        ability to approve and acquire information about new, 
        Commission-led investigations? Yes or no?
    Answer. I am excited at the opportunity to work with all 
Commissioners, regardless of party. I also cherish the Commission's 
reputation for bipartisanship, and recognize that it is strongest when 
operating in a bipartisan matter.
    If confirmed, I commit to affirmatively look for areas in which I 
could work together with minority Commissioners and also commit to 
reach out to minority Commissioners to identify their process-related 
concerns and work to find a way to address them.

    Question 9. Do you think the FTC has a role in overseeing the 
enforcement of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act? If yes, 
what is the Commission's role? If not, why not?
    Answer. The FTC does not ``enforce'' Section 230 of the 
Communications Decency Act, but I understand that it may affect the 
FTC's ability to combat deceptive and unfair practices under the FTC 
Act in some circumstances. I am also aware that there have been 
legislative proposals to reform Section 230. As a Commissioner, I would 
work closely with my colleagues, FTC staff, and members of Congress to 
identify ways in which Section 230 may be improved to better protect 
consumers and competition.

    Question 10. Do you think content suppression by dominant online 
platforms- in the form of banning books, pushing down organic search 
results, or restricting apps on app stores--could meet the definition 
of an unfair practice under the FTC's consumer protection unfairness 
policy test or competition unfairness principles? Why or why not?
    Answer. I am acutely concerned with content suppression and 
manipulation by dominant online platforms. As a private citizen, I 
think it is a problem when one person or a handful of people 
effectively control the speech of hundreds of millions of people.
    To constitute an unfair trade practice, a trade practice must (1) 
cause substantial injury to consumers that (2) is not outweighed by the 
benefits of that practice and (3) is not reasonably avoidable. This is 
a fact-specific analysis that will vary with the industry and the 
transaction in question; that said, I do not think it is implausible 
that content suppression or manipulation in particular contexts might 
conceivably constitute an unfair trade practice. In addition to these 
statutory factors, the FTC would need to assess whether the platform 
was exercising First Amendment-protected editorial control over the 
content it chooses to disseminate and whether the corporate statements 
were commercial speech.
    Content suppression, for example manipulating search results to 
demote competitors, could constitute anticompetitive conduct that harms 
the competitive process. Content suppression conduct could take many 
forms and the analysis would require the consideration of a number of 
factors, depending on the conduct at issue.

    Question 11. Prohibiting unfair methods of competition is an 
essential part of the FTC's consumer protection mission. Could you 
please describe for the Committee your approach to competition policy 
and what experiences you will draw upon to address anticompetitive 
conduct in the marketplace, if confirmed?
    Answer. I am committed to rigorous enforcement of antitrust laws, 
and believe that robust competition is critical to innovation and 
flourishing of small business.
    As a general matter, I am acutely concerned with the level of 
concentration in the technology sector, and, if confirmed, plan to make 
antitrust enforcement on Big Tech a top priority. As I indicated in my 
confirmation hearing, I am also deeply concerned with anti-competitive 
practices affecting small businesses across all sectors.
    As chief counsel to Senator Al Franken (D.-Minn.) I helped advise 
the Senator on his work into the Comcast-NBC merger. As a privacy 
scholar at Georgetown Law, I have also become attuned to the privacy 
impacts of concentration in the tech sector. Many mergers and 
acquisitions in the tech sector create ever-larger pools of data.

    Question 12. As you know, consumers and retailers are suffering 
this holiday season from supply chain disruptions that have reduced the 
stock of goods nationwide. There seems to be general agreement that the 
issues stem from carriers and terminal operations (such as empty 
container returns) and the lack of equipment (chassis), which are 
beyond the control of the retailer or cargo owner. Now the FTC plans to 
launch an investigation in which it will issue civil investigative 
demands (similar to subpoenas) to larger retailers, which appears on 
its face to be misdirected.

   How do you think the FTC's proposed ``6(b) study'' on supply 
        chain disruptions facing this country actually help fix the 
        problem right now by reducing the shipping backlog, restoring 
        supply chain efficiencies, and helping lower prices for 
        consumers?

   If confirmed, will you investigate and report back to this 
        Committee on the principal reason why the Commission is 
        spending valuable taxpayer resources using, in my opinion, the 
        wrong tool at the wrong time?

   In your view, why do you believe the FTC is taking this 
        action at all?
    Answer. I do not have an opinion on this study, particularly since 
the 6(b) requests have not been approved and are not yet finalized. 
That said, if confirmed, I do commit to investigate and report back to 
the Committee on what I learn, in line with any confidentiality 
restrictions that apply to me as Commissioner.

    Question 13. In a recent report surveying individuals in the AI 
research field, 85 percent of respondents ``expressed confidence that 
appropriate public policies could help accelerate private sector 
development of new materials, medicines, and other innovations derived 
from AI technology.'' With Artificial Intelligence at the forefront of 
future innovation, what do you see as the FTC's role in regulating 
Artificial Intelligence?
    Answer. I envision the FTC as providing consumers and businesses 
with educational materials that inform them of the strengths and 
weaknesses of machine learning technologies. I also think it is 
imperative that the FTC have the technical expertise required to 
enforce its consumer protection and competition mission despite the 
highly complex and occasionally opaque nature of machine learning-
driven systems and technologies.

    Question 14. The Federal Trade Commission has a vital role in 
stopping anticompetitive behavior. However, some members of the 
Commission have indicated that data can be a source of market power. AI 
requires large data sets, and the larger the data sets the better 
equipped AI is at avoiding unwanted bias. Further, companies make 
significant investment to gather data. How do you see the collection of 
data as a source of market power?
    Answer. I have read that access to large pools of data--for 
example, a company holding an individual's social ``graph,'' or social 
network--can serve as an effective barrier to entry to new competitors. 
That said, I have not systematically studied the interplay between data 
collection and market power or competition more generally.

    Question 15. A survey by the Security Industry Association (SIA) in 
2020 looked at societies' view of facial recognition technology around 
public safety uses. That survey found that 66 percent of the public 
believe that law enforcement use of facial recognition is appropriate, 
and 57 percent were comfortable with its use in a database that 
includes their facial image. If society believes and has faith in the 
technology, do you think that government should still look to limit its 
use?
    Answer. It is not clear from my review of the survey whether the 
1,000 respondents were informed that face recognition searches 
typically occur without warrants and effectively in secret, or that 
people identified through these searches are rarely informed that they 
were found through the use of the technology. It would also appear, per 
the survey, that more than 4 in 10 adults are uncomfortable with the 
inclusion of their face in a law enforcement face recognition network.
    That said, I do not believe that there is a one-size-fits-all 
approach to regulating police use of face recognition. For example, the 
Center on Privacy & Technology publicly supported Utah's state law 
regulating police use of face recognition, which does not ban or 
require a warrant prior to use of the technology but rather limits its 
use to certain violent crimes, and requires notice to those affected. 
While we have supported more stringent standards in other states, my 
primary concern has been that taxpayers are not informed of these 
practices, and that they should be afforded the chance to decide what 
the rules of the road should be for the technology.
    Of course, the FTC does not have jurisdiction over law enforcement. 
That said, if confirmed, if this issue does somehow present itself 
before the Commission in an indirect manner, I will commit to working 
with my colleagues, FTC staff, and members of Congress on this complex 
matter.

    Question 16. A recent report found that 68 percent of respondents 
believed the Federal government should support the removal of 
subjectivity and personal bias from business processes through expanded 
use of AI and adoption of more robust standards and models. Do you 
agree that Artificial Intelligence can be used to reduce unwanted bias?
    Answer. I agree that in theory that machine learning could be used 
in this way. At the same time, what I have learned is that many 
commercial vendors of machine technology make claims as to its 
neutrality without fully studying its differential performance across 
all sectors of society.

    Question 17. Did you provide any assistance to the White House 
drafting the July Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the 
American Economy?
    Answer. No, I did not.

