    [House Hearing, 119 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                      STRENGTHENING AMERICAN LEADERSHIP IN
                               WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY

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

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                           SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND
                                     TECHNOLOGY

                                     OF THE

                        COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                JANUARY 23, 2025

                                   __________

                                Serial No. 119-2

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

         Published for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce

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

                                   __________

                       U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    58-876 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2025

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

                        COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

                            BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
                                     Chairman
    ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio                FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
    H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia           Ranking Member
    GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida            DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
    RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina       JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
    EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia    DORIS O. MATSUI, California
    GARY J. PALMER, Alabama              KATHY CASTOR, Florida
    NEAL P. DUNN, Florida                PAUL TONKO, New York
    DAN CRENSHAW, Texas                  YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York
    JOHN JOYCE, Pennsylvania, Vice       RAUL RUIZ, California
        Chairman                         SCOTT H. PETERS, California
    RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas           DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
    RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia               MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
    TROY BALDERSON, Ohio                 ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
    RUSS FULCHER, Idaho                  NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGAN, California
    AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas                DARREN SOTO, Florida
    DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee         KIM SCHRIER, Washington
    MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa       LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
    KAT CAMMACK, Florida                 LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
    JAY OBERNOLTE, California            ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, New York
    JOHN JAMES, Michigan                 JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts
    CLIFF BENTZ, Oregon                  TROY A. CARTER, Louisiana
    ERIN HOUCHIN, Indiana                ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
    RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina          KEVIN MULLIN, California
    LAUREL M. LEE, Florida               GREG LANDSMAN, Ohio
    NICHOLAS A. LANGWORTHY, New York     JENNIFER L. McCLELLAN, Virginia
    THOMAS H. KEAN, Jr., New Jersey
    MICHAEL A. RULLI, Ohio
    GABE EVANS, Colorado
    CRAIG A. GOLDMAN, Texas
    JULIE FEDORCHAK, North Dakota
                                     ------

                               Professional Staff

                         MEGAN JACKSON, Staff Director
                    SOPHIE KHANAHMADI, Deputy Staff Director
                   TIFFANY GUARASCIO, Minority Staff Director
                 Subcommittee on Communications and Technology

                         RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina
                                     Chairman
    RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia, Vice         DORIS O. MATSUI, California
        Chairman                           Ranking Member
    ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio                DARREN SOTO, Florida
    GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida            YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York
    EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia    RAUL RUIZ, California
    NEAL P. DUNN, Florida                SCOTT H. PETERS, California
    JOHN JOYCE, Pennsylvania             DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
    RUSS FULCHER, Idaho                  ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
    AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas                NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGAN, California
    KAT CAMMACK, Florida                 TROY A. CARTER, Louisiana
    JAY OBERNOLTE, California            ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
    ERIN HOUCHIN, Indiana                GREG LANDSMAN, Ohio
    RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina          JENNIFER L. McCLELLAN, Virginia
    THOMAS H. KEAN, Jr., New Jersey      KATHY CASTOR, Florida
    CRAIG A. GOLDMAN, Texas              FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey (ex
    JULIE FEDORCHAK, North Dakota            officio)
    BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky (ex
        officio)
                                 C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Hon. Richard Hudson, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of North Carolina, opening statement...........................     1
        Prepared statement...........................................     4
    Hon. Doris O. Matsui, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of California, opening statement...............................    11
        Prepared statement...........................................    13
    Hon. Brett Guthrie, a Representative in Congress from the
      Commonwealth of Kentucky, opening statement....................    15
        Prepared statement...........................................    16
    Hon. Rick W. Allen, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Georgia, opening statement..................................    21
        Prepared statement...........................................    22
    Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the
      State of New Jersey, opening statement.........................    25
        Prepared statement...........................................    27

                                   Witnesses

    Michael K. Powell, President and Chief Executive Officer, NCTA-
      The Internet and Television Association........................    29
        Prepared statement...........................................    32
        Answers to submitted questions...............................   155
    Brian Gillen, Executive Vice President, CTIA.....................    42
        Prepared statement...........................................    44
        Answers to submitted questions...............................   159
    Diane Rinaldo, Executive Director, Open RAN Policy Coalition.....    53
        Prepared statement...........................................    55
    Chris Lewis, President and Chief Executive Officer, Public
      Knowledge......................................................    62
        Prepared statement...........................................    64
        Answers to submitted questions...............................   163

                               Submitted Material

    Inclusion of the following was approved by unanimous consent.
    List of documents submitted for the record.......................   129
    Slide presentation on spectrum, CTIA.............................   130
    Letter of January 23, 2025, from Tim Donovan, President and Chief
      Executive Officer, Competitive Carriers Association, to Mr.
      Hudson, et al..................................................   135
    Letter of January 22, 2025, from Brian Fontes, Chief Executive
      Officer, NENA, The 9-1-1 Association, to Mr. Guthrie, et al....   138
    Letter of January 22, 2025, from David A. Wright, Policy
      Director, Spectrum for the Future, to Mr. Guthrie, et al.......   140
    Letter of January 22, 2025, from Mary L. Brown, Executive
      Director, WifiForward, to Mr. Guthrie, et al...................   143
    Statement of WISPA...............................................   146
    Report of the Satellite Industry Association, ``National Policy
      Must Prioritize More Spectrum for the U.S. Commercial Space
      Industry or the United States Will Lose the Space Race,''
      September 2023 (Updated January 2025)..........................   150

            STRENGTHENING AMERICAN LEADERSHIP IN WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY

                                  ----------

                           THURSDAY, JANUARY 23, 2025

                      House of Representatives,
         Subcommittee on Communications and Technology,
                              Committee on Energy and Commerce,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:01 a.m., in
    the John D. Dingell Room 2123, Rayburn House Office Building,
    Hon. Richard Hudson (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
        Members present: Representatives Hudson, Allen, Latta,
    Bilirakis, Carter of Georgia, Dunn, Joyce, Fulcher, Pfluger,
    Cammack, Obernolte, Houchin, Fry, Kean, Goldman, Fedorchak,
    Guthrie (ex officio), Matsui (subcommittee ranking member),
    Soto, Clarke, Ruiz, Peters, Kelly, Barragan, Carter of
    Louisiana, Menendez, Landsman, McClellan, Castor, Pallone (ex
    officio), and Hudson.
        Staff present: Ansley Boylan, Professional Staff Member;
    Jessica Donlon, General Counsel; Sydney Greene, Director of
    Finance and Logistics; Calvin Huggins, Staff Assistant; Megan
    Jackson, Staff Director; Noah Jackson, Clerk, Communications
    and Technology; John Lin, Senior Counsel, Communications and
    Technology; Joel Miller, Chief Counsel; Elaina Murphy,
    Professional Staff Member, Communications and Technology; Kate
    Harper, Chief Counsel, Communications and Technology; Jackson
    Rudden, Staff Assistant; Chris Sarley, Member Services/
    Stakeholder Director; Hannah Anton, Minority Policy Analyst;
    Rasheedah Blackwood, Minority Intern; Keegan Cardman, Minority
    Staff Assistant; Jennifer Epperson, Minority Chief Counsel,
    Communications and Technology; Waverly Gordon, Minority Deputy
    Staff Director and General Counsel; Tiffany Guarascio, Minority
    Staff Director; Perry Hamilton, Minority Member Services and
    Outreach Manager; Mackenzie Kuhl, Digital Manager; Dan Miller,
    Minority Professional Staff Member; Michael Scurato, Minority
    FCC Detailee; Andrew Souvall, Minority Director of
    Communications, Outreach and Member Services; Johanna Thomas,
    Minority Counsel, Communications and Technology.

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD HUDSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
               CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

        Mr. Hudson. Good morning, and welcome to the first hearing
    in the Communications and Technology Subcommittee of the 119th
    Congress.
        I am honored to serve as the chairman of this subcommittee,
    where there is a rich history of identifying and addressing the
    most pressing issues raised in the communications and
    technology sectors. As technology continues to advance, this
    subcommittee will be at the forefront of solving tough issues.
        The subcommittee has historically worked in a bipartisan
    manner to solve many of the issues before us, and I plan to
    continue that tradition by working with my ranking member,
    Representative Matsui, who I respect very much, and have
    admired her work and accomplishments as a leader in this space.
    And I look forward to working together and learning from Ms.
    Matsui.
        I am grateful for the work Chairman Latta brought to this
    subcommittee, and I am looking forward to continuing it and
    learning from him as well.
        I am also excited to work with my vice chairman, Mr. Rick
    Allen, and all of my colleagues on this subcommittee on both
    sides of the aisle to advance important legislation in this
    Congress.
        Our Nation is the world's economic powerhouse, and we lead
    the world in innovation. America is home to the best technology
    companies, both large and small. These companies lead in
    everything from next-generation wireless technology to all of
    the emerging technologies that rely on connectivity, ranging
    from artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things, to
    Next Gen 9-1-1 and precision agriculture.
        Our country's startup ecosystem is strong and should be
    fostered. This committee must advance thoughtful policy that
    continues to grow American innovation and productivity rather
    than stifle it.
        Next-generation wireless technology supports many of these
    technological advancements. It impacts nearly every sector of
    our economy, from powering everyday communications networks and
    advancements in healthcare and manufacturing to being used for
    our national defense. It is something heavily present in my
    district at Fort Bragg. We call it the epicenter of the
    universe, the home of our special forces, and the largest Army
    base in the world.
        But if our wireless networks are going to keep pace with
    the speed of innovation, we need to make sure they have
    additional spectrum resources. Spectrum is a crucial element
    for wireless technology to operate. Americans depend on
    connected devices in their everyday lives, and the congestion
    on our networks has skyrocketed. Our wireless networks need to
    keep up.
        As our wireless networks advance from 5G to 6G technology
    and beyond, the demand for spectrum will only continue to grow.
    We must remember these important resources are finite. Managing
    these limited resources is vital to maintaining our economic
    dominance and protecting our national security.
        We will take a balanced approach to making both licensed
    and unlicensed spectrum available. This includes working with
    our Federal partners, such as the Department of Defense, which
    must have enough spectrum to defend the homeland but also be
    held accountable to use their resources efficiently.
        Last Congress, the Federal Communications Commission's
    spectrum auction authority expired for the first time due to
    disagreements about how spectrum resources should be allocated.
    These auctions have historically brought in billions to our
    national economy, with the highest spectrum auctions raising
    over $80 billion from private companies.
        It is simple economics. There is limited supply, unlimited
    demand, and a willingness to pay. We need to reauthorize the
    FCC's spectrum auction authority immediately.
        We must also continue looking for ways to make unlicensed
    spectrum available. Unlicensed spectrum unlocks the Internet of
    Things and the smart-device economy on which Americans rely,
    providing tremendous economic growth.
        Under the first Trump administration, more than 1,200
    megahertz of unlicensed spectrum was made available in the 6
    gigahertz band, leading to massive opportunities for innovation
    for our farmers, industrialists, and communities.
        These successes are just the start. However, as we
    progress, our adversaries are constantly trying to undermine
    our leadership and international standard-setting bodies
    through IP theft and through cyber attacks. The U.S. must
    remain resolute in defending our leadership to safeguard
    democratic values, and this happens by trusting in our private-
    sector partners to address some of our Nation's most pressing
    challenges.
        We recently learned about Salt Typhoon, which may be the
    largest Chinese-backed telecommunications hack in our Nation's
    history. As we deploy advanced networks and connected devices
    in an environment of great power competition, we have to
    thoughtfully secure our networks every step of the way.
        At the end of last year, I was glad to see Congress fund
    the removal of the remaining Chinese equipment in our
    communications networks. China is producing cheap
    communications equipment at the cost of our national security,
    and that needs to change. We need trusted alternatives.
        Companies are working to develop and deploy Open RAN
    technology, which is intended to promote an ecosystem of
    trusted vendors for communication network equipment. And I look
    forward to hearing an update on its progress today.
        The key to our success is working together with our
    stakeholders to deploy and secure our networks. As our
    adversaries seek to undermine U.S. leadership, we will continue
    to build a comprehensive spectrum policy in the United States
    and a unified position on the international stage.
        I look forward to discussing these issues more in depth
    with our witnesses today and discussing the future spectrum
    policy in the United States.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Hudson follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Hudson. I will now recognize our ranking member of the
    subcommittee, the gentlelady from California, Ms. Matsui.

    OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DORIS O. MATSUI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                 CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

        Ms. Matsui. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I want
    to congratulate you as serving as the new Communications and
    Technology Subcommittee chair. I look forward to working with
    you this Congress.
        I am glad that we are starting with such a timely issue on
    which we have a strong bipartisan track record. The last time
    this subcommittee had a spectrum hearing, the FCC spectrum
    auction authority had just lapsed for the first time in
    history. Now nearly 2 years later, the FCC is still deprived of
    this critical tool to unlock the full potential of the spectrum
    airwaves, leaving U.S. economic and national security at risk.
        Spectrum is a key engine of wireless innovation. It
    supports a wide range of technologies from remote surgery to
    autonomous vehicles and broadband. Our consumers, businesses,
    and Federal agencies all stand to benefit when we maximize our
    spectrum use. This requires a comprehensive approach that
    strikes the right balance of licensed, unlicensed, and shared
    spectrum.
        We need a bipartisan solution that not only restores
    auction authority but also promotes a healthy spectrum pipeline
    and ensures our Federal Government speaks with one voice on
    spectrum policy. And we need to be forward looking by promoting
    technologies that will improve spectrum sharing and efficiency.
    Equally critical is our obligation to be responsible stewards
    of spectrum auction revenues.
        As a long-time advocate for the FCC's Rip and Replace
    program, I am proud of our role to use spectrum auction
    proceeds to remove unsecured Chinese equipment from our
    communications networks. Spectrum is a public good, and I am
    dismayed to see prospects floated that would use auction
    proceeds to provide tax cuts for the wealthy through
    reconciliation.
        Rather, we need to work as a subcommittee to use these
    funds to close the digital divide, protect national security,
    and support public safety communications. This includes
    expanding access to lifesaving technologies such as Next
    Generation 9-1-1 for faster and more accurate emergency
    responses.
        Last Congress, this committee unanimously passed the
    Spectrum Auction Reauthorization Act, comprehensive spectrum
    legislation that would have accomplished these very goals.
    Disappointingly, the House Republican leadership never brought
    this bipartisan proposal to the floor for a vote.
        This Congress, we must build on our good work. I hope my
    colleagues will continue our history of bipartisan cooperation
    on spectrum.
        Lastly, I would be remiss if I didn't highlight the
    important work of the national spectrum strategy. Even amidst
    an auction authority lapse, the Biden administration answered
    my call for a unified spectrum plan by launching the first
    comprehensive U.S. spectrum strategy in 6 years. This strategy
    offers a roadmap for securing U.S. leadership and spectrum
    innovation and ensuring that the Federal Government speaks with
    one voice.
        We can't afford to throw that progress away and return to
    the disarray that preceded the national spectrum strategy. The
    U.S. needs a unified spectrum position now more than ever to
    fight for our interest in international negotiations and to
    rally other countries to our vision. If we fail to maintain our
    global leadership on spectrum, we create a vacuum that China
    will happily fill.
        The stakes are high. It is time for all stakeholders to
    come to the table and for Congress to pass comprehensive
    spectrum legislation that has substantial bipartisan buy-in.
        Clearly, there is a lot of work ahead of us, but I am
    hopeful. This subcommittee has a proven track record of
    bipartisan cooperation that keeps America at the forefront of
    global innovation. Now is not the time to throw that aside. We
    have a chance to continue our tradition of working across the
    aisle, and I am committed to advancing solutions that secure
    economic growth, national security, and bipartisan funding
    priorities benefiting the American public.
        Thank you to our witnesses for appearing before us today,
    and I look forward to the discussion.
        And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the remainder of
    my time.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Matsui follows:]
       [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Hudson. I thank the ranking member for her remarks.
        And I now recognize the chairman of the full committee, the
    gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Guthrie, for 5 minutes for his
    opening statement.

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BRETT GUTHRIE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
               CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY

        Mr. Guthrie. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
    bringing us together for this important hearing.
        And I thank you, to the witnesses, for your participation.
        I look forward to the work we will do this Congress to
    close the digital divide, protect our critical infrastructure,
    and ensure Americans are prepared to outcompete the Chinese
    Communist Party.
        I have long been an advocate for spectrum policy that
    serves both our national security and American innovation. I
    served for many years as the cochair with my good friend from
    California, Ms. Matsui. I enjoyed, always enjoyed working with
    you and look forward to continue working with you as we move
    forward this Congress.
        The United States needs a spectrum agenda that enables both
    big and small American companies to innovate and remain
    competitive globally. Ensuring that the U.S. continues to be a
    leader in next-generation wireless communications technology
    will create jobs and unlock new opportunities here at home, as
    reliable high-speed connectivity supports a range of cutting-
    edge applications like artificial intelligence and advanced
    manufacturing.
        We cannot--and we will not--allow our adversaries, like the
    Chinese Communist Party, to dominate 21st century technological
    battle. As a first step, we must reauthorize the FCC's spectrum
    auction authority. Second, we must work together with Federal
    agencies and stakeholders to reallocate unused spectrum. And
    third, we need to look at innovative tools to better utilize
    and manage spectrum resources.
        I am looking forward to keeping our promises to Americans
    across the country that America is open for business, and I
    eagerly anticipate bold leadership across many industries,
    ushering in the next great American century.
        I will now yield to our vice subcommittee chair, my good
    friend, Vice Chair Allen, for a few opening remarks. I will
    yield my time to--the remainder of my time.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Guthrie follows:]
       [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICK W. ALLEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                   CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA

        Mr. Allen. Thank you, Chairman Guthrie, for yielding. And
    Chairman Hudson, thank you for holding this important hearing,
    and I look forward to working with you.
        I am looking forward to working with this committee and
    this Congress to tackle the issues, the critical issues, like
    closing the digital divides, fighting robocalls, and
    strengthening our telecommunications infrastructure.
        Access to telecommunications isn't just a luxury. It is
    something Americans depend on every single day. Students need
    it to finish their homework; folks of all ages, especially in
    rural communities, rely on it for telehealth visits with their
    doctors; and small businesses use it to reach customers and
    keep the doors open. And let's not forget, we all use it to
    stay in touch with friends and loved ones.
        Additionally, when natural disasters strike, access to
    reliable communication becomes even more critical. Georgia's
    12th District saw firsthand just how devastating this can be
    when Hurricane Helene wreaked havoc in our communities last
    September. That storm caused significant damage to our
    communications infrastructure, leaving our residents unable to
    call for help, check in with family to let them know where they
    were and that they were safe, and in many cases made it
    impossible to receive helpful updates about accessible
    resources.
        Thankfully, we had satellite and other resilient emergency
    systems in place to help fill the gap with recovery efforts and
    that got underway.
        Spectrum is absolutely vital for the wireless services and
    devices we use today and for the technologies of tomorrow. If
    we want to maintain our leadership in the world and keep pace
    with China's advancements, we need to free up more spectrum for
    both licensed and unlicensed uses. Technology is like precision
    agriculture. Advanced manufacturing and next-gen wireless
    services all depend on it.
        Again, I look forward to tackling these issues as vice
    chairman of the C&T Subcommittee.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I yield back.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Allen follows:]
       [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Guthrie. I yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I now recognize the gentleman from New Jersey, the ranking
    member of the full committee, Mr. Pallone, for 5 minutes of his
    opening statement.

    OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, Jr., A REPRESENTATIVE
                IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

        Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And we are here today to discuss spectrum, one of our
    Nation's most underrated and economically valuable natural
    resources. Discussion of current spectrum policy debates is
    important to better understand how our decisions impact
    America's standing in the world.
        But we can't ignore that this hearing comes at a time when
    House Republicans are considering using spectrum auction
    proceeds as a piggy bank to fund their costly tax breaks for
    billionaires and large, wealthy corporations. And I hope they
    reconsider going down that road because it would be a sharp
    departure from the way spectrum policy and auction proceeds
    have been handled by Congress in the past.
        Spectrum is such a valuable natural resource because it is
    an essential building block for connecting family and friends
    as well as delivering critical services like education and
    health to people across the country. It is also critical to
    everyday safety for first responders.
        Without spectrum, we would not have radio stations, smart
    phones, the app economy, or drones. And many of these
    technological advancements were developed by American
    innovators pushing the limits on the way spectrum could be used
    in new and exciting ways. But past performance does not
    guarantee future results. So America must remain a leader in
    spectrum policy.
        For more than three decades, Congress has granted the FCC
    the authority to make spectrum available using competitive
    bidding or auctions, and granting the FCC this authority has
    served both the public and the Nation well.
        Today, the United States is a global leader in delivering
    5G, advanced WiFi, Bluetooth, and other next-generation
    wireless technologies to consumers across the country. At the
    same time, spectrum auctions, which have raised over $230
    billion to the Federal Government, have helped fund important
    public communication priorities, including the Rip and Replace
    reimbursement program, the construction of FirstNet, and
    broadband infrastructure grants.
        And that is why spectrum policy has long been an area of
    bipartisan agreement. In fact, we have worked closely with the
    Republicans on this committee for the past 3 years on bills to
    extend the FCC's auction authority and use spectrum proceeds to
    pay for bipartisan spending priorities.
        And one of the areas of bipartisan agreement was the need
    to fund Next Generation 9-1-1. This funding would modernize our
    9-1-1 networks to allow the public to use modern-day
    communication tools, like sending text images and videos to
    first responders and emergency personnel. And this technology
    will reduce response times and equip first responders with
    lifesaving information before they arrive at the scene, which
    will better assist people in their critical time of need.
        The recent devastating wildfires in California are another
    reminder of how vital seconds can be in an emergency. This
    program clearly serves the public interest, and proceeds from
    auction of our public airwaves are ideal to fund it.
        Unfortunately, again, it seems that Republicans are now
    going to abandon this bipartisan work in order to march ahead
    to give tax breaks to the rich, and this is simply not the way
    these funds should be used. The auction of public airwaves
    should fund programs for the public good.
        Republicans should keep that in mind and reject proposals
    that would include spectrum in any reconciliation. Instead,
    they should work with us to set good spectrum policy and to use
    auction proceeds to fund vital programs that actually serve the
    public and not the wealthy few.
        And I don't think the stakes could be any higher. Failure
    to replenish the commercial spectrum pipeline risks our Nation
    falling behind our counterparts across the globe--of course,
    particularly China--because we want to produce cutting-edge
    consumer innovations and enhance our national security
    capabilities. And we can't allow that to happen.
        That is why--I mean, we can't allow to not have spectrum
    use for these good policy and public purposes, and that is why
    we should be working together.
        We should also work to ensure the advancements made
    possible by spectrum are delivered to all Americans regardless
    of their income or ZIP Code. Too often rural, Tribal, and low-
    income areas are left behind as next-generation technologies
    are deployed and have to continue to work on making these
    services more affordable to everyone.
        So finally, I want to say, if I could take a minute, Mr.
    Chairman, I want to bid farewell to Jennifer Epperson, who is
    our chief counsel on this subcommittee. She is leaving the
    committee after 6 years of service, and during that time she
    has played an instrumental role in the historic broadband
    investments we made in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the
    creation of the Affordable Connectivity Program, and our
    bipartisan Rip and Replace legislation that I mentioned.
        And we have accomplished a lot in this subcommittee, much
    of it bipartisan and throughout her time. I want to thank
    Jennifer for helping to make that happen. So I wish her nothing
    but the best. Of course, I don't want her to leave, but that is
    the way it goes. And, you know, I want to thank Jennifer for
    all her contributions.
        [Applause.]
        Mr. Pallone. Thank you, and I yield back the balance of my
    time.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Hudson. I thank the ranking member, and I join him in
    thanking Ms. Epperson for your service on the committee and
    wish you all the best in the future.
        We have now concluded our Member opening statements. The
    Chair reminds Members that, pursuant to the committee rules,
    all Members' opening statements will be made part of the
    record.
        We would like to thank our witnesses for being here today
    to testify before the subcommittee. Our witnesses will have 5
    minutes each to provide an opening statement, which will be
    followed by a round of questions from Members.
        The witnesses here before us today are the Honorable
    Michael Powell, who is the president and CEO of NCTA, the
    Internet and Television Association. Thank you for being here.
        Mr. Brad Gillen, the executive vice president of CTIA.
    Thank you for joining us.
        Ms. Diane Rinaldo, executive director of Open RAN Policy
    Coalition. Thank you for being here.
        The Chair would also like to recognize Cole Peterman, a
    special guest joining us in the audience, Ms. Rinaldo's son.
    Welcome, Cole.
        And finally, Mr. Chris Lewis, the president and CEO of
    Public Knowledge. Thank you for being here today.
        I would like to note for our witnesses that the timer light
    on the table will turn yellow when you have 1 minute remaining
    and will turn red when your time has expired, and then I will
    start tapping up here and then eventually banging, but
    hopefully we won't get to that point. Thank you.
        Mr. Powell, you are recognized for 5 minutes for an opening
    statement.