    Question 18. Do you commit to keeping the FTC independent and 
coming to decisions based on agency expertise and not White House 
requests or pressure?
    Answer. Yes, I do.

    Question 19. Do you believe that FTC Commissioners have the legal 
authority to cast votes that continue to count toward a Commission 
majority even after they have departed from the agency?
    Answer. I certainly understand the concern with this practice. If 
confirmed, I will reach out to the Office of General Counsel to study 
this issue closely.

    Question 20. Do you believe the Federal Trade Commission should 
provide more transparency into its proceedings by allowing the public 
to see orders on agency rules, guidance, and procedural changes several 
weeks before Commissioners vote on a matter?
    Answer. In general, I support greater transparency at all 
government agencies, including the FTC.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to 
                             Alvaro Bedoya
    Question 1. Do you believe the FTC should pursue a comprehensive 
data privacy rulemaking, even though this is a matter currently under 
debate in Congress?
    Answer. In an ideal world, the FTC would wait until Congress passed 
a comprehensive data privacy bill prior to engaging in rulemaking, and 
would do so pursuant to the authority granted in that bill. 
Unfortunately, I think we are in a privacy crisis, and that crisis 
necessitates using the existing authority granted under Magnuson-Moss 
to issue rules curbing prevalent unfair or deceptive trade practices 
touching upon privacy--a smaller subset of issues that could be 
addressed as compared to privacy legislation. If the FTC does in fact 
conduct that rulemaking, and if confirmed, I will confer closely with 
you and your staff on your priorities and viewpoints.

    Question 2. The FTC is a traditionally bipartisan institution in 
which consensus on tough issues is sought and stakeholders heard from. 
Will you commit to work in a bipartisan manner with your Commission 
colleagues to better serve the interests of the American people, if you 
are confirmed?
    Answer. Yes, absolutely.

    Question 3. It has been reported that, prior to leaving, former-
Commissioner Chopra e-mailed several votes that are still being used to 
decide two-two cases on the Commission. I don't think it makes sense to 
use votes cast by a former Commissioner on cases that are very closely 
decided. I also believe it furthers the partisan tensions that the 
Commission is currently experiencing. Do you agree that using a former 
Commissioner's votes to decide close cases may be contributing to the 
lack of bipartisanship on the Commission?
    Answer. I certainly understand the concern with this practice. If 
confirmed, I will reach out to the Office of General Counsel to study 
this issue closely.

    Question 4. Chair Khan's ``Vision and Priorities'' memorandum to 
FTC staff in September suggests that the FTC should take a ``holistic'' 
approach to antitrust that ``focus[es] on power asymmetries and the 
unlawful practices those imbalances enable.'' What do you believe 
constitutes a ``power asymmetry,'' and when does it violate the 
antitrust laws? What analytical approach would you apply to power 
asymmetries other than the common law's traditional focus on market and 
monopoly power?
    Answer. As this is not a term I have ever used or defined, I do not 
have an opinion on how one would analyze ``power asymmetries'' in an 
antitrust case. As a general matter, I am acutely concerned with the 
level of concentration in the technology sector, and, if confirmed, 
plan to make antitrust enforcement on Big Tech a top priority.

    Question 5. Chair Khan has often spoken of ``democratizing'' the 
Commission's work. What does it mean to you to ``democratize'' the 
Commission?
    Answer. I am not sure what Chair Khan was referring to 
specifically. Personally, if confirmed, I hope to serve as a 
Commissioner who actively reaches out to everyone. In general, I will 
do everything I can to hear opinions and get feedback from outside of 
the Beltway.
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roy Blunt to 
                             Alvaro Bedoya
    Question 1. Earlier this year, the rural retail company Tractor 
Supply agreed to buy Orscheln Farm and Home, a Missouri-based family-
owned business that has served Midwest rural communities with quality 
products for more than 55 years. One of the reasons the Orscheln family 
carefully chose Tractor Supply to purchase their company was because 
the latter embodied similar rural cultural values as Orscheln. In 
contrast to what might happen if Orscheln were to sell its business to 
a private equity firm, Tractor Supply would help retain the same 
quality and customer loyalty for which Orscheln was known. This would 
in turn help Orscheln survive in the face of competition from Internet 
giants like Amazon. Shortly after announcing the deal, however, the FTC 
issued a second request for information to extend the merger review 
process. It's been ten months since the parties have been negotiating 
with the FTC, and FTC staff haven't provided clear criteria or reasons 
for why the deal is anti-competitive, or what could be done to reach an 
agreement. In the meantime, both Orscheln and Tractor Supply have been 
bleeding massive amounts of money on attorney fees, with no end in 
sight.

   Mr. Bedoya, do you think it would be a problem if Orscheln 
        Farm and Home went out of business because it lacked the 
        resources to compete with Internet-based platforms like Amazon 
        and others that offer low prices and free shipping? Are you 
        concerned about the devastating job losses this could cause in 
        rural communities where Orscheln serves?

   Do you agree that the FTC merger review process should take 
        into account the unique circumstances facing rural areas of the 
        country?

   In reviewing mergers, should FTC staff communicate clearly 
        to parties the criteria that would satisfy the FTC's concerns? 
        Should the FTC do so in a timely manner and provide a date 
        certain for the review to conclude?

   Are you concerned that if companies like Orscheln aren't 
        able to close their deals in a timely manner, and are forced to 
        become subject to burdensome consent decrees upon approval, 
        they won't seek the FTC's approval before closing?
    Answer. I very much appreciate your concern with this case, but I 
believe that I should not comment on any matter currently before the 
Commission.
    As a general matter, not specific to this case, I am deeply 
sympathetic to job losses in rural communities, particularly where one 
cannot easily change jobs without relocating family.
    I also believe that the Commission should treat all parties before 
it with dignity and respect, and do everything possible to provide 
clarity into the review process and its criteria for evaluation.

    Question 2. Some in the current administration want the FTC--which 
shares civil antitrust jurisdiction with the Department of Justice--to 
take a tough posture on merger activity. And, over the last year, the 
FTC has certainly taken steps to make the merger review process more 
time-consuming, expensive, and difficult for merging parties. One 
example is the FTC's decision to halt its practice of granting early 
termination requests for transactions identified as not posing a risk 
to competition. Another is the FTC's new practice of sending ``close at 
your own peril'' form letters to tell parties that even if they've 
passed the statutory waiting period before closing, the FTC could still 
determine the transaction to be unlawful in the indeterminate future. 
There's also the FTC's party-line rescission of the vertical merger 
guidelines, as well as the new ``prior approval'' policy that gives the 
FTC veto power over merging parties' future deals, both in the absence 
of any public comment. And the list goes on. In contrast, I'm concerned 
that making it too hard engage in merger transactions can have negative 
consequences. Mergers can benefit consumers by creating economies of 
scale, enabling greater investment in research and development, 
promoting innovation, and protecting a local business from closing. We 
also don't want to make it too difficult for family businesses--like 
Missouri's own Orscheln Farm and Home, which Tractor Supply Company 
agreed to acquire--to profit from their life's work. Mergers can even 
save lives. For example, gene-sequencing company Illumina and its 
former start-up, Grail, state that they can accelerate the pace at 
which Grail's early stage cancer screening--a simple blood test that 
screens for more than 50 different cancers in asymptomatic patients--
can reach the market through a vertical re-acquisition to leverage 
Illumina's scale and manufacturing and clinical capabilities. Yet, the 
FTC has been working to block the merger, in concert with the European 
Commission, even though both Illumina and Grail are American companies.

   Mr. Bedoya, do you think there are ways the FTC could 
        overreach when it comes to making it too difficult for 
        companies to engage in transactions or acquisitions? If so, 
        what are those ways?

   Are you concerned that the FTC's decision to block the 
        Illumina-Grail transaction may delay the public's access to 
        Grail's lifesaving tests?

   Are you concerned that the FTC's decision to block the 
        Illumina-Grail transaction will disincentivize other companies 
        from developing the next groundbreaking technology?
    Answer. I very much appreciate your concern with these cases, but I 
believe that I should not comment on any matter currently before the 
Commission. As a general matter, not specific to these cases, I 
certainly think that the FTC could overreach if it went beyond the 
statutory mandates with which it has been charged.

    Question 3. Over the last several decades, the Supreme Court has 
held that the purpose of Congress' antitrust laws is to protect 
consumers, not competitors.

   Mr. Bedoya, do you have a view of the Supreme Court's 
        `consumer welfare' theory of antitrust law?

   Would you adhere to the interpretation of antitrust statutes 
        that the courts give?
    Answer. I emphatically support efforts to ensure that consumer 
welfare is interpreted in a manner that encompasses not just price, but 
also output, innovation, consumer choice, and quality. There are 
critiques of the standard as to its ability to protect competition with 
respect to large technology platforms. If confirmed, I believe that I 
would be bound to enforce the antitrust laws in a manner in line with 
statutory intent and court precedent.

    Question 4. This summer, President Biden signed an executive order 
on promoting competition, in which he encourages the FTC to promulgate 
rules in seven different areas of the economy, including through a 
catch-all direction to regulate ``any other unfair industry-specific 
practices that substantially inhibit competition.'' I'm concerned that 
such expansive language and assertions of rulemaking authority are not 
well-supported. After all, Congress never granted the FTC broad 
rulemaking authority to determine what is and is not an unfair method 
of competition. Rather, when Congress has given the FTC rulemaking 
authority, it has been limited very specific procedures and 
circumstances, and intended--in the words of former FTC Commissioner 
Maureen Olhausen--to ``complement its case-by-case adjudicatory 
authority, not supplant it.'' I'm also concerned that this approach 
wouldn't be accepted by the courts. Just over a week ago, the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit decided to block OSHA's emergency 
vaccine and testing mandate, stating that it raised separation of 
powers concerns ``over the Mandate's assertion of virtually unlimited 
power to control individual conduct under the guise of a workplace 
regulation'' and that ``Congress must speak clearly if it wishes to 
assign to an agency decisions of vast economic and political 
significance.'' Mr. Bedoya, do you have a view of the Supreme Court's 
`consumer welfare' theory of antitrust law?

   Mr. Bedoya, do you think that Congress has expressed a clear 
        intent for the FTC to have broad rulemaking authority over the 
        economy?

   Do you think there are limits to the FTC's regulatory power, 
        and if so, what are they?
    Answer. I do not believe that Congress has expressed a clear intent 
for the FTC to have broad rulemaking authority over the economy. It 
has, however, clearly given the agency authority to issue rules in 
certain circumstances, for example to curb prevalent unfair or 
deceptive trade practices (section 18).
    I think there are clear limits on that regulatory power. For 
example, under section 18 Magnuson-Moss rulemaking, the Commission is 
only able to issue rules regarding unfair or deceptive conduct deemed 
``prevalent.'' Even then, it has to give advance notice to Congress and 
ample opportunity for public comment, with the subsequent possibility 
of judicial review.
                                 ______
                                 
  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Marsha Blackburn to 
                             Alvaro Bedoya
    Question 1. Senator Blumenthal and I, through our positions on the 
Consumer Protection Subcommittee, have held several hearings looking at 
the impacts of tech platforms on kids and teens. I understand you spent 
a good deal of your career focused on privacy issues and how privacy 
impacts different populations. How do you think Congress and the FTC 
should be addressing kids' privacy and kids' behavior online given the 
way that big tech platforms have penetrated our kids' lives?
    Answer. As a parent, I am deeply concerned with kids' and 
teenagers' ability to navigate the Internet and tech platforms. This 
strikes me as one of the most urgent issues facing Congress and the 
Commission, and if confirmed, this would be a top priority for me.
    First, I think that existing privacy protections for children 
should be extended to more teenagers, ideally through 17.
    Second, I think that the actual knowledge standard in COPPA should 
be modified to a constructive knowledge standard.
    Third, I think that Congress and the Commission should investigate 
the degree to which many of these technologies are affirmatively 
designed to addict people.
    Fourth, I think that Congress and the Commission should 
comprehensively study the issue of addiction, ideally with the support 
of child psychologists and other subject matter experts.
    Fifth, I think that Congress and the Commission should study the 
information asymmetries--a longtime focus of Commissioner Wilson's--
that leave parents in the dark about the potential harms of technology 
on their children. As I indicated in my hearing, if confirmed I am 
particularly eager to work with Commissioner Wilson on the issue of 
children's privacy.

    Question 2. I have watched with concern steps the FTC took recently 
to disincentivize merger and acquisition activity across all 
industries. For example, in September, the FTC withdrew its Vertical 
Merger Guidelines and then last month took steps to reinstate its prior 
approval authority for mergers it deems ``anticompetitive.'' Do you 
agree with these actions? What clarity should businesses have when 
pursuing transactions before the FTC?
    Answer. Both of these are actions which I would like to study 
further, if confirmed, particularly with the assistance of expert 
staff. I believe that the Commission should do everything possible to 
provide clarity into the review process and its criteria for 
evaluation.

    Question 3. I have seen a number of tweets you posted over the last 
few years that were overtly political, including calling President 
Trump a ``racist and white supremacist.'' You also served on the board 
of Free Press, an organization that has been explicitly partisan in its 
approach. Do you believe you can be a fair and independent member of 
the FTC, rather than one who is beholden to political interests?
    Answer. I appreciate the chance to address this. Yes, I do. I 
believe that my bipartisan work as a Senate staffer, my research and 
advocacy at Georgetown Law, and statements of support from Republicans, 
including both Commissioner Noah Phillips and Commissioner Christine 
Wilson and various former Senate staff colleagues, speak to my 
commitment to impartiality and bipartisanship.
    In the Senate, I worked across the aisle (1) to build a bipartisan 
coalition of Senators to press the FTC and the Department of Justice to 
investigate and prosecute stalking app developers; (2) with the office 
of Senator Mike Lee to protect small businesses in the 2013 
comprehensive immigration reform bill; and (3) with the office of 
Senator Dean Heller to help negotiate and craft the transparency 
provisions that eventually became part of the USA FREEDOM Act.
    At Georgetown Law, the Center on Privacy & Technology my team's 
research on the Federal biometric exit program supported bipartisan 
oversight of Customs and Border Protection by Senators Ed Markey and 
Mike Lee. My team's research on DHS face recognition searches of DMVs 
led to a bipartisan and bicameral oversight letter led by Senator Ron 
Johnson and Gary Peters.
    As a private citizen and law professor, I did speak out on social 
media when I strongly disagreed with the actions or statements of 
elected officials, particularly when they affected my family. That 
said, looking back, there were many instances in which I said or shared 
things that I regret today. What's more, it could not be clearer to me 
that the role of commissioner is a law enforcement function that will 
require me to set aside all of my personal political beliefs and work 
across the aisle to protect American consumers and businesses.
    If confirmed, I am committed to serving as an unbiased and 
impartial commissioner.
                                 ______
                                 
      Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Mike Lee to 
                             Alvaro Bedoya
    Question 1. During the hearing I mentioned that FTC Chair Khan is 
still ``zombie'' voting with former Commissioner Chopra's proxy on 
matters before the Commission even though Mr. Chopra has left the 
Commission to be the Director of the CFPB. Do you support Chair Khan's 
use of ``zombie voting'' on matters before the Commission?
    Answer. I certainly understand the concern with this practice. If 
confirmed, I will reach out to the Office of General Counsel to study 
this issue closely.