    STATEMENTS OF MICHAEL K. POWELL, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
      OFFICER, NCTA-THE INTERNET AND TELEVISION ASSOCIATION; BRAD
        GILLEN, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, CTIA; DIANE RINALDO,
    EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OPEN RAN POLICY COALITION; AND CHRIS LEWIS,
        PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE

                     STATEMENT OF MICHAEL K. POWELL

        Mr. Powell. Thank you, sir.
        Good morning, Chairman Hudson, Ranking Member Matsui,
    Chairman Guthrie, and Mr. Pallone and other distinguished
    members of this committee.
        I am Michael Powell, president and CEO of NCTA, The
    Internet and Television Association. I thank you for the
    opportunity to testify today.
        I am going to discuss two topics central to America's
    leadership in wireless technology, WiFi and shared spectrum,
    which is an innovative way to get more spectrum more quickly to
    more users.
        WiFi has become the backbone of America's internet
    experience. It powers our homes, workplaces, schools, and
    public spaces, enabling nearly all modern digital interactions.
    WiFi allows multiple users to share a single connection and has
    democratized access to the internet, making connectivity more
    affordable and widely available.
        WiFi also drives innovation. By offering open, unlicensed
    access, it enables entrepreneurs to create smart devices and
    technology, from thermostats to virtual reality. Today, the
    average U.S. home has 17 connected devices and is projected to
    have 24 by 2027. Moreover, WiFi supports critical technologies
    like the Internet of Things, generating $2.4 trillion in annual
    economic value.
        The U.S. has led in WiFi innovation, creating systems that
    enable universal access without heavy regulation. However, to
    sustain this leadership, we must ensure enough spectrum for
    WiFi's continued growth, particularly as demand surges with
    emerging technologies like artificial intelligence and virtual
    reality.
        WiFi, effectively, is the internet. It carries nearly 60
    percent of all the world's data traffic. It carries 10 times
    more data than all other wireless networks combined, and when
    using our smart phones, 80 to 90 percent of our data goes over
    WiFi and not the cellular network.
        And the best part is that WiFi is an American-led
    innovation. WiFi allows innovators to make devices that connect
    to the internet for free and without a license from the
    government. We, in America, harness the power of our citizens
    to publish, to produce, and to invent. This contrasts starkly
    with China, who prefers to spy on its citizens rather than
    empower them.
        WiFi brought us the future, and it will carry us into the
    AI intelligence age. America's spectrum policy should embrace
    our leadership and continue to furnish WiFi with the spectrum
    it needs to continue its explosive growth and meet consumers'
    high expectations.
        Now, it goes without saying America has a spectrum problem.
    Put simply, demand for it is shooting up, and supply of it is
    falling. Nearly all midband spectrum that we all want to use is
    used by critical mission government systems, most of it in the
    hands of our warfighters.
        Traditional approaches clearing government health spectrum
    for auctions are increasingly unsustainable. We can't
    compromise our combat capability in the face of a dangerous
    world. There are fewer places to move these critical systems,
    and moving them is costly and time consuming.
        For example, just clearing the lower 30 gigahertz band for
    exclusive use would take 20 years and cost $120 billion. We
    need a better way out of this problem. Shared spectrum is the
    solution. Advances in dynamic spectrum management allow
    government and commercial users to coexist, resolving conflicts
    and reducing delays.
        The success of Citizens Band Radio Service, CBRS, proves
    this approach works. It supports a diverse range of users,
    including schools, factories, and even disaster recovery
    efforts, while fostering competition and innovation.
        To maintain U.S. leadership, we must prioritize coexistence
    in shared spectrum models. Congress should extend the FCC's
    auction authority while embracing both shared licensed auctions
    and unlicensed WiFi designations. This includes allocating more
    spectrum for WiFi and exploring shared models in critical
    midband ranges like the 3 gigahertz and 7 gigahertz bands.
        By adopting forward-looking spectrum policies, we can
    accelerate deployment of technologies like 5G, 6G, WiFi 7 and
    8, strengthen national security, and sustain our global
    wireless leadership and our innovation.
        This committee has always embraced innovation, and we are
    on the cusp of a great innovation revolution, and we need an
    innovative spectrum policy to meet the moment.
        Thank you for the opportunity to speak today.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Powell follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Hudson. Thank you.
        Mr. Gillen, you are recognized for 5 minutes for an opening
    statement.

                        STATEMENT OF BRAD GILLEN

        Mr. Gillen. Good morning. Thank you and congratulations,
    Mr. Chairman. Ranking Member Matsui, members of this
    subcommittee, it is a privilege to be with you.
        Mr. Hudson. Is your microphone on? I want to make sure.
        Mr. Gillen. It is a privilege to be with you, a privilege
    to be here on behalf of the wireless industry, 4.58 million
    jobs strong across this country. We invest $30 billion a year
    to make this and so much more better.
        And I really want to echo your opening comments. This is a
    conversation around spectrum, but it is a lot more than that.
    It is about economic opportunity for all. It is about our
    national security. It is about our global competitiveness. And
    it really comes back to connectivity drives so much of this
    conversation, particularly 5G connectivity. And spectrum, at
    its core, is our oxygen.
        I was here 2 years ago asking for more spectrum. I am back
    today and that ask is more urgent because we have stood still
    as a country the last 2 years. The rest of the world is moving
    forward aggressively, and so too are our American consumers,
    who use more and more of this each and every day, and we want
    to make sure we continue to meet that demand.
        Now, our screens today aren't 5G enabled, so we are going
    old school with pictures, but it is easier to explain through
    pictures. So if you think about how much traffic has been on
    wireless networks the last few years, this is where we have
    been.
        [Shows chart.]
        When I was here last time, we were in the orange. I
    actually bragged about just how much traffic was being carried
    on these 5G networks. We are now just 2 years later here, 100
    trillion megabits of traffic on these networks, almost doubling
    in only 2 years of time. I think the economists call that kind
    of growth bananas.
        We just don't see that kind of growth, and we were able to
    do that only thanks to the leadership of this committee. It was
    the auctions that you directed in 2020 and 2021 that gave us
    the oxygen in spectrum to actually meet that moment.
        So when you look forward to the next couple years, by the
    end of the generation, by the end of the decade, we are going
    to have almost three times more traffic on our networks than we
    do today. And the challenge we face right now is we don't have
    new auctions right now. The FCC doesn't have auction authority
    to meet that moment.
        So how do you actually meet that consumer demand? Part of
    it is our responsibility. We need to invest, and we do, each
    and every 20 or 30 billion dollars, to make our networks
    denser, to have more facilities throughout the country. We have
    40 percent more than we did a generation ago.
        We also, all of us, need to be more efficient with this
    finite resource. We are very proud of our record in doing that.
    We are 42 times more efficient with the technology we use on a
    per-megahertz basis than we were a generation ago. All of that
    is necessary, but it is not sufficient.
        If you plug that all in the traffic models, it reveals that
    we need roughly 400 more megahertz of spectrum by 2027 and over
    800 by 2029. Where does that spectrum come from? The Federal
    Government today reserves roughly two-thirds of this asset, the
    midband spectrum we are talking a lot about today, for their
    own use.
        So if you look at the slide in terms of who has midband
    right today [shows chart], the Federal Government has 600
    percent more than we do today. We are in the teal on the
    bottom, 450 megahertz. Unlicensed WiFi has 300 percent more
    than we do, thanks to the 6 gigahertz decision you alluded to.
        What is happening in the rest of the world? They see this
    same type of growth curve that we see, and they are building--
    they are getting access to spectrum more quickly. Nowhere is
    that more true than with respect to China. In 2023, we were
    roughly even with China in terms of midband access. Looking
    forward now to where we will be in 2027, they will be in a
    position to have four times more than us. That is untenable
    from a global-competitiveness standpoint.
        So what do we need? We would love this committee's help.
    Over the last 30 years, the committee, on a bipartisan basis,
    has provided FCC auction authority, and each time you do that,
    you provide a plan, a roadmap of what you expect them to do
    with that authority, and that is critical.
        And now, this conversation gets very jargony fast. I am
    extremely guilty of that. But at its core, what this
    conversation is about, why we really care about spectrum, why
    we are excited about what wireless could be is because we have
    a role to play in almost everything you came to Washington to
    work on. Everyday household costs, we can help. Beating China,
    creating jobs.
        A new study just released this morning from NERA said for
    every 100 megahertz of midband spectrum released for 5G creates
    1.5 million jobs rippling throughout the economy, both those
    building those networks all across the country but also those
    innovating on top of that.
        And we also just want to close with there is a huge role
    here for the digital divide and the role of spectrum to play,
    both connecting Americans on the mobile and the home broadband
    side. This is too important technology for not everyone to be
    involved. So we want to partner with you to make sure that this
    resource is available to all Americans, that everyone has a
    fair shot at this.
        Greatly appreciate you including us, and I look forward to
    your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Gillen follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Hudson. Thank you.
        Ms. Rinaldo, you are recognized for 5 minutes for an
    opening statement.

                       STATEMENT OF DIANE RINALDO

        Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you.
        Chairman Hudson, Ranking Member Matsui, and esteemed
    members of the committee, thank you very much for the
    opportunity to testify on America's leadership in wireless
    innovation. This hearing and topic are vital to the national
    and economic security importance to the United States, and I
    welcome the committee's interest on this subject.
        And also, thank you for recognizing my 10-year-old son,
    Cole. He is a budding telecom engineer. We take workforce
    development very serious at the coalition.
        So I have had the distinct pleasure of serving this body in
    a couple of different capacities. I was the lead cybersecurity
    and tech telecom staffer at the House Intelligence Committee. I
    was also the Acting Administrator of NTIA in the Executive
    branch.
        Today, I serve as the executive director of the Open RAN
    Policy Coalition, a coalition that promotes to drive the
    adoption of open and interoperable solutions in the radio
    access network. Our coalition represents a diverse group of
    communication and technology companies unified under a common
    goal: policy that can help dismantle technological and market
    barriers to cultivate a competitive, secure, and resilient
    marketplace.
        Since the launch of the Open RAN Policy Coalition, ORAN has
    experienced tremendous growth, with more than 100 global
    deployments. From the world's largest right here in the United
    States with 100 percent Open RAN 5G network that Dish's Boost
    Mobile has deployed nationwide, Open RAN has achieved its
    initial goal of providing additional vendor choice for mobile
    operators.
        This Congress and the new administration assume office at a
    pivotal time in the wireless communication space. The next 2 to
    4 years are critical to ensuring our country's continued
    leadership and competitiveness in the global contest with the
    People's Republic of China.
        Beijing's efforts to dominate the wireless space are
    simultaneously wide-ranging, prolific, and focused. The PRC
    seeks to supplant the United States as the world's leader in
    wireless innovation and market leadership. This is not about
    free market competition, but about state-sponsored market
    manipulation. Put simply, the PRC does not want to compete. It
    wants to rig the game to win.
        Throughout my testimony today, I will return to three
    critical themes. First is the pivotal role of U.S. in
    pioneering wireless innovation. The second is the necessity of
    leadership in spectrum policy. And lastly is the importance of
    public-private policies. We truly do need to work together.
        The United States has had a proud legacy of leadership in
    wireless technology, from the groundbreaking development of 4
    and 5G networks to the creation of global positioning systems,
    an innovation that transferred global navigation and timing.
    Our country has consistently been at the forefront of wireless
    advancements.
        These technologies have driven economic growth and job
    creation, contributing billions of dollars annually to our
    economy. Industries such as healthcare, transportation, and
    manufacturing have been revolutionized by wireless innovation,
    enabling new applications for remote surgery, autonomous
    vehicles, and smart factories. For example, estimates indicate
    that 5G alone will create millions of jobs and contribute over
    $1.5 trillion to global GDP by 2035.
        Looking ahead, the opportunities are boundless. However,
    achieving these advancements depend on one critical factor:
    secure and efficient access to spectrum.
        Now, the PRC's ascendancy is by no means destined for
    success. The strengths of America remain and have the potential
    to grow, provided they are carefully stewarded, encouraged,
    and, indeed, unleashed. It is Silicon Valley, not Shenzhen, to
    which innovators and industry flock.
        How can Congress and the Federal Government help maintain
    this edge? By fostering an environment conducive to innovation,
    removing roadblocks for growth, and aligning policies to
    facilitate the expansion. One fundamental element underpins all
    our aims, and that is spectrum leadership. Spectrum is the
    lifeblood of wireless communications driving innovation and
    economic growth and national security.
        In closing, the United States is at a pivotal moment. We
    are the world's leader in wireless innovation, but maintaining
    this position requires sustained effort, investment, and
    collaboration. By prioritizing superiority in optimizing
    spectrum, strengthening partnerships, and enhancing our
    participation in global forums, we can ensure that American
    innovation continues to define the future of connectivity.
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I look
    forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Rinaldo follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Hudson. Thank you.
        Mr. Lewis, you are recognized for 5 minutes for an opening
    statement.