    Question 2. On July 1, 2021, the FTC voted 3-2 to rescind the 
Commission's ``2015 antitrust policy statement.'' Do you agree with the 
Commission's decision to rescind the antitrust policy statement? Why?
    Answer. I do not know how I would have voted, as I was not present 
on the Commission and thus not privy to briefings or discussions 
between the Chair, the staff, and Commissioners. That said, I do 
believe it is clear from legislative history and the structure of the 
statute that section 5's unfair methods authority was meant to go 
beyond the confines of what is prohibited under the Sherman and Clayton 
Acts. Further, I believe that if the agency is to be called upon to 
protect competition in the face of large and powerful technology 
platforms, it needs every tool at its disposal.

    Question 3. During the hearing, you noted that you agreed that the 
FTC should use its Section 5 authority to engage in rulemaking on 
``unfair methods of competition.'' What specific rules do you believe 
the Commission should undertake using this authority? And are those 
rules ``expressly delegated?'' What limits (if any) are there to the 
use of this rulemaking authority?
    Answer. I do not have a preconceived idea of what rules should be 
issued under a section 6(g) rulemaking on unfair methods of 
competition. It does appear to me that the authority has been expressly 
delegated to the Commission by Congress. Rulemaking under section 6(g) 
would be subject to the constraints of the Administrative Procedures 
Act.

    Question 4. During the hearing, you mentioned that you needed more 
time to consider whether you were in agreement with the FTC's recent 
decision to withdraw its Vertical Merger Guidelines. Do you support 
this decision by the Commission? Why?
    Answer. I would like to study this further, if confirmed, 
particularly with the assistance of expert staff. I believe that the 
Commission should do everything possible to provide clarity into the 
review process and its criteria for evaluation.
    In general, I am acutely concerned with vertical integration among 
large technology platforms, and believe that this practice has harmed 
competition in the tech sector.

    Question 5. During the hearing, I asked about the FTC's 3-2 
decision to eliminate procedural rules related to Magnuson-Moss Section 
18 rulemaking authority. Do you support this decision by the 
Commission? Why?
    Answer. Yes, I do. I believe that the Commission should be nimble 
in its ability to curb prevalent unfair or deceptive trade practices, 
and that the statutory requirements of Magnuson-Moss rulemaking--which 
cannot, as a constitutional matter, be undermined by any agency 
action--remain quite robust.

    Question 6. During the hearing, you noted that you supported the 
FTC's decision to only require the support of a single commissioner to 
sign off on investigations as opposed to the practice of having a 
majority of Commissioners. Why do you support this decision? Does this 
decision avoid a collaborative, bipartisan process at the Commission?
    Answer. I believe that the agency needs to be nimble in its ability 
to respond to potential instances of unfair or deceptive trade 
practices or threats to competition. It is my understanding that using 
omnibus authorizations for investigations has been the longstanding 
practice of the Commission in its consumer protection work, and that 
this move has brought the Bureau of Competition in line with the Bureau 
of Consumer Protection.

    Question 7. There was a recent case called LabMD v. FTC where the 
11th Circuit vacated an order by the FTC because it found the FTC 
lacked specificity in its order and commanded LabMD to meet an 
indeterminable standard for reasonableness. What lessons should be 
learned from the LabMD case? Are there changes that you would implement 
to prevent this abuse of power that the 11th Circuit identified?
    Answer. I believe that it speaks to the fact that section 5 is a 
less than an ideal means through which to protect data security. This 
is why I believe it is imperative that Congress pass strong and 
detailed data security legislation to protect business and consumer 
data.

    Question 8. Our country is in a nationwide debate regarding online 
political bias and censorship. Tech CEO's often make promises in public 
about how their company operates in the marketplace. How often have we 
heard public statements that say, ``We don't sell your data'' or ``You 
own your data'' or ``We don't censor your data or content.'' Or how 
about Twitter CEO, Jack Dorsey, who stated: ``We do not look at content 
with regards to political viewpoints or ideology. We look at 
behavior.'' The statements may or may not be true. But in the Internet 
context, it's become a common complaint from consumers that what a CEO 
says or how a company holds out their businesses operations is 
different than how the platform operates. If consumers are harmed by 
relying on these CEO or corporate statements, is this an area that the 
FTC could find constitutes a ``deceptive trade practice?''

   I believe consumers could benefit from increased tech 
        company transparency regarding these particular business 
        practices. And I along with Senators Moran and Braun have 
        introduced S. 427, the Promoting Responsibility Over Moderation 
        In the Social-Media Environment (PROMISE) Act, which would 
        require greater consumer transparency over these business 
        practices by requiring companies to disclose their content 
        moderation practices and follow through on these promises made 
        to consumers. Would increased transparency and disclosure from 
        these tech companies empower consumers?

   And do you support my bill, the PROMISE Act?
    Answer. I am acutely concerned with content suppression and 
manipulation by dominant online platforms. As a private citizen, I 
think it is a problem when one person or a handful of people 
effectively control the speech of hundreds of millions of people.
    A deceptive trade practice involves (1) a claim or material 
omission that is (2) likely to mislead a reasonable consumer, (3) to 
that consumer's detriment. In addition to these statutory factors, the 
FTC would need to assess whether the platform was exercising First 
Amendment-protected editorial control over the content it chooses to 
disseminate and whether the corporate statements were commercial 
speech. This is a fact-and law-specific inquiry that will turn on the 
industry and the transaction in question.
    That said, as a general matter, if a technology platform claims to 
run content moderation in one way, but does it in a different way in a 
manner that misleads most reasonable consumers, and in a way that harms 
them, then it is conceivable that under certain circumstances this 
could constitute a deceptive trade practice.
    I absolutely think that greater transparency and disclosure from 
tech companies empower consumers. The PROMISE Act strikes me as a 
simple and strong step forward towards that goal.

    Question 9. The Congress is actively debating Federal data privacy 
legislation? What is your stance on Federal data privacy legislation?

   What should the regulatory definition of ``data'' 
        constitute?

   Do consumers ``own'' their data? Is there a limit to a 
        consumer's ownership rights over data?

   What consumer ``harms'' or ``injuries'' should the 
        government prevent or have rules that protect against?

   What is a consumer's ``reasonable expectation'' of privacy 
        online? What information should a consumer be presented with 
        regarding the use of their data?

   Is preemption a necessary component of Federal data privacy 
        legislation? If so, to what extent?

   Is a private right of action (in any form) a necessary 
        component of Federal data privacy legislation?

   In your opinion, should the Commission be granted additional 
        APA rulemaking power to carry out data regulations? And what 
        rules should the Commission pursue under Section 5 to address 
        data privacy concerns?
    Answer. I used to be a skeptic of Federal comprehensive privacy 
legislation, but now I believe that Congress has the will and expertise 
to issue a strong comprehensive privacy law, and strongly support this 
effort.
    I don't have a preconceived view of what ``data'' should encompass, 
but I do think that any regulatory regime must try to anticipate future 
data streams and technologies, and be sufficiently flexible to 
encompass them, either directly or through expert rulemaking.
    While I have occasionally used the expression that you ``own'' your 
data, I have tried to avoid it as I do not think it adequately captures 
the nature of sensitive data, or the fact that consumers sometimes pay 
for a service through their data.
    I believe that data privacy legislation should protect against non-
consensual collection of sensitive information and the use of sensitive 
information in a manner that a reasonable consumer does not expect or 
in a manner that breaches a duty of loyalty to that consumer. I also 
believe that sensitive data collection should not occur in secret.
    Generally speaking, I think that consumers reasonably expect that 
their sensitive information will not be collected without their 
knowledge or consent, and that it will not be used to their detriment. 
I believe that consumers should be informed of what data is being 
collected from them, what it will be used for, who it will be shared 
with, and when it will be deleted.
    In an ideal world, Congress would pass a strong Federal data 
privacy law, and that law would preempt individual state standards. If 
Congress were unable to pass a strong law, then floor preemption would 
be appropriate.
    I have generally supported private rights of action as effective 
means to protect consumer privacy. However, there are good faith 
arguments to limiting them.
    I do think that Congress should grant the Commission APA rulemaking 
power to implement any data privacy legislation, as existing section 5 
rulemaking is limited, under section 18, to a subset of prevalent 
unfair or deceptive data practices.