                        STATEMENT OF CHRIS LEWIS

        Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ranking Member Matsui,
    I appreciate you inviting me here today representing Public
    Knowledge on a topic that I agree is jargony but wonderfully
    nerdy, and in Public Knowledge, that is always a compliment, so
    thank you.
        Over the last 30 years, the United States has led the world
    in wireless technology, and this leadership is no small measure
    due to the innovative and bound spectrum policies that have
    carried out a bipartisan basis--on a bipartisan basis over
    these decades. I will highlight three key factors from my
    written testimony that have led to this success, and then I
    look forward to the discussion.
        First, our system has managed spectrum, the public
    airwaves, as a public asset and in the public interest all
    while encouraging private investment and innovation. Other
    governments effectively nationalize their spectrum. Only the
    government could operate broadcast radio or authorize new uses
    of spectrum. These governments acted through ministries under
    the direct control of the country's chief executive.
        The United States, we went a different way. We created an
    independent agency to oversee spectrum use designed to strike
    the right balance between the many users of spectrum, such as
    public safety, local governments, broadcasters, to encourage
    innovation and private investment. Most importantly, Congress
    recognized that spectrum represents a unique, nonrenewable
    public resource.
        Congress enshrined the Communications Act, but the FCC
    managed the public airwaves for the public interest. This means
    that no one can own the public airwaves, policy on licensees
    are balanced with public needs and come with public interest
    obligations, and that spectrum policy, including auction design
    and proceeds, should make efficient use of the spectrum
    allocations and benefit the needs of the public under the FCC
    mandate to connect all Americans.
        Today's public needs to connect all Americans include
    deploying Next Gen 9-1-1, supporting infrastructure needs, and
    especially supporting digital inclusion funding needs in local
    communities. Local digital inclusion efforts actually lower the
    cost of deployment for broadband providers while giving
    communities, large and small, the support to realize the full
    potential of those infrastructure deployments.
        Second, the FCC has, with congressional authority,
    experimented with new regulatory models to create competitive
    opportunities in the market and foster innovation. There is no
    greater example of regulatory innovation than the success of
    WiFi.
        WiFi technology was invented in the 1980s, when the FCC
    opened unlicensed spectrum for experimentation by engineers and
    inventors. These unlicensed spectrum bands allow anyone to use
    any device for any purpose under rules authorized by the FCC to
    avoid interference with licensed services.
        WiFi carries 53 percent of all internet traffic and almost
    90 percent of wireless internet traffic. Without supporting
    WiFi and unlicensed spectrum innovation, we would not have the
    mobile communications revolution we now enjoy.
        In this century, newer regulatory models for spectrum
    access, like CBRS sharing models, are increasing access for
    small community institutions, rural and Tribal communities, and
    other private industry outside of the big wireless carriers.
        Third and finally, Congress has carefully divided spectrum
    between Federal and non-Federal users at NTIA and the FCC,
    respectively, requiring cooperation between agencies and
    between Federal and non-Federal users.
        The public may not follow the day-to-day operation of NTIA
    and the FCC, but they do put their trust in government to make
    sure this resource and the technologies that use it work
    efficiently. Thankfully, NTIA and FCC have worked to develop
    more than one MOU to support cooperation between agencies and,
    therefore, processes the balance Federal and commercial use
    needs. Without this coordination, we would return to chaos and
    governmental infighting.
        If America is going to continue its leadership in wireless
    technologies, we must continue to follow these proven
    principles that led to our success to date. Congress can lead
    in this direction by permanently restoring auction authority at
    the FCC. This is critical for enabling effective coordination
    between Federal and commercial users, driving efficient use of
    the public airwaves, and delivering public-interest benefits
    that connect all Americans to secure, reliable, and affordable
    communications.
        Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Lewis follows:]
       [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Hudson. Thank you, Mr. Lewis.
        We will now begin questioning, and I will recognize myself
    for 5 minutes.
        Listen, economic security is national security, and to lead
    in technology as a nation, I believe we need a balanced
    spectrum policy that benefits both licensed and unlicensed use
    of spectrum. Making licensed spectrum available is more
    difficult, but I don't think we should resort to making
    everything unlicensed just because of the challenges associated
    with it.
        Mr. Powell, recognizing that your companies primarily
    utilize unlicensed spectrum, would you talk a little bit about
    what advancements in technology happening in your industry that
    might increase a demand for unlicensed spectrum?
        Mr. Powell. Thank you for the question.
        It is interesting to note that the cable industry pursued
    the convergence that we all dreamed of in the '96 Act. It uses
    all forms of spectrum to compete. It uses WiFi, it uses shared
    licensed spectrum, and we also use exclusive licensed spectrum,
    which has allowed us to become the fifth--fourth most
    significant mobile service provider in the country offering
    competition.
        So we believe that going forward, you have to be creative
    in using all forms of spectrum allocation in order to be
    effective. And we look forward--we see a continuing conflict
    with what is available for the market to use quickly and the
    processes we are using to allocate that spectrum, which is why
    we are committed to advancing and advocating shared-spectrum
    models.
        Those models now use very sophisticated, dynamic spectrum
    technology in order to coordinate and manage among uses and
    competing uses, and it works quite effectively.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank you.
        Artificial intelligence has been a topic receiving a lot of
    attention recently because it is revolutionizing so many of our
    industries. As a result, it is also putting significant demand
    on our Nation's resources.
        Mr. Gillen, does artificial intelligence require more
    bandwidth? And if so, will it need to be licensed spectrum?
        Mr. Gillen. We are going to need more bandwidth, period.
    When you think about what AI promises, it really is a good
    frame for this entire conversation, the ability of AI to help
    all sectors, much like 5G can help all sectors. But they really
    need to work together.
        When you think about--the Vodafone CEO of Europe talks
    about the risk in Europe of AI bottleneck because there is not
    enough cellular capacity to meet the data needs of AI.
        So absolutely, when you talk about the growth curves we are
    talking about, AI growth, we need to make sure our networks are
    strong enough to carry that, to drive that innovation. We want
    that innovation to happen here. And if that innovation is going
    to happen globally, who has the best networks? That has always
    been us, and we are in a great place on WiFi to continue to be
    the best. We need to do the same in 5G as well.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank you.
        Congress and the White House need to take a leadership role
    in repurposing Federal spectrum for commercial use. Access to
    spectrum by Federal and commercial users is necessary to
    protect our national security, but Federal agencies are not
    actively looking for ways to be more efficient with their
    spectrum.
        Ms. Rinaldo, as a former Acting Administrator of NTIA and
    in your current role, you were responsible for managing
    spectrum used by Federal agencies while also looking for
    opportunities to repurpose spectrum for commercial use.
        What are the biggest challenges presented by agencies when
    trying to make spectrum available?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you, sir.
        Yes. So as an example, when I was at NTIA in August of
    2019, I sent a memo to all of the Federal agencies asking them
    to do an assessment of their spectrum needs. And just today in
    2025 are those bands finally being studied. So I would say it
    is just time. We need to make decisions a lot sooner in order
    to deploy.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank you.
        I will pose this question to everybody. So we will go down
    the line. But how does spectrum policy disputes domestically
    affect America's leadership on the global stage? And let's go
    in reverse order. Mr. Lewis, I will start with you.
        Mr. Lewis. I am sorry. How does spectrum policy what?
        Mr. Hudson. So disputes that we have here domestically, how
    does that impact our leadership on the global stage?
        Mr. Lewis. You know, I think history has proven that when
    we chart a path, that promotes innovation and promotes meeting
    a variety of needs with our spectrum policies that the world
    follows us. And so, you know, debate might be good, but I think
    disputes that frees us picking a direction that continues to
    promote those values in our balanced spectrum policy can hold
    up our opportunity for leadership as we look at the next
    generation of wireless technologies like WiFi 7 and 6G.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank you.
        I am about to run out of time here.
        Ms. Rinaldo. He is absolutely right. Debate has a type of
    purpose, but we need to be decisive when we go into standards
    bodies. We need to speak with one voice.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank you.
        Well, my time has expired. Mr. Gillen and Mr. Powell, if
    you all want to submit something.
        Mr. Gillen. I just think our adversaries are unified. Their
    government, military, and industry are working together. We
    need to be, too, to compete.
        Mr. Hudson. Good point.
        All right. Thank you all.
        Mr. Powell. I just think it was delay.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank you.
        My time has expired, and I can't hold my committee members
    accountable if I don't hold myself accountable. So I will stop.
        At this point, I will recognize Ms. Matsui for 5 minutes of
    questions.
        Ms. Matsui. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Before the Biden administration's national spectrum
    strategy, the United States went 6 years without any
    comprehensive spectrum strategy. During those 6 years, drawn-
    out spectrum disputes compromised our ability to maximize our
    use of this vital resource. If America is to remain the pace-
    setter for global innovation, we need to maintain consistency
    in our spectrum policy.
        Mr. Lewis, how is the national spectrum strategy keeping
    the U.S. on track to lead on their wireless technologies? And
    why is it important, critical, to continue its work?
        Mr. Lewis. Yes, Congresswoman. The spectrum strategy was an
    important step forward. It laid a path for us to follow in
    studying five spectrum bands that could create a pipeline in
    the future. It talked about long-term planning and research
    into technological developments like dynamic spectrum sharing
    that could make the use of those bands more efficient and
    hopefully also points in the direction of continued cooperation
    between Federal and non-Federal users.
        Ms. Matsui. OK. Thank you.
        Mr. Lewis. So it is an important step forward. We need to
    continue to move on.
        Ms. Matsui. Continue it. Thank you.
        Mr. Gillen and Mr. Powell, can the United States afford to
    delay studies of spectrum bands and undo the national spectrum
    strategy's progress in increasing spectrum access?
        Mr. Gillen. Absolutely no.
        Ms. Matsui. OK.
        Mr. Powell. I agree with Mr. Gillen. It is important to
    quickly study these bands and get them into the market.
        Ms. Matsui. OK. Thank you.
        I have been a strong advocate for modernizing our
    telecommunications network through open interoperable solutions
    that diversify our supply chains and create new opportunities
    for American innovators to compete in the market.
        Ms. Rinaldo, the DoD has partnered with members of the Open
    RAN coalition to leverage commercial wireless technologies for
    secure, resilient networks. What next steps should U.S.
    spectrum policy take to ensure we can continue to enhance
    national security through commercial innovation?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Yes. Thank you. Absolutely.
        The DoD has been incredibly bullish on Open RAN,
    interactively working with my member companies to deploy 5G
    around the world. Unfortunately, their budgets continue to get
    cut. So in 2025, I think people would be shocked how little 5G
    is deployed at our DoD bases around the world.
        So I would say continued funding, continued partnership.
    And it is great to see the two sides, the commercial side and
    the public side, working together to deploy commercial
    technologies.
        Ms. Matsui. Certainly. Thank you.
        Spectrum demands continue to grow, and there is no more
    easy spectrum to access. We must have a unified Federal
    spectrum policy to continue the work towards sustainable
    spectrum pipeline that benefits the American people.
        Mr. Lewis, how have American consumers and innovators been
    harmed in the past when the Federal Government fails to speak
    with a unified voice on spectrum policy?
        Mr. Lewis. I think our innovators are looking for
    reliability on where they can design, and so, the national
    spectrum strategy that you mentioned and setting up a clear
    path forward on what bands can be used in the future is
    important for providing that certainty for innovators.
        Ms. Matsui. OK. Thank you.
        Mr. Gillen, I have worked collaboratively across the
    government for years to advance America's spectrum policy. Can
    you tell me why it matters that the government speaks with one
    voice, and why it matters what other nations do with spectrum?
        Mr. Gillen. For us to succeed, we need one voice. And I
    really appreciate your leadership, really pushing NTIA to be at
    the forefront. We need the experts making these calls and to
    get rid of some of the turf wars we are fighting.
        When you think about it, the U.S. is a big market, but we
    are only 4 percent of all the global wireless connections in
    the world. So in order to succeed, we need to amplify our
    voice. We need to make sure other countries are using our