    Question 10. As you may know, the FTC first implemented the Contact 
Lens Rule in 2004 after Congress passed the Fairness to Contact Lens 
Consumers Act. And last year, the FTC unanimously approved an amended 
version of the Contact Lens Rule. I'm a strong supporter of the Rule, 
which requires contact lens prescribers to give their patients a free 
and portable copy of their lens prescription and keep a record of the 
patient's receipt of prescription. This allows patients to shop around 
in a competitive marketplace and choose the option that works best for 
them. Are you a supporter of the Contact Lens Rule and the FTC's 
efforts to enable a competitive marketplace?
    Answer. Yes, and as a contact lens user I am a beneficiary of this 
rule.

    Question 11. The FTC has scheduled a ten-year regulatory review of 
the Business Opportunity Rule, which requires business opportunity 
sellers to give prospective buyers specific information to help them 
evaluate a business opportunity. Do you have any views on the FTC's 
review of the Business Opportunity Rule? And will you commit to 
ensuring that small businesses are not met with unnecessary regulatory 
burdens?

   If confirmed, will you commit to objectively considering all 
        public comments and conversations during this regulatory review 
        to ensure that consumers are protected and small businesses are 
        shielded from burdensome regulations?
    Answer. I do not at present have any specific views on the Rule. I 
am, however, sympathetic to the specific needs of small businesses and 
will of course work to ensure that they are not met with unnecessary 
regulatory burdens.
    Yes, if confirmed, I will gladly commit to this.

    Question 12. What is your stance on the FTC's authority to use 
13(b) to pursue restitution or disgorgement? Given that the Supreme 
Court recently ruled that the FTC unlawfully used Section 13(b) to seek 
equitable monetary relief, would you support Congressional efforts to 
ensure use of this authority for this purpose is accompanied by 
procedures that ensure due process?
    Answer. Section 13(b) has been a critical tool to return millions 
of dollars to American consumers and businesses. I support the 
Commission's bipartisan effort to give the Commission the ability to 
seek monetary relief for consumers and businesses. In general, I always 
support efforts to protect due process, but am concerned that moving to 
a process such as that allowed under section 19 would unnecessarily 
delay the return of ill-begotten funds to victimized consumers and 
businesses.

    Question 13. Section 6(b) is used by the FTC to require a company 
to file reports or answers in writing to specific questions about its 
business practices. When should Section 6(b) authority be used? Should 
there be limits to its use?

   The production of documents is expensive. How would you 
        balance the invocation of the authority with the expense to the 
        business?
    Answer. I think that section 6(b) is a powerful tool to allow the 
FTC to learn about business practices in a way that informs and refines 
future enforcement actions. While section 6(b) is a broad authority, 
the Paperwork Reduction Act imposes significant limits on that 
authority. The Commission would require approval from the Office of 
Management and Budget (or a waiver from Congress) to send the same set 
of questions to more than nine entities, or to entities that comprise a 
substantial majority of an industry. If confirmed I will keep in mind 
the burden of document production on businesses prior to approving such 
a study.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ron Johnson to 
                             Alvaro Bedoya
    Question 1. You stated during the hearing, that you believed ``that 
if the Commission is to be called on to police Big Tech, that it needs 
every tool at its disposal.''

   What are the tools at the FTC's disposal?

   What is your philosophy on policing Big Tech?
    Answer. The FTC has a broad range of tools at its disposal, from 
consumer and business education, to investigations, law enforcement 
actions, consent decree monitoring, and, in some circumstances, 
rulemaking.
    I am concerned that large technology platforms have come to 
dominate our personal and professional lives and, indeed, our society, 
and that they have often used that power in a way that violates our 
privacy and stifles competition.

    Question 2. You are known to be a critic of surveillance 
technologies.

   What are your views on the digital surveillance tools used 
        to censor illegal and illicit content on social media 
        platforms?

   What are your views on expanding these tools to censor 
        content based on political viewpoints?
    Answer. I support targeted efforts by social media platforms to 
protect against illegal or illicit content. For example, I support 
automated comparison of user-uploaded images to law enforcement 
databases of hashed images of child exploitation in order to identify 
and take down matching images.
    I am emphatically opposed to the use of any tools to censor social 
media content based on political viewpoints.

    Question 3. Do you believe that censorship of political viewpoints 
by social media platforms is an unfair or deceptive practice?
    Answer. As a private citizen, I think it is a problem when one 
person or a handful of people effectively control the speech of 
hundreds of millions of people.
    A deceptive trade practice involves (1) a claim or material 
omission that is (2) likely to mislead a reasonable consumer, (3) to 
that consumer's detriment. In addition to these statutory factors, the 
FTC would need to assess whether the platform was exercising First 
Amendment-protected editorial control over the content it chooses to 
disseminate and whether the corporate statements were commercial 
speech. This is a fact-and law-specific inquiry that will turn on the 
industry and the transaction in question.
    That said, as a general matter, if a technology platform claims to 
run content moderation in one way, but does it in a different way in a 
manner that misleads most reasonable consumers, and in a way that harms 
them, then it is conceivable that under certain circumstances this 
could constitute a deceptive trade practice.

    Question 4. Will you commit to ensuring the continued independence 
of the FTC?
    Answer. Yes, absolutely.
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Rick Scott to 
                             Alvaro Bedoya
    Question 1. Last Congress, I introduced the PRIME Act (S. 2208, 
116th Congress), which would require online retailers to display the 
country of origin for each products they sell. Do you believe the FTC 
has the authority to enforce such a law?
    Answer. Yes, I do.

    Question 2. What authority do you believe the FTC has to protect 
the privacy of Americans' data online, and if confirmed as FTC 
commissioner, what actions would you take to protect the personal data 
of Americans online?
    Answer. The Commission's principal privacy authorities fall under 
section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, specifically its 
prohibition against unfair or deceptive trade practices, the Children's 
Online Privacy Protection Act, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and the Fair 
Credit Reporting Act.
    I am committed to rigorously protecting Americans' privacy. If 
confirmed, on my first day as Commissioner, I would do two things on 
this front.
    First, I would make it a priority to investigate practices 
targeting children online, specifically practices that deny parents 
information regarding the harms presented by online platforms.
    Second, I would urge the Commission to act more aggressively to 
combat the threat posed by ``stalking apps,'' which allow domestic 
abusers to secretly geolocate and track their victims, and which remain 
frighteningly prevalent in the U.S.

    Question 3. In the past, you have been politically active on social 
media. If confirmed as FTC commissioner, will you promote the right to 
free speech on online platforms and protect consumers from censorship 
practices that are being used by multiple social media platforms?
    Answer. I believe in the right to free speech. As a private 
citizen, I think it is a problem when one person or a handful of people 
effectively control the speech of hundreds of millions of people.
    I am also a proponent of free speech. The issue is that, if I am 
confirmed, I will myself become a government official, and my own 
actions with respect to social media companies will be subject to First 
Amendment scrutiny.
    One potential avenue to address misleading content moderation might 
be the FTC's authority to combat deceptive trade practices. A deceptive 
trade practice involves (1) a claim or material omission that is (2) 
likely to mislead a reasonable consumer, (3) to that consumer's 
detriment. In addition to these statutory factors, the FTC would need 
to assess whether the platform was exercising First Amendment-protected 
editorial control over the content it chooses to disseminate and 
whether the corporate statements were commercial speech. This is a 
fact-and law-specific inquiry that will turn on the industry and the 
transaction in question.
    That said, as a general matter, if a technology platform claims to 
run content moderation in one way, but does it in a different way in a 
manner that misleads most reasonable consumers, and in a way that harms 
them, then it is conceivable that under certain circumstances this 
could constitute a deceptive trade practice.
    In my view, the clearest resolution to this particular problem 
would be congressional action.

    Question 4. President Biden recently sent a letter to the FTC 
urging them to investigate whether oil and gas companies are 
intentionally keeping gasoline prices high.

   As an independent agency, do you believe investigating is a 
        request or a requirement from the President of the United 
        States?

   Do you believe that the FTC has the appropriate authority to 
        undergo this investigation?

   What would your focus and scope be for this investigation if 
        you are confirmed?
    Answer. The FTC is indeed an independent agency, and so the letter 
would constitute a request rather than a requirement, and the agency 
would not be obliged to follow it.
    If heightened gasoline prices were a product of conduct prohibited 
by the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act, section 5 of the FTC Act, or any 
other of the laws that the Commission is charged with enforcing, then I 
do believe the Commission would have the authority to conduct the 
investigation.
    I am not expert in the nature of oil and gas markets, and so, if 
confirmed, I would rely on the advice of staff to effectively oversee 
the investigation.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to 
                           Jainey K. Bavishi
Habitat Restoration for Pacific Salmon Conservation
    Pacific salmon recovery will not happen without rapid advancement 
of habitat restoration project that has been limited by funding. In the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (``IIJA'') (P.L. 117-58), I 
secured significant funding in support of this effort. Specifically, 
the IIJA contains funding for salmon habitat restoration through NOAA's 
Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund and several NOAA-based programs 
restore coastal habitats. In the Build Back Better (``BBB'') Act (H.R. 
5376) that will soon be considered by the Senate, I have fought for 
historic funding level of funding for these projects as well as for 
stock assessments and fisheries science to help scientists identify the 
cause of salmon mortality at sea.
    However, securing funding is the first step. Over the next five 
years, we will need to work with NOAA to implement these programs 
quickly and efficiently.

    Question 1. These funding levels are far beyond levels NOAA has 
received before and legislation demands they are spent quickly. If 
confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure salmon habitat 
restoration funding--as well as all IIJA and BBB funding--is 
distributed as quickly as possible and will be invested in projects 
that will have measurable outcomes?
    Answer. I understand that Pacific salmon are critically important 
to the health and economy of the Pacific Northwest, and protecting 
these species and their habitat is a top priority for NOAA. If 
confirmed, I will work closely with staff in the National Marine 
Fisheries Service to expedite these funds as quickly as possible so 
that States, Tribes, and local stakeholders can continue their work to 
protect, conserve, and restore populations of salmon and their habitat. 
I will bring to bear my recent experience in administering resilience-
oriented and other programs in New York City, where I manage--and must 
expedite--a $20 billion portfolio to meet the critical needs of the 
city's communities; many of which have been chronically underserved 
over the past several decades. I will also commit to working closely 
and regularly with you and your staff to ensure that we expedite the 
funds in line with your specific intent.

    Question 2. Tribal consultation will be essential in salmon habitat 
restoration funding distribution. How will NOAA work with Tribes to 
focus salmon restoration efforts toward projects that can recover 
salmon runs needed to support treaty fisheries and underserved 
communities?
    Answer. Tribal communities play an important role in the recovery 
and restoration of salmon and engaging with local tribes on salmon 
restoration is a top priority for NOAA. If confirmed, I commit to 
working with you and Tribal communities on ways NOAA can engage 
meaningfully in salmon restoration and recovery in the Pacific 
Northwest to support treaty fisheries.

    Question 3. Salmon habitat restoration is needed to recover vital 
salmon runs. Concurrently, these projects can also boost carbon 
sequestration. Coastal ecosystems such as mangroves, tidal marshes, and 
seagrass meadows sequester and store more carbon per unit area than 
terrestrial forests. Investments in this ``blue carbon'' are an 
important step in reaching our climate goals and protecting our fragile 
ecosystems from climate change. What other investments in science and 
restoration can be done to help leverage NOAA's habitat restoration 
efforts to also combat climate change and improve resilience?
    Answer. Pacific salmon are critically important to our culture, 
recreation, and economy. If confirmed, I look forward to learning more 
about NOAA's science for the recovery of Pacific salmon and their 
habitat, and working with our scientists in the National Marine 
Fisheries Service to ensure our habitat restoration efforts improve 
restoration and resilience of and sequestration of carbon in these 
coastal ecosystems.
Culverts
    The IIJA includes the first ever National Culvert Removal, 
Replacement and Restoration Grant program to restore salmon passage in 
blocked as a result of transportation infrastructure. This program will 
invest $1 billion dollars in competitive grants to states, local 
governments, and Tribes to address salmon-blocking culverts.
    Historically, infrastructure such as roads and railways were built 
in a manner to impede fish migration, which resulted in devastating 
impacts to salmon and other species. This program is a key part of our 
strategy to remediate aging infrastructure and recover salmon.

    Question 1. NOAA scientists have expertise in salmon and habitat 
restoration. If confirmed, can you ensure that NOAA will provide the 
salmon recovery scientific expertise to the Department of 
Transportation to support the National Culvert Removal, Replacement, 
and Restoration Grant Program?
    Answer. I understand that partnerships among the Federal agencies, 
including the Department of Transportation, are key to restoring 
healthy salmon runs and securing the economic and cultural benefits 
they provide for future generations. If confirmed, I look forward to 
learning more about NOAA's expertise in salmon and habitat restoration 
and commit to ensuring our scientists continue to conduct the research, 
monitoring, and analyses needed to ensure Pacific salmon recovery. I 
look forward to working with you and our Federal partners on this 
important topic.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roger Wicker to 
                           Jainey K. Bavishi
    Question 1. I introduced and passed the bipartisan Modern Fish Act 
to improve the management of recreational fisheries by incorporating 
the best available science. In the Gulf of Mexico, states like 
Mississippi have invested significant time and money to develop a more 
accurate understanding of how much fish recreational fishermen harvest. 
Despite this effort, NOAA has proposed ignoring the more accurate and 
higher quality state data and treating the less accurate Federal data 
from the Marine Recreational Information Program as though it is of 
equal quality. The calibration approach NOAA suggested was based on 
years 2017 and 2018, which if used would result in a 60 percent decline 
in Mississippi's recreational red snapper season. If NOAA had instead 
used 2020 to calibrate, Mississippi would see a 48 percent increase in 
their quota. How can our stakeholders have confidence in a Federal data 
set that is neither accurate nor precise?
    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to learning more about the red 
snapper fishery, which I know is of great economic and cultural 
significance to the state of Mississippi and the entire Gulf of Mexico 
region, and the Great Red Snapper Count, which I understand is being 
re-examined by the Gulf of Mexico Fisheries Management Council now. It 
is critical that NOAA base management decisions on the best peer 
reviewed scientific information available. I will commit to learning 
more about NOAA's Marine Recreational Information Program and to 
working with you and NOAA on this issue as the program pertains to Gulf 
of Mexico fisheries. If confirmed, I will work closely with National 
Marine Fisheries Assistant Administrator, Janet Coit, who brings state-
level fisheries experience to the table from her work in Rhode Island, 
something that I believe is critical to red snapper and other fisheries 
deliberations.

    Question 2. NOAA has an important role to play with respect to 
climate science. The agency collects observations and data, conducts 
cutting edge science, and runs weather and climate models. However, the 
agency has no statutory role in regulating greenhouse gas emissions. 
How will you ensure that NOAA remains a science-based organization, and 
does not become an advocacy agency for a political agenda?
    Answer. Like President Biden, Secretary Raimondo, and Dr. Spinrad, 
I know that climate change poses an existential threat to communities 
across the country, and NOAA can meet this challenge by advancing 
environmental stewardship and economic opportunity. NOAA has the 
products and services to help communities address the climate crisis 
and become more resilient in the face of climate change. NOAA's 
products and services can support local, state, and Tribal governments, 
the private sector, and Federal agency partners to make informed 
decisions in the face of a changing climate.