    equipment, are using our spectrum, like Ms. Rinaldo said. So it
    is critical that we lead and we lead first.
        Ms. Matsui. Thank you.
        Cutting-edge technologies like dynamic spectrum sharing
    hold great promise in efficiently using our finite spectrum
    resources. There are a number of possibilities to leverage
    emerging technologies like artificial intelligence to better
    manage spectrum, as published in the National Spectrum Research
    and Development plan.
        Mr. Powell and Ms. Rinaldo, how can--quickly answer--
    investments in emerging technologies like AI improve spectrum
    efficiency and management? Mr. Powell?
        Mr. Powell. I think it is critical. I mean, you can bet on
    technological innovation to resolve conflict, or you can rely
    on political regulatory conflict to resolve conflict. We think
    there's stunning advances in the ability to use spectrum more
    efficiently and, more importantly, to allow multiple users to
    use the same bands simultaneously without interference,
    allowing greater competition and greater innovation.
        Ms. Matsui. Ms. Rinaldo, you have got 7 minutes--7 seconds.
        Ms. Rinaldo. Absolutely. I think with Open RAN, the use of
    AI, you are going to see a lot of use cases, especially in
    spectrum management.
        Ms. Matsui. OK. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Hudson. The gentlelady yields back.
        The Chair will recognize the chairman of the full
    committee, Mr. Guthrie, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Guthrie. Thanks, Mr. Chair, for the recognition.
        And Ms. Rinaldo, it is great to see Cole here. Not many of
    us on this committee remember when you used to work for a
    member of this committee, and it is hard to believe I have been
    here that long, because he is 10 years old now. I remember when
    you were having him.
        So my question is--I know we have newer Members, and some
    of us need a refresher as well. So NTIA, which you were leading
    in the previous administration--well, now, I don't even know if
    it is still previous--45--it manages the Federal spectrum, but
    a lot of agencies try to manage their own Federal spectrum.
        Can you explain how that is not supposed to work and the
    problems of how it--what that causes when that happens?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Absolutely.
        So fragmentation is one of the worst things that we could
    do to move things forward. You would lose everything from the
    efficiencies that you gave through the IRAC, where all the
    Federal agencies come together and discuss management of
    spectrum, to national security concerns. Can you imagine if
    each agency was responsible for cybersecurity of their
    individual bands? It would be disastrous.
        Mr. Guthrie. But some agencies try to do that, right?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Some would like to use, yes.
        Mr. Guthrie. OK. So all right.
        So we heard Chair Hudson and Ranking Member Matsui talk
    about disputes going into these international bodies. And just
    kind of a refresher for some, and some are new to the
    committee. So we were at the 2023 World of Radio Communication
    Conference. There were disputes that went in that made us less
    effective.
        So if you would talk about what those--I know there were
    several, but kind of highlight a couple of the disputes, why
    that made us ineffective or less effective, and if we go into
    those international groups less effective, how China will take
    advantage of that.
        Ms. Rinaldo. Absolutely.
        So there is a lot of prep work that goes into these events
    years ahead of time. We work with others around the world to
    ensure that we can have a unified response, not just the U.S.
    but our partners as well. And so, if we are still arguing over
    policy decisions as we go into the standards bodies, then we
    are not able to speak with a unified voice.
        Mr. Guthrie. So what kind of policy discussions were
    happening? What were we arguing over?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Spectrum bands.
        Mr. Guthrie. Spectrum bands?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Yes. So the adversary wants the chaos because
    if there is chaos internal amongst us, that means we are not
    fighting them for our strongest hand and our position.
        Mr. Guthrie. So these international standard-setting bodies
    that the standard--because, obviously, spectrum knows no border
    because it is physics, in the air only. I know Mr. Obernolte
    can explain it. I can't.
        But we do know that it crosses borders. And so, what
    advantage does China have if they get the leverage? What could
    they do with having the leverage? What kind of standards could
    they influence that is negative to us and positive to them?
        Ms. Rinaldo. So it does advantage their vendor community a
    great deal. It is incredibly expensive to put together a radio.
    And so, if you are walking in and if you are standards-
    accepted, you are going to have the first movers advantage, and
    that is what we want.
        Mr. Guthrie. So like what kind of standards? I mean, just
    kind of more details.
        Ms. Rinaldo. Yes. So whatever bands. So you are going to
    have transistors in all of your radios, and so that becomes
    incredibly expensive. You are going to want to ensure that you
    have--so other countries around the world are on the same bands
    that China is, and so that is what their aim is, is just to
    coalesce everyone together.
        Mr. Guthrie. So it is kind of like if they become the
    dominant player, then everybody else has to play. If you want
    to be interoperable, most people want to be interoperable with
    the dominant player.
        Ms. Rinaldo. Correct. You want to be the leader.
        Mr. Guthrie. And so, if they become the dominant player,
    then we have to follow them instead of them follow us?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Correct.
        Mr. Guthrie. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate that.
        I do have another minute if anybody wants the time. If not,
    I will yield back.
        I will yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chair will recognize the ranking member of the full
    committee, Mr. Pallone, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Pallone. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I am concerned by reports suggesting that Republicans would
    rather spend $70 billion in spectrum auction proceeds on tax
    cuts for the rich instead of investing this money in bipartisan
    public safety priorities, such as Next Generation 9-1-1, which
    is going to save the lives of a lot of Americans, including
    first responders.
        But let me go to Mr. Lewis. To the best of your knowledge,
    has Congress ever directed spectrum auction proceeds to pay for
    tax cuts for billionaires?
        Mr. Lewis. Not to my knowledge.
        Mr. Pallone. All right.
        And why is using spectrum auction proceeds to deploy NG 9-
    1-1 networks a worthwhile investment, if you would?
        Mr. Lewis. I view NG 9-1-1 as an important public interest
    need that makes all Americans benefit from secure networks,
    faster emergency services, and it matches the mandate of the
    Communications Act that says that we should push to have all
    Americans connected to reliable, secure, affordable
    communications.
        Mr. Pallone. Well, thank you.
        I mean, obviously, I am very proud of the fact that we have
    used spectrum in the past for public purposes and don't want it
    to be just used for tax cuts for, you know, corporate or
    billionaires.
        You know, we are debating spectrum policy, but--here in
    this committee, but as far as the people in my district are
    concerned, they just want to know what we are doing to make
    their monthly bills more affordable. That is what they care
    about, you know, the bottom line, You know, they can't afford
    things. They want us to bring prices down.
        So, Mr. Lewis, do you think that the FCC should require
    through licensing or other means wireless service providers to
    offer an affordable service option, that we should require
    that, if you will?
        Mr. Lewis. I think that would be OK. I don't think it would
    be a substitute for restoring the low-income subsidy for
    broadband that we lost last year. Even with a low-income
    option, there is a cost to low-income people in every State and
    every district. So, yes, but it is not all we would need.
        Mr. Pallone. You think some of those other things are just
    as important, certainly?
        Mr. Lewis. I think the subsidies are very important. It was
    proven. You know, over 20 million people signed up for it
    before it went away, and folks are making difficult budgetary
    choices without it.
        Mr. Pallone. Yes. I certainly agree with you that that was
    a major accomplishment, and we should try to continue or expand
    it.
        The last question I wanted to ask, and I could ask it to
    both Mr. Lewis and Mr. Powell possibly too, if you would like.
    The Biden administration made great strides in advancing the
    U.S. spectrum policies by adopting the national spectrum
    strategy, which got bipartisan support in this committee. And
    this strategy requires the Federal Government to undertake
    studies of certain spectrum bands before making any final
    decisions on whether or how they should be made commercially
    available.
        So let me start with Mr. Lewis and then Mr. Powell. We have
    got a couple minutes. Will completing these studies allow us to
    more effectively compete against China and other countries, and
    if so, how?
        If you could take a minute and we will ask Mr. Powell.
        Mr. Lewis. I would say yes, actually, for some of the
    reasons that Ms. Rinaldo was talking about, to point in a
    unified direction instead of the disputes we had between
    different agencies in the past. The studies can really set what
    the scientific facts are about how different bands will work
    and the technologies using it and then, hopefully, coordination
    can be built off of those scientific facts.
        Mr. Pallone. OK.
        Mr. Powell?
        Mr. Powell. I would just quickly say that the bands that
    were being evaluated are the very bands that all of us are
    sitting here asking for the government to get into the market.
    We all have acknowledged those bands are heavily encumbered,
    and so there are complex questions associated with the current
    users and potential commercial use.
        So at some level, no matter what form it takes, there has
    to be continued evaluation of the viability of doing that and
    the appropriate approach to doing that.
        Mr. Pallone. All right. Thank you both.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank you, Mr. Pallone.
        The Chair now recognizes the vice chair of the
    subcommittee, Mr. Allen. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Allen. Thank you, Chairman Hudson, for yielding, and
    now we will get back to the subject we came to talk about.
        Mr. Powell, can you explain why it is important to our
    strategic competition with China for your members to have more
    spectrum made available for their use?
        Mr. Powell. Yes, sir. You know, I think attacking China is
    a multifront war, and I think, you know, to follow the advice
    of Sun Tzu, don't attack where they are strong, attack where
    they are weak. Our innovations in WiFi are unprecedented in the
    world. China does not appreciate or embrace that technology or
    approach, because it would empower their citizens in a way that
    they are unwilling to do in their Communist system. And this
    gives America an enormous competitive advantage because we
    harness the innovation potential of every one of our citizens,
    and they don't. They have a command-and-control, exclusive
    license regime because they want to maintain control----
        Mr. Allen. Right.
        Mr. Powell [continuing]. Of that regime. And they want the
    world to use their approach as well.
        Mr. Allen. Good. Thank you. Ms. Rinaldo, what--can you give
    me an answer to that question about why it is important for
    your members to have more spectrum to compete with China?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Absolutely. So if you want to get Open RAN,
    deployed, we would need new spectrum to bring online. It is
    updating networks. It is U.S. and our allied friends around the
    world, innovation that is coming to bear.
        Mr. Allen. OK. Today, I will be introducing the Spectrum
    Pipeline Act, which was originally co-led last Congress by
    Senators Cruz and Thune. This bill is designed to ensure the
    efficient allocation of midband spectrum, a resource critical
    for the advancement of 5G and next-generation technologies.
        While this communications technology is a cornerstone of
    our strategic competition with China, this bill lays out a path
    for us to promote wireless innovation while protecting national
    security interests.
        Mr. Gillen, can you explain why the Spectrum Pipeline Act
    is needed and how it would benefit the Nation's economic and
    national security interests?
        Mr. Gillen. Absolutely. And thank you for your leadership
    and for the bill. It is a really important thing to address a
    lot of the challenges we are talking about, that we--we need to
    move quickly, we need to move decisively, and it is Congress'
    role to set that direction.
        And that structure you propose is flexible. It allows the
    agencies to actually determine which bands are right, that we
    need to do together. But ultimately, when we are trying to talk
    about China, in our view, we need to be the best in the world
    in our license, and we are today. We also need to be the best
    in the world in 5G. We shouldn't be choosing. We need to do
    both, and we need to have the innovation available on both of
    those platforms.
        And so your bill would help equalize that imbalance we have
    right now on the 5G side to put us in a position. We lead the
    world today in unlicensed spectrum. We can again in 5G with
    this kind of bill. Thank you.
        Mr. Allen. Thank you. Mr. Gillen, my rural district still
    does not have consistent mobile phone service.
        What assurances can you give me that your member companies
    are making the necessary investments in upgrading their cell
    towers and building new ones as necessary?
        Mr. Gillen. Absolutely. It is a project every day that we
    continue to build. It is one of the things why it is important
    when we talk about what kind of spectrum is available, why
    full-power spectrum matters. If you think about some of the
    models, the sharing models we are using, you need seven times
    more the facilities to cover this in geography.
        So when we are trying to get out beyond Augusta, what are
    we trying to do? How far that signal goes matters. There is
    also a role for the government, the 5G fund at the SEC, to help
    supplement and complement those places to help us push out
    faster.
        But absolutely, we need to get further than we are today.
        Mr. Allen. Is there anything Congress can do to help us--
    help companies build more towers in the rural areas of the
    country?
        Mr. Gillen. Certainly continued work on permitting reform
    would help, to help cut down--modernize that process to let us
    build faster and get to more places and more full-power
    spectrum. It would be both.
        Mr. Allen. And then finally--I have got about a minute--can
    you explain the difference in the approach of a spectrum policy
    between the first Trump administration and the recent Biden
    administration, and what exactly needs to happen to get
    spectrum policy out of the gutter and back on track, and how
    long will it take?
        Mr. Gillen. We saw great success. The first Trump
    administration released more spectrum than any other
    administration, particularly some of the midband spectrum we
    are talking about under the Trump direction and Ms. Rinaldo's
    leadership. We saw 380 megahertz of spectrum--midband spectrum
    auction for over $100 billion.
        The spectrum directly adjacent to both of those is prime
    spectrum for that same opportunity again. So it came down to--
    we had a lot of--we were speaking with one voice, and the White
    House pushed us all forward with a good plan.
        Mr. Allen. So it is important that this committee
    understand that we have got to move quickly with this, and we
    need to move in a bipartisan way and quit talking about
    political issues, and let's get this done and so we can lead--
    lead the world in communications technology.
        And I want to thank each one of you for your being here
    today and for your input on this important subject, and please
    help us get this done. Thank you.
        Mr. Hudson. I thank the gentleman for yielding back.
        I will now recognize the Representative from Florida, Mr.
    Soto, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Soto. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Spectrum is one of our
    most valuable commodities, our information superhighway. When I
    think about all the uses from cell phones and getting to 6G to
    AI and commercial rockets in Central Florida, by the way,
    telehealth streaming, gaming, internet, e-commerce, one of the
    greatest economic inefficiencies we have is buffering, the
    dreaded spinning wheel. I even remember when it used to be an
    hourglass. A lot of you may remember that.
        And so, it is critical for us to ensure access to spectrum
    for these commercial and technical uses. Unfortunately,
    Congress allowed the SEC's auction authority to lapse back
    nearly 2 years ago. And we saw, you know, the Department of
    Defense, our military, they need to defend the Nation. But with
    nearly 2 years of this lapsing authority, we need to work out
    these differences.
        There has been a history of using this funding for public
    safety, for national security that is communications-related,
    whether it is FirstNet, Rip and Replace broadband, and the new
    infrastructure law. I could tell you, in rural places in my
    district, like South Osceola and East Orange, where they have
    ranches and farms and groves, using this funding in a related
    way to communications not only makes sense, but it is the just
    thing to do.
        Communications are only going to require more investment as
    technology and competition advance, especially making our
    telecom system more resilient to cybersecurity hacks, like Salt
    Typhoon, which has been mentioned a bunch of times here.
        So we need to make sure we are reinvesting these in the
    telecom system and not seeing tax cuts for billionaires that
    will siphon this off.
        Most Americans and American small businesses will suffer
    identity theft, ransomware, spying, if we don't continue to
    reinvest.
        So first, Mr. Gillen, I was shocked to see--we would see--
    China, over the last 3 years nearly 4 times the amount of
    midband spectrum for commercial use unleashed. And just so we
    are clear, there has been a bipartisan opposition in the
    Senate, through DoD, through Senator Rounds, I see Senator
    Hirono, too, who helped slow this down.
        How do we--what are the consequences if this continues to
    happen?
        Mr. Gillen. Thank you for the question. I thought the
    consequences is where you started. It is the buffering
    hourglass. And when we talk about what these networks can do,
    it is inconvenient on a phone call when we want--with 5G, and
    we want connectivity to do in manufacturing and healthcare and
    transportation. We need these to be heavily reliable and
    resilient networks. So it has to work.
        And so, ultimately, at its core, that advantage in China is
    giving them a leg's up in their ability to innovate. There are
    14 times more 5G-connected factories in China than are in the
    U.S. You can draw a direct line back to our spectrum policy.
    They are continuing to move forward. There's forward global
    bands for 5G right now. They support three. We support zero.
        We need to get on the playing field. We need to start
    competing again.
        Mr. Soto. Ms. Rinaldo, you were head of NTIA. When you
    worked with the DoD on these issues, What was their hesitancy?
    I feel like there is--I get it. There is national security
    implications to this.
        But what are some of the things you can disclose of why
    there is still that tension there that is blocking a lot of
    this from coming forward?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Yes. I feel that there is a lack of trust.
    They, of course, have national security aims that they need to
    protect, and the industry wants those protected too. But
    there's so many efficiencies coming online. How can we ensure
    all users, public and private, are taking advantage of these
    efficiencies?
        And so I think that is what we really need to get back into
    this conversation, is how do we get the trust back? We are all
    one country.
        Mr. Soto. Thank you. Mr. Lewis, if you could have a top
    three reinvestment in a telecom and in communications systems
    with the proceeds of spectrum sales, what would it be?
        Mr. Lewis. Top three. Definitely NG 9-1-1, which we have
    talked about. Number 2 would be digital inclusion efforts on
    the ground, Congress' investment in the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law. And digital inclusion efforts on the ground
    was a first of its kind, but it is not permanent. Spectrum
    auction authority could create a permanent fund.
        And then other infrastructure needs: resiliency, there may
    be others. But spectrum auction proceeds are hard to predict as
    well. Those auctions, no greenfield space come with costs as
    well, so it would--prioritizing would make sense.
        Mr. Soto. Thanks. And I yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. I thank the gentleman.
        The Chair now recognizes Mr. Latta for 5 minutes to ask
    your questions.
        Mr. Latta. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to our
    witnesses for being with us today. This is really a great
    conversation.
        Our national security depends on the United States
    maintaining an edge in advanced technologies. This committee
    has acted decisively over the years to meet this goal. At
    times, the legislation securing Americans' data from Communist
    Chinese collection and advancing spectrum policies like the
    Beat China for 5G Act of 2020.
        The expiration of the FCC spectrum auction authority is not
    something I take lightly. An auction authority remains crucial
    for wireless technologies to have the ecosystem developed and
    thrive in the United States.
        If I could start my questioning with Mr. Powell. And there
    has been a lot of discussion back and forth, but I am going to
    get your--get your thoughts on this. In your testimony, you
    speak to the American innovations that have come to--thanks to
    unlicensed spectrum availability.
        Do you expect that, as technology continues to develop,
    coexistence of some sort of sharing in a band will be easier or
    have less interference?
        And before you answer--you really went in-depth in your
    testimony on shared spectrum. And--but the question--we have
    been going around and around on this for--oh, since I have been
    on this committee, for almost 15 years, especially with DoD.
    And we just heard from Ms. Rinaldo talking about, you know,
    having some kind of working relationship back and forth and
    having that trust. But how do we get there? Because we can do a
    lot of talking, but how are we going to get that? Because we
    are going to have to have this spectrum.
        Mr. Powell. Yes. I think if you look at the examples of
    WiFi and the CBRS spectrum, you will look at dramatic increases
    in our ability to utilize advanced technologies to allow
    conflicting uses to coexist cooperatively. That allows you to
    get the spectrum out, have all users who need it have access to
    it, and be able to provide services in new and innovative ways.
        I think one of the trust problems is that the Defense
    Department and others believe--I have worked with for them for
    many years, including when I was Chair of the FCC. They lose
    trust when they feel like people are hunting to take the
    spectrum completely away from them and not offer them an
    alternative. They are charged constitutionally with protecting
    our borders, protecting United States national security.
        And I can tell you, a cash--a flipping hourglass while you
    are watching a video is one thing. A loss of 3 milliseconds on
    a missile intercept means you miss. That is a very fundamental
    loss of capability. So you can understand the conflict. It
    takes talented leaders and policymakers to bring that trust
    back.
        But I would argue, looking more fully at shared spectrum
    models would allow them to see a future which they can continue
    to operate while coexisting with commercial users.
        Mr. Latta. Thank you very much.
        Ms. Rinaldo, similar to conversations we have had in the
    past related to the benefits of ORAN networks, how does having
    a diverse spectrum ecosystem strengthen our national security
    and protect against foreign cyber attacks?
        Ms. Rinaldo. You never want an overreliance on a single
    band. That is why it is important to diversify. I think all you
    have to do is look to GPS, where it is incredibly vulnerable
    because all of our eggs are in one basket. You don't want to
    create a high-value target.
        Mr. Latta. Thank you.
        In your testimony, you mentioned that the United States
    cannot and should not try to act more like China when it comes
    to spectrum management. What are some of the areas we should be
    looking at to encourage that innovation here while spreading
    American wireless values abroad?
        Ms. Rinaldo. So they operate by fiat. They have a handful
    of companies as opposed to us. We have hundreds of companies in
    this space, so it is important to bring them together to
    collaborate, multistakeholder through government, public/
    private partnerships. And so that is where we do have the
    innovative edge.
        Mr. Latta. Thank you.
        Mr. Gillen, are there bands that have already been studied
    by NTIA that should be part of the spectrum pipeline?
        Mr. Gillen. Our studies have studies. Absolutely. When
    you--the structure really--there's many different ways you can
    structure the bill. You can direct--in the past, you have
    directed, you must auction this particular band. Sometimes it
    is a matter of spectrum within a range.
        The clear priority for us is that--that you include a plan
    with auction authority, and there's lots of different ways it
    can do it. In terms of specific bands, absolutely. The 3
    gigahertz band and the 7, 8 gigahertz band are two global bands
    that are both identified by the national spectrum strategy. We
    think those are key parts of the roadmap going forward.
        Mr. Latta. Well, thank you very much. And in this Congress,
    we have got to do, as I mentioned a little bit earlier, on our
    spectrum auction authority, to get this done, you know. It is
    just not for making sure that we have dollars coming in to
    the--on the Federal side, but it is also absolutely essential
    that we get the spectrum out there.
        So, Mr. Chairman, I hope we can get this done this
    Congress. And I yield back the balance of my time.
        Mr. Hudson. I thank the gentleman.
        I will now recognize the Representative from California,
    Mr. Ruiz, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Ruiz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is an honor to serve
    on this subcommittee. I represent California's 25th District,
    the southeast corner of California, where far too many of my
    constituents are dealing with persistent issues of limited
    broadband access, inadequate cell coverage, and aging
    infrastructure. It is one of the most underresourced rural
    communities in the State of California.
        And in communities like mine, the lack of reliable high-
    speed internet creates obstacles. Students are unable to fully
    engage in online education, small business struggles to remain
    competitive, and families are disconnected from critical
    services. The need to expand broadband access to Tribal Nations
    is particularly pressing because they face some of the lowest
    connectivity rates in the Nation.
        And addressing this digital divide will not only ensure
    equitable access to education and economic opportunity, it
    would also provide essential services, like telehealth, to
    communities that need it most. And especially our vulnerable
    communities during the pandemic, we saw that the lack of access
    made them even more vulnerable.
        And we must prioritize modernizing our telecommunications
    infrastructures to close this gap and build a stronger, more
    connected future for all Americans.
        Mr. Lewis, could you speak to how the absence of broadband
    access affects the community and, in particular, what the
    national security implications might be?
        Mr. Lewis. I think you started with some great
    explanations. I saw some of those examples firsthand. I served
    on the school board in Alexandria for 6 years and saw students
    who did not have connectivity and how it impacted their ability
    to--to compete and to get a full education.
        Broadband connectivity promotes economic development and
    the opportunities to reach a global marketplace for adults as
    well, and is incredibly important for communities.
        Mr. Ruiz. Thank you.
        Mr. Lewis. And, you know, we are here talking about
    spectrum policies. There are so many different ways to serve
    rural communities like yours. And certainly the investments in
    the BEAD program that get fiber hopefully out to as many
    communities as possible is important for wireless because you
    can't have wireless connectivity and towers without the fiber
    backbone that those towers connect to.
        And then finding other ways to use different sort of
    spectrum deployments, whether it is licensed spectrum, whether
    it is shared spectrum, whether it is WiFi, like unlicensed
    spectrum, like TV white spaces, the spaces between the
    channels--the TV channels is used for broadband performance. So
    there is so many different ways to----
        Mr. Ruiz. And we need those during disasters for----
        Mr. Lewis. Yes.
        Mr. Ruiz [continuing]. One of the critical things that we
    need them for.
        So these connectivity gaps also pose critical risks during
    emergencies, where reliable communication networks are
    essential for delivering timely information, ensuring the
    safety of all Americans.
        Last week, on January 10, 2025, due to various reasons, 9-
    1-1 outages were reported in the Coachella Valley where I
    represent, particularly in Cathedral City and Indio. Residents
    who relied on AT&T and Frontier Services were unable to reach
    9-1-1 for several hours.
        First responders directed people to call alternate numbers
    or text 9-1-1, which are not always available or reliable
    options. And this is not the first time people in my district
    have experienced this.
        As an emergency physician, I have witnessed firsthand how
    every second counts during an emergency. Not being able to
    reach first responders is simply unacceptable.
        In the 118th Congress, this subcommittee, on a bipartisan
    basis, made significant strides towards providing Federal and
    State governments with the resources necessary to transition to
    nationwide, IP-based Next Generation 9-1-1 systems. This
    technology will modernize our outdated 9-1-1 infrastructure and
    will allow texts, photos, and videos to be sent to 9-1-1,
    improving communication during emergencies, and location
    tracking, and ensuring better coordination during natural
    disasters like the ones we experienced, Tropical Storm Hilary
    and then also the L.A. wildfires.
        So could you elaborate, Mr. Lewis, on the specific
    benefits, investments NG 9-1-1 will bring to our communities?
        Mr. Lewis. I think it starts with the idea that when an
    emergency happens, what do a lot of us do? We grab our phone,
    we take it with us. It is our--it is our lifeline to emergency
    services and our families.
        Mr. Ruiz. People are more likely to die when they are
    having a cardiac arrest and they can't get the paramedics to
    their home to help them because of lack of N11.
        So I think when we are looking at spectrum option, we
    should be using the funds to expand NG 9-1-1 and help save
    everyday American lives rather than trying to use those funds
    to give millionaires and billionaires more tax breaks, people
    that need it the least. We should be serving the American
    people who need it the most: everyday, middle-class, hard-
    working Americans who rely on 9-1-1 systems to save lives.
        Thank you. I yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank the gentleman for yielding back.
        I now recognize the Representative from Florida, Mr.
    Bilirakis, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it
    very much, and congratulations. You are going to make a great
    chairman.
        I have to admit, though, I was surprised that Congress let
    spectrum auction authority lapse, let alone for 2 years. At
    least we can say that the House did its job in trying to
    reauthorize spectrum auctions last Congress.
        But this clearly remains a top priority for members of this
    committee on both sides. As we move forward, we shouldn't just
    be simply thinking about reinstating auctions but also consider
    process reforms. In the past, Federal agencies have attempted
    to stymie auctions, sometimes even after an auction is held and
    bidders have won provisional licenses.
        Mr. Gillen, how does the uncertainty of post-auction agency
    meddling impact the value of a spectrum license, and what can
    Congress do to address these problems in the future?
        Mr. Gillen. Thank you for the question. You are exactly
    right. Bidders hate uncertainty. Capital hates uncertainty. And
    therefore, asking companies to spend tens of billions of
    dollars on an asset, there is expectation that they are going
    to be able to quickly then use that to deliver service to
    consumers. Unfortunately, that has not always been the case
    recently.
        I think it comes back to some of what Ms. Rinaldo said
    about the need for one voice at NTIA to make those calls. And
    ultimately, agencies and industry and everyone needs to live by
    that decision, and we need to get back to that place that you
    can help empower the spectrum experts at the FCC, at NTIA to be
    the ones that have to make the hard choices, how all of us want
    spectrum to be used.
        Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Powell, in the aftermath of the historic double
    hurricanes that slammed Florida and North Carolina and other
    parts of the south and the wildfires that destroyed cities in
    California, these communities need to rebuild from scratch. How
    will permitting policies impact rebuilding efforts, and what
    can Congress do to more quickly and cost-effectively rebuild
    robust networks in these areas, potentially allowing them to
    achieve a citywide network like Charter has done in Charlotte,
    North Carolina? If you could answer that, I would appreciate
    it.
        Mr. Powell. Yes. I think you mentioned most importantly
    that efficient receipt of permitting is essential. Our members
    often, in communities, run into situations which they are ready
    to lay fiber across an enormous expanse of rural and you have
    been waiting for a permit for 2 years. This happens at both the
    Federal and the State level.
        I think there are other things about recovering
    infrastructure in disasters, like in Florida and North
    Carolina. For example, how do we get poles back up, and what
    quality poles do we put? Are we just going to put the same
    poles that blew down and broke, or are we going to improve
    those? Not only for withstanding the elements, but also being
    able to handle the expansion of broadband that we are all
    looking for in the BEAD program.
        We have had companies like Charter who have been on the
    ground in--both in L.A. and North Carolina who have learned a
    lot about how we improve coordination with power companies and
    utilities to avoid infrastructure being cut after it has been
    restored, which is something we run into a lot in these
    situations.
        So I think Congress and local governments can play a major
    role in improving the way we recover from these disasters.
        Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much.
        During his first term, President Trump signed an Executive
    order that streamlined environmental permitting processes for
    infrastructure projects, particularly highlighting projects
    that increase public safety. Due to this Executive order, Pasco
    County, Florida, which is in my congressional district, was
    able to finally get a project shovel-ready after nearly 25
    years of bureaucratic red tape, if you can believe it.
        This streamlining was eventually rolled back by President
    Biden. On Tuesday, President Trump once again signed an
    Executive order significantly streamlining the environmental
    permitting process for infrastructure projects. Some experts
    are even suggesting this order could cut down permitting
    timelines from the better part of a decade down to 1 year, or
    under 1 year.
        Mr. Gillen, historically, about how much time and money is
    spent on the environmental review process as opposed to
    physically building the networks to reach new customers and/or
    improve service for existing customers?
        Mr. Gillen. According to the Commerce Department stats, it
    can take well over 2 years, which an often case is a decision
    of whether or not we are going to build or not. Particularly
    when we have the conversation, you dovetail spectrum policy, we
    are not getting spectrum out quickly and then how quickly can
    we actually deploy it on the permitting side to get sites built
    to build networks further out. And then oftentimes the cost is
    considerable, but the time is really what hurts and our ability
    to actually build out those facilities as quickly as we want
    to.
        So I think any steps to modernize those permitting programs
    to allow us to do that more quickly with more certainty,
    transparency, can be a game changer in terms of how quickly we
    can amplify what you do on spectrum.
        Mr. Bilirakis. Very good. Thank you.
        I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank the gentleman for yielding back.
        I now recognize the Representative from California, Mr.
    Peters, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am looking forward
    to working with you on this subcommittee.
        It is the first time I have been on this subcommittee. One
    of the benefits of seniority--besides creaky knees--is, when
    the third committee comes around, you can choose--choose a new
    one. So I am happy to be here.
        And throughout my time in Congress, I have prioritized some
    of the main pillars of our economy in San Diego, two of which I
    think are directly implicated here, just science and
    innovation, and also our military presence.
        In San Diego we take pride that our industries are at the
    forefront of innovation. Qualcomm is headquartered at my
    district. It plays a pivotal role in the progress of 5G and 6G
    technologies and what we can achieve with a balanced spectrum
    policy.
        Common complaint I hear from innovators like Qualcomm is
    that more spectrum is needed to meet demand from an
    increasingly online population and to be able to compete with
    competitors abroad, and we have already talked extensively
    about that in some ways.
        Mr. Gillen, can you describe a little bit about the
    increasing demand for low cost--low-cost, high-quality
    broadband services and how that relates to the need to make
    spectrum more commercially available?
        Mr. Gillen. Absolutely. One of the exciting things 5G has
    created is our ability to compete in the home broadband market.
    So we can now provide an option in both rural areas and areas
    where we have not had as much competition as you have,
    traditional mobile space. But we have seen that to be a greatly
    attractive product. Ten million households have signed up to
    that product.
        But ultimately, at the end of the day, the ability to
    deliver that service, the promise of $8 billion by one study is
    savings to households if we could roll that out. We don't have
    enough spectrum to actually keep delivering that everywhere. We
    already have a company with a million-person waiting list. More
    spectrum means that person has broadband.
        Mr. Peters. Right. How efficient would you say the wireless
    industry is with the current spectrum holdings and what
    opportunities are there for the Federal Government to be more
    efficient with the spectrum that it uses?
        Mr. Gillen. It is a critical question. We all need to be
    more efficient. I think, if you think about it from our
    perspective, 20 years ago, this was cutting-edge wireless
    technology. We reinvent every 10 years. Our network gets
    created. We get more efficient. We are 42 times more efficient.
    We have government systems from the 1970s still out there.
        So it really is a matter for all of us to be in a position
    to make sure that those equipment--that we get the government
    better resources, better tools to be as efficient as we can be
    as well.
        Mr. Peters. I used to carry around a slide rule. That is
    really going back.
        The IIJA, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act,
    directed the Department of Defense to study and plan for making
    specific segments of spectrum available for shared Federal and
    non-Federal use to potentially identify frequencies for
    auction.
        Mr. Powell, given your service in the military and as a
    former Chairman of the FCC, can you tell me why it is important
    for the Federal Government to take a comprehensive approach,
    including national security implications, when studying
    spectrum currently used by DoD for potential commercial use?
        Mr. Powell. Yes. I think we have all celebrated the value
    of spectrum, but we need to understand it is valuable for
    multiple important public uses. Not only commercial uses for
    consumers and businesses, but critical systems this Nation
    relies on, everything from NASA to OSHA to--the Oceanographic
    isn't what I meant--and our national security.
        I was a soldier in the field. I was a cavalry scout, and
    you know what I was trained to do when the Russians come
    through the gap? Find the antennas. I mean, it is critical to
    shut down command-and-control systems in the military because
    that spectrum is essential to their ability to operate.
    Similarly, that spectrum is essential to intercepting
    intercontinental ballistic missiles like the dome over Israel,
    for example. You imagine if they didn't have the effective
    spectrum for that system, things would be very, very different
    in that community.
        So it is essential with the military, and we have to work
    it out. There is no ``just take it from them and we will be
    fine,'' right? We have to have a public answer to how we
    replicate anything we compromise.
        And so the EMBRSS process in which--the EMBRSS report, in
    which the DoD studied the feasibility of sharing, came to the
    conclusion that it was possible to share.
        And, frankly, if we had accepted that recommendation then,
    we would be well on our way to providing a spectrum to market
    under a shared-spectrum model. But for whatever reason,
    including opposition by the wireless industry, it got restudied
    by the NTIA because somehow people didn't like the answer. But
    if we really wanted the spectrum, we could have moved off of
    that report.
        Mr. Peters. Well, I am looking forward to talking more
    about this with you. I have the military in my ear and Qualcomm
    in my ear----
        Mr. Powell. Yes.
        Mr. Peters [continuing]. And I think the people do send us
    here to work things out. And so that is what I like to do, and
    look forward to working with you all.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank the gentleman for yielding back.
        I will now recognize the Representative from Florida, Mr.
    Dunn, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Dunn. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. As a returning
    member of the subcommittee, I want to remind my colleagues,
    what we map out for national spectrum usage sets the stage for
    all telecommunications nationally and, importantly, for the
    entire world.
        I would like to emphasize the advantages that we enjoy in
    this particular Congress. We not only have Republican control
    of the House, Senate, and the administration, but we have a
    President who actually understands spectrum policy and was very
    successful in spearheading some innovative and competitive
    policies in his first term.
        I am going to read a statement from Brendan Carr, Chairman
    Carr, that highlights the successes. From '17 through '20, the
    FCC freed up roughly 6,000 megahertz of spectrum for licensed
    use alone, plus thousands of additional megahertz for spectrum
    for unlicensed use. The Trump administration put four times as
    much spectrum into the commercial marketplace for consumer use
    in one term than the last administration studied to put into
    use.
        Two years ago, Congress allowed spectrum auction authority
    to lapse for the first time in three decades. This is while
    China edges into the lead on spectrum occupation and the
    offerings of its associated technologies. It is on the members
    of this committee in this room to lead on spectrum policy, to
    direct or authorize the FCC to enact authorization to auction
    these critical and finite resources.
        And it starts by asking one general question: How much
    spectrum does the--America need for commercial use, and how
    much do we need for government use, and can they share the
    resource? And next: What are our licensed versus unlicensed
    needs for the commercial sector to innovate and grow? Can we
    strengthen sustained U.S. leadership in the field, or will we
    continue to lose ground in China?
        Three years ago--several years ago, the U.S. lagged as a
    country in adopting 3G technology. Europe got ahead of us. The
    tables turned when we switched from 3G to 4G, and America was
    ahead. So now as we get to 5G and 6G, we are competing with a
    cutthroat adversary, China.
        And I want to caution us that, as Americans, we may feel
    entitled to win every big tech race and advancement, but that
    is by no means guaranteed unless we protect the
    telecommunications infrastructure wireless ecosystem. And that
    includes working with the ITU and the World Radio Conference.
    It also includes addressing priorities like diversifying
    spectrum uses for streamlining, for satellites, space, AI, et
    cetera.
        All of this, you know, to keep foreign adversaries out of
    our telecom. And I believe, by the way, our adversaries have
    proven their hostile intentions by disrupting at least six
    submarine cables in the last few months alone.
        With my esteemed colleagues on this subcommittee enjoying
    bipartisan, pro-American approach to technological innovation,
    which is fundamental in finding solutions to inner-agency
    debates and political disputes standing in the way of America's
    global competitiveness, and I look forward to finding
    solutions. And I trust this panel to help us.
        Ms. Rinaldo, I was fascinated by your testimony. In your
    opinion, what is the safest and most secure path for the
    expansion of commercial use of spectrum bands, and given your
    expertise in Open RAN space, can you tell us what you see in
    the future for that technology, how we're expanding the usage
    of Open RAN, and where we go from here?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Well, if I could give you one little quick
    vignette to really get your mind wrapped around it. Canada in
    2022 banned Huawei. They are going to be replaced just like we
    are. One of the executives at Telus has publicly said by 2029,
    they are going to be 100 percent Open RAN because he never
    wants to be in this position ever again.
        Vendor lock is such a big part of this. So we talk about
    vendor diversity, but it is also about the vendor lock. It is
    going to allow you to be nimble, make updates as needed. So it
    really does have the power of national security concerns, as
    well as commercial connectivity.
        Mr. Dunn. Thank you very much for that. You know, I am
    looking at a list of questions here. I know I am going to run
    out of time before I get there, but I am going to submit
    questions to everyone on the panel. And all too often, we do
    not get responses--I will say that--when we ask for written
    responses.
        This is not a gotcha moment. This is a chance for you to
    educate Congress, improve your government, and I am sure you
    recognize the need for that. So please think of us as a
    receiving antenna and not a--not a nosey, imposing government.
        And so with that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank the gentleman for yielding back.
        I will now recognize the Representative from Illinois, Ms.
    Kelly, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Ms. Kelly. Thank you, Chair Hudson--and thank you for the
    peanuts--and Ranking Member Matsui for holding this morning's
    hearing, and thanks to all of our witnesses for participating.
        You have heard some concerns already about how spectrum
    auction proceeds will be spent. I think Congress should invest
    its money in ways that benefit local communities and public
    interest objectives. For instance, last Congress in our
    bipartisan spectrum bill, some auction revenues were directed
    towards HBCUs and other MSIs to help them increase broadband
    adoption in their local communities.
        As one of the cochairs of the Predominantly Black
    Institution or PBI Caucus, I know such funding would have
    enormous benefits, as these communities are too often
    underresourced and lack affordable, reliable internet
    connectivity.
        Mr. Lewis, do you agree that directing revenues towards
    expanding broadband adoption in communities served by HBCUs and
    MSIs is a worthwhile investment, and if so, why?
        Mr. Lewis. I would say yes. When I talked about digital
    inclusion efforts on the ground, many of them are being led by
    folks in and of specific communities, whether it is the Black
    community or Hispanic community, at HBCUs or MSIs. And so, yes,
    I think those dollars are incredibly important to--to support
    folks who know the local community well in getting people
    connected.
        Ms. Kelly. And my district is urban, suburban, and rural,
    and I have 4,500 farms in my district. So I can relate to what
    my colleagues on both sides have been saying about their
    constituents.
        The expiration of the Affordable Connectivity Program, or
    the ACP, poses a significant challenge for low-income
    households that depended on it to afford internet services.
    Unlicensed spectrum technology such as WiFi has provided
    connectivity across all income levels due to its wide
    distribution and deployment. We have seen schools and libraries
    utilize WiFi to help connect their students and patrons.
        Mr. Lewis, can you talk about the role WiFi can play in
    connecting the unconnected, particularly with the expiration of
    ACP?
        Mr. Lewis. It is a powerful tool. You see libraries and
    schools loaning out WiFi hotspots for students who don't have
    connectivity at home. I know we did that years ago in
    Alexandria when I was on the school board.
        The unlicensed is also important for continuing to support
    the next generation of diverse scientists and engineers. You
    talk about HBCUs. They are generating the vast majority of
    Black scientists and engineers in this country. If those
    schools don't have access to unlicensed spectrum to--to study
    new innovations and develop new devices and new innovations,
    then they miss out on those opportunities.
        Ms. Kelly. Thank you. Mr. Powell, your written testimony
    notes that shared spectrum models are the key to meeting our
    growing wireless needs, and you go on to list some of the
    advantages of shared spectrum.
        What is it about these shared spectrum bands that make them
    attractive to a wide range of different entities, including
    ISPs, schools, libraries, and manufacturers?
        Mr. Powell. I think the important thing to emphasize is
    when you do shared spectrum like we did in CBRS, you attract a
    whole bunch of bidders who win licenses, not just a single
    company or couple of companies.
        So, for example, in CBRS, 228 companies or entities won
    licenses. And when you use those licenses, they are lower-
    power, smaller geography, so it allows innovation in
    communities to set up their own wireless networks.
        For example, you referenced HBCUs. Howard University is
    using shared CBRS spectrum on its campus today as a consequence
    of the shared-spectrum policy and the CBRS option. You
    mentioned agriculture. There are places all over the country
    that are using CBRS to manage moisture control, automatic
    temperatures.
        These are bands that they would have never had access to
    but for the shared model.
        Ms. Kelly. You kind of--my next question was, How has the
    development of CBR service or CBRS advanced precision
    agriculture--you know, how has that been affected?
        Mr. Powell. Yes. As I mentioned, you know, there is a
    company called Hurst Greenery in Missouri that has 600 acres of
    greenhouses, and they use CBRS shared spectrum in order to
    control fertilizer feeds in order to check moisture of--
    moisture in the soil as well as to automatically control
    temperature control. And they were able to access that as a
    consequence of that FCC auction.
        Ms. Kelly. My increase in farms join me to join my
    colleague, Rep Latta, in leading the House-passed Precision
    Agriculture Satellite Connectivity Act, which asks the FCC to
    review its rules for certain satellite services to see if there
    are rule changes that can be made to promote precision
    agriculture.
        So thank you, Mr. Chair, and I yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank the gentlelady for yielding back.
        The Chair now recognizes the Representative from
    Pennsylvania, Mr. Joyce, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Joyce. Thank you, Chairman Hudson and Ranking Member
    Matsui, for holding this hearing and to our witnesses for
    testifying.
        I appreciate that this subcommittee is starting with a
    topic that is clearly at the top of everyone's mind, and that
    is spectrum. The Energy and Commerce Committee has a long-
    standing commitment to smart, bipartisan policies that both
    modernize and govern spectrum use. Our jurisdiction is on the
    issue, and it has a storied history. And I am looking forward
    to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle on
    this issue.
        Spectrum is a finite resource, and we must ensure that we
    are being innovative and thoughtful when forming any spectrum
    legislation moving forward. Solving this spectrum auction
    authority lapse and generating new spectrum policy is my top
    priority on this subcommittee, and I look forward to working
    with Chairman Hudson on getting this across the finish line.
        Mr. Powell, speaking of innovation, your members have
    leveraged spectrum and its high-speed broadband networks in
    many groundbreaking ways and are becoming fast-growing mobile
    providers. Can you describe this incredible growth and
    competition and the role that unlicensed and shared spectrum
    have been playing?
        Mr. Powell. Yes. You can look at how we innovatively use
    the spectrum that was available to enter the mobile telephone
    market as the fourth major player. So we use WiFi where 80 to
    90 percent of our traffic goes over that infrastructure. We
    should remember, 90 percent of the time human beings are
    indoors, and so they have access to that spectrum.
        And then we use shared spectrum and we use exclusive
    license spectrum. And by doing that, we have been able to
    create a service that is dramatically cheaper than other
    wireless plans. Plans from the cable companies on mobile
    services, on average, save consumers up to $700 a year on their
    mobile wireless services being offered by cable companies.
        Mr. Joyce. Mr. Gillen, can you speak to the ways in which
    your members have utilized licensed spectrum to innovate in the
    wireless space, and to what extent that--has the lapse in
    auction authority affected your ability to innovate?
        Mr. Gillen. It is a great question. I think we talked a
    little bit about 5G home, an example of providing the second or
    third choice in home broadband right now, thanks to the power
    of 5G home. The 20 percent of those subscribers are new to
    broadband altogether as an ability of wireless to get deeper in
    those communities makes a big difference, and the differences
    can be stark. It is up to $8 billion in savings to consumers
    thanks to that competition.
        As a practical matter, we already have companies out there
    that have waiting lists because there is not enough spectrum to
    continue to feed that competitive spirit. And so across the
    board, the more spectrum we have, the better we can compete
    both in the mobile space and in the fixed space.
        Mr. Joyce. And continuing, Mr. Gillen, during the first
    Trump administration, 100 megahertz of prime midband spectrum
    was auctioned in the 3.45-into-3.55 gigahertz band for $22
    billion. Estimated relocation costs by DoD were over $13
    billion, but according to NTIA, less than $300 million have
    been spent.
        Is that band currently operational by commercial users, and
    if so, are they currently operating with incumbent DoD
    operations?
        Mr. Gillen. Absolutely. I think when we talk about shared
    spectrum, there's different types of shared spectrum. There is
    dynamic sharing, where it is actually real time and
    preemptible. That makes it hard for us to be used reliably.
        There is other spectrum like you are alluding to. Some
    systems are moving out their government system, some stay. And
    the best thing we can do is get engineer to engineer together
    as to which systems belong here, which systems can be used more
    smartly elsewhere.
        I think one of the auctions you just referred to is one of
    those places that the money that is left over right now is
    earmarked for the Navy to design a better radar that could help
    in the drone environment. And so, part of the magic of auctions
    is the Spectrum Relocation Fund Congress created creates win-
    win opportunities that we can actually help the government get
    the tools they need for the modern warfare environment that we
    have now.
        So how do we get smarter? How do we share better? And we
    have a lot of tools available that we actually know can work,
    both the military radars can work, and we can coexist with 5G.
        Mr. Joyce. Do you think, Mr. Gillen, that the innovation
    that can occur with the United States Navy and other military
    is a byproduct of the additional funds that occur through
    spectrum auction?
        Mr. Gillen. Absolutely. This is a key piece of the puzzle
    to help them continue to advance and improve what they need
    us--what we all need them to do: keep us safe.
        Mr. Joyce. Ms. Rinaldo, what policy priorities should
    Congress have when addressing development spectrum policies in
    this Congress? Are there issues in spectrum--with your
    experience, what you bring to the table--that have not been
    addressed and you want to be seeing in this Congress occurring?
        Ms. Rinaldo. So I would say, first and foremost, good
    oversight. We need a plan, we need to implement that plan, and
    we need to make sure that we have oversight to hold everyone's
    feet to the fire.
        Mr. Joyce. Thank you.
        Mr. Chairman, again, thank you for holding this important
    spectrum hearing today.
        Mr. Allen [presiding]. Thank you, Dr. Joyce.
        And now I recognize Representative Barragan from California
    for 5 minutes for questioning.
        Ms. Barragan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this
    hearing on American Leadership