    Question 3. Much of your career has been spent in New York City and 
DC. Rural areas have different needs and priorities than the cities. 
What steps do you plan to take to learn about the needs of places like 
Mississippi?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will draw on past experiences in rural 
areas, such as my work to support communities in Louisiana, 
Mississippi, and Alabama recover from Hurricane Katrina. I also look 
forward to learning more about NOAA's work in supporting rural 
communities and how NOAA's products and services can continue to 
support economically, socially and environmentally vulnerable 
communities.
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Rick Scott to 
                           Jainey K. Bavishi
    Question. Florida has experienced several hard-hitting hurricanes 
that devastated our communities. We know first-hand that preparedness 
saves lives, and NOAA's work to develop and improve weather predictive 
services has been critical to our preparedness efforts. How do you plan 
to improve NOAA's weather forecasting services to ensure families have 
the best information to stay safe?
    Answer. Thank you, Senator, for your long-standing interest in, and 
support of, NOAA's hurricane preparedness, forecast, warning, and 
recovery mission. Hurricanes are one area that truly cuts across, and 
is supported by, everything that NOAA does: from observations to 
forecasts and warnings, to work with coastal communities, fisheries, 
and across the blue economy. I recognize the importance that weather 
has on industries to the economy of Florida and our nation, and to 
every individual's life and property. If confirmed, I will ensure that 
NOAA leads with data and sound science, and I look forward to working 
with you to ensure that NOAA and its National Weather Service are the 
gold standard for weather, water, and climate forecasting.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to 
                           Arun Venkataraman
    1. Supply Chains. Within Washington state, one in three Washington 
jobs depend on trade, with 40 percent of exports in aircraft and 
aircraft parts, which relies on a large global supply chain. We are 
therefore particularly affected by the considerable supply chain 
disruptions this year
    If you are confirmed, you will be charged with promoting the 
international sale of U.S. goods, assisting American small and medium-
sized businesses during a period of historic turmoil within the global 
supply chains.

    Question. How can Commercial Service leverage its authority and 
expertise, including over 100 domestic offices and 70 international 
locations, to help U.S. manufacturers navigate the ongoing supply chain 
disruptions and to continue being successful internationally?
    Answer. America's strong recovery from the pandemic, with the 
associated increases in economic activity, have resulted on strains in 
our global supply chains. The economic recovery has highlighted the 
lack of resilience in our supply chains, compounded by infrastructure 
that has been neglected for decades. We have seen the costs of this 
outdated infrastructure with respect to our economy, our 
competitiveness, and for our workers and families. For example, the 
Southern California warehouse system did not grow to match the 
extraordinary surge in demand at our ports. We have seen increased 
demand for semiconductors for cars, medical devices and consumer 
electronics but most of these chips are made in other countries so we 
have less visibility into this supply chain than we should. It is 
important to note that government doesn't run these supply chains, but 
the Biden Administration is using every tool available to help the 
private sector to address these challenges. For example, President 
Biden and his team worked with some of our major ports to get them to 
expand their hours to 24/7.
    The Global Markets business unit within the International Trade 
Administration, including the U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service, can 
contribute to ensuring the security and resilience of global supply 
chains in a manner that protects U.S. interests. Foreign Commercial 
Service officers can draw on their expertise about local economic 
policies to identify specific policy barriers maintained by host 
governments, such as export restrictions. These barriers can then be 
addressed in the supply chain discussions that are being incorporated 
into all Commerce Department engagement with trading partners. 
Recognizing that supply chains are established and shaped by industry 
rather than government, the U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service can 
inform U.S. industry more fully about the consequences of depending on 
certain markets as part of global supply chains based on political and 
economic features of those markets, thereby ensuring that industry 
factors in resilience and security at the early stages of business 
planning.
    If confirmed, I will work with the interagency and the private 
sector to promote the Commercial Service's work in supporting new 
opportunities for U.S. firms and their workers to participate in global 
supply chains and securing supply chains in critical products. I would 
welcome the opportunity to work with you and your staff in this effort.

    2. International Competition. Twenty five percent of small and 
medium sized enterprises struggle to meet weekly capital costs, making 
it difficult to upgrade equipment or build inventory. According to 
reporting by research firm McKinsey, the United States requires up to 
$250 billion over ten years to upgrade plants and equipment in 
traditional manufacturing sectors like automobiles. Meanwhile, 
competitors like Japan and Germany offer their companies financing and 
free or low-cost facilities. U.S. companies also face far greater 
financial expectations, such as an expected of 12-14 percent return for 
investors, versus 5-7 percent in Asia.
    The United States Innovation and Competition Act champions 
investment in more research and development and in programs like the 
NIST Manufacturing Extension Partnership. It also supports a better 
mapping of U.S. supply chains and the use of that data to better direct 
investment into U.S. manufacturing.

    Question. Based on your experience, what other actions should the 
Department of Commerce take to invest in our small and medium sized 
manufacturers and to create a successful strategy for U.S. competition 
in foreign markets?
    Answer. The Department of Commerce includes a number of bureaus 
(such as the International Trade Administration (ITA), NIST and USPTO) 
with tools and services that can enhance the international 
competitiveness of small and medium-sized manufacturers. Within ITA, 
the Global Markets business unit focuses on supporting small businesses 
export their goods and services to over 90 markets around the world. 
Building on this mission, Global Markets could expand its efforts to 
help existing exporters reach new markets. They could also take 
additional proactive steps to ensure that small businesses in 
underserved communities, including rural communities and communities of 
color, are aware of and can use exporting assistance provided by the 
federal government to reach new customers outside the United States. 
This includes the necessary market research and analytic tools to help 
them identify new markets and strategies. If confirmed, I look forward 
to working with you and your staff on these issues as well as my 
counterparts at USDA and SBA, and across the government, to identify 
additional actions that Global Markets can take to ensure that small 
and medium-sized manufacturers have the tools they need to grow and 
export.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to 
                           Arun Venkataraman
    1. Rural Export Center. While small and medium-sized enterprises 
account for 98 percent of U.S. exporters, rural businesses are often 
located far from transportation hubs, making it difficult for them to 
access international markets. I introduced the Promoting Rural Exports 
Act with Senator Hoeven to establish a Rural Export Center at the U.S. 
Commercial Service to help rural businesses access foreign markets and 
increase exports.

    Question. Your testimony noted the importance of access to foreign 
markets for American companies. If confirmed, what steps do you plan to 
take to increase access to foreign markets for rural businesses?
    Answer. U.S. Export Assistance Centers, including the Rural Export 
Center, provide export assistance and support for businesses, 
especially our small and medium sized businesses, farmers, ranchers, 
and fishermen, through offices located in 117 cities across the United 
States. These offices play a critical role in supporting our businesses 
and competitiveness, including in rural America, and are continuously 
working to increase their understanding of and responsiveness to the 
particular challenges faced by rural exporters.
    The Rural Export Center (REC) provides research reports, through 
Rural America's Intelligence Service for Exporters (RAISE), training 
seminars and webinars. If confirmed, I will work to ensure our rural 
businesses, farmers and ranchers across the United States have the 
necessary market research and analytic tools to help them identify new 
buyers, markets and strategies. I will also work across the government, 
including with USDA and SBA, to identify additional actions that Global 
Markets can take that would better help rural exporters reach consumers 
outside the United States. If confirmed I look forward to working with 
you to ensure exporters in rural and other underserved communities have 
access to the tools they need to grow their business through exports.

    2. Brand USA. Inbound international travel has historically been 
the Nation's second largest industry export, generating $233 billion 
and supporting 1.2 million jobs in 2019. But the pandemic brought an 
immediate 91 percent decrease in international visitors. My bipartisan 
legislation with Senator Blunt would help fund Brand USA--a proven 
partnership that promotes international tourism to the U.S.--which has 
supported more than 45,000 jobs a year and generated $56 billion for 
our economy.

    Question. Brand USA has partnered with the U.S. Commercial Service 
in the past to collect market data and plan trade events. If confirmed, 
what will you do to support this important sector of the economy?
    Answer. The travel and tourism sector is critical to the U.S. 
economy and provides vital job opportunities for Americans at all 
educational levels. Brand USA, a nonprofit corporation formed by 
statute and funded in part by fees paid by travelers from visa waiver 
countries, promotes the United States as a travel destination. It is my 
understanding the National Travel and Tourism Office, led by the Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Travel and Tourism, leads work on travel and 
tourism for the U.S. Government in the tourism working groups or 
committees.
    If confirmed, I look forward to working with the Assistant 
Secretary for Industry and Analysis and the Deputy Assistant Secretary 
for Travel and Tourism to support her and the Secretary's work on the 
Tourism Policy Council, which coordinates national policies related to 
travel and tourism to support this critical industry for regions across 
the country. If confirmed, I would also work closely with agencies 
through the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee (TPCC), including 
the State Department and our Embassies, to encourage foreign travelers 
to come to the United States and help ensure that they support the 
sector's recovery from the pandemic. I look forward to working with you 
and your staff on these efforts.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roger Wicker to 
                           Arun Venkataraman
    Question 1. The Commercial Service (CS) strengthens U.S. economic 
prosperity by promoting U.S. exports, attracting inward investment, and 
ensuring market access and a level playing field in international trade 
for U.S. companies and industries. The CS does this through a variety 
of programs, including its Rural America's Intelligence Service for 
Exporters (RAISE) initiative. Rural communities, like those in my home 
state of Mississippi, benefit from RAISE's export assistance 
activities. If confirmed, how would you strengthen efforts to assist 
rural communities in export promotion?
    Answer. U.S. Export Assistance Centers, including the Rural Export 
Center, provide export assistance and support for businesses, 
especially our small and medium sized businesses, farmers, ranchers, 
and fishermen, through offices located in 117 cities across the United 
States. These offices play a critical role in supporting our businesses 
and competitiveness, including in rural America, and are continuously 
working to increase their understanding of and responsiveness to the 
particular challenges faced by rural exporters.
    The Rural Export Center (REC) provides research reports, through 
Rural America's Intelligence Service for Exporters (RAISE), training 
seminars and webinars. If confirmed, I will work to ensure our rural 
businesses, farmers and ranchers across the United States have the 
necessary market research and analytic tools to help them identify new 
buyers, markets and strategies. I will also work across the government, 
including with USDA and SBA, to identify additional actions that Global 
Markets can take that would better help rural exporters reach consumers 
outside the United States. If confirmed I look forward to working with 
you to ensure exporters in rural and other underserved communities have 
access to the tools they need to grow their business through exports.

    Question 2. One of the key objectives of the Commercial Service is 
to assist small businesses in their efforts to sell their products to 
the world. The international arena is more fiercely competitive now 
than it has perhaps ever been. I believe that American small businesses 
can compete with anyone if given adequate access to global markets. 
What would you say is the biggest obstacle to small businesses 
competing on the world stage, and, if confirmed, what would you do to 
help them overcome that obstacle?
    Answer. Export promotion of goods and services from the United 
States, especially by small & medium-sized businesses, is a core 
mission of the Global Markets business unit within the International 
Trade Administration. Among the principal challenges faced by these 
businesses is the ability to access and ensure the reliability of 
foreign customers. This is why our Commercial Service officers 
throughout the United States and across the world provide a suite of 
services to support our exporters, including research to help companies 
identify markets with high demand for their products and matchmaking 
opportunities to connect U.S. producers with potential customers 
overseas. I would welcome the opportunity, if confirmed, to prioritize 
helping existing small business clients of the Commercial Service 
export to new markets and bringing in new small businesses to export 
and reach new customers through the full use of the tools we can 
provide.
    American business can compete against anyone when the playing field 
is level. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you as we 
support small businesses and ensure that small businesses have the 
tools they need to compete in overseas markets.

    Question 3. With the horrendous port congestion we are seeing on 
our West Coast and increasing concerns about investing in a China 
controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, what efforts can the U.S. 
Commercial Service provide to encourage firms in a practice known as 
nearshoring, to move their operations closer to U.S. markets?
    Answer. The United States needs to ensure the security and 
resilience of supply chains especially for critical products and 
technologies. If confirmed, I will work with stakeholders to support 
their efforts to move supply chains accordingly, especially outside of 
China, and source from trading partners with high standards, including 
in those countries closer to the United States. The U.S. and Foreign 
Commercial Service could also work with stakeholders to identify 
potential new customers in those nearby trading partners. If confirmed, 
I look forward to working with our allies and partners on measures to 
support strong and diversified supply chains, and to working with you 
and your staff on these issues.

    Question 4. As firms look to move production from East Asia to 
Central America, what role can the U.S. Commercial Service play in 
Customs modernization, enhancing regional cooperation and basic trade 
promotion, and improving regional infrastructure?
    Answer. Commerce, including the U.S. Commercial Service, is engaged 
in a number of efforts in Central America to promote customs 
modernization, regional cooperation, trade promotion, and the 
improvement of regional infrastructure. These activities range from 
policy and technical assistance interventions designed to motivate the 
countries to establish improved practices, engagement with the private 
sector to increase awareness of opportunities in the Central American 
markets, and support to interested U.S. companies in the context of 
specific commercial undertakings in these countries. This includes the 
U.S. Department of Commerce's Central America Customs, Border 
Management, and Supply Chain Program, ongoing since 2017, which is a 
multiphase effort to promote transparency, cooperation, and 
coordination among the Northern Triangle governments and improve 
interregional trade in Central America.
    If confirmed, I look forward to working with you on these important 
issues.
                                 ______
                                 
  Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Marsha Blackburn to 
                           Arun Venkataraman
    Question. In your testimony, you mention your experience defending 
policy tools that are used to protect U.S. companies. Can you elaborate 
on how you plan to work with other countries to ensure they have a fair 
playing field to operate?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will work with other business units in the 
International Trade Administration and with other agencies to help 
ensure that our businesses operate on a level playing field. This 
includes partnering with like-minded governments to take actions to 
combat unfair practices, such as non-market policies that contribute to 
global excess capacity. I would also work with those governments, if 
confirmed, to set new global rules and standards. In addition, for 
those trading partners with whom we have international agreements, I 
would work with stakeholders and colleagues in the Enforcement & 
Compliance unit and in USTR to hold those partners accountable to the 
non-discrimination and other commitments under those agreements so that 
U.S. firms get the fair access they deserve.
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Rick Scott to 
                           Arun Venkataraman
    Question 1. In encouraging U.S. companies to export and expand 
their business opportunities into other countries, how will you work to 
ensure those U.S. companies are not assisting our adversaries or aiding 
dictatorship regimes, such as Nicaragua, Venezuela or Communist China?
    Answer. I understand that the Global Markets business unit within 
the International Trade Administration works closely with partners 
across the Department of Commerce and the interagency to ensure that 
its approach to trade promotion and growing U.S. exports to other 
countries is in line with broader U.S. policy objectives. If confirmed, 
I would continue such efforts, including close coordination with the 
Department's Bureau of Industry and Security, to ensure that the export 
promotion efforts of the Department are aligned and in full compliance 
with export controls and other policies designed to protect the 
national and economic security of the United States.

    Question 2. If confirmed, how will you work with American companies 
to encourage trade promotion that can counter Communist China's 
aggression towards certain countries?
    Answer. The Chinese government's anti-competitive, unfair, and 
coercive practices hurt American workers and businesses. The Chinese 
government also undermines the competitiveness of U.S. firms through 
theft of intellectual property, cyber-based economic espionage, 
subsidies, and other non-market barriers. These challenges are not 
unique to the United States. Many of our allies and partners face the 
same challenges with respect to aggressive behavior from the Chinese 
government. If confirmed, I will work with stakeholders including U.S. 
companies to enhance the ability of our allies and partners to resist 
and respond to Chinese economic coercion, including through promoting 
long-term inclusive growth and stability in those economies and 
supporting secure and resilient supply chain linkages with the United 
States.

                                [all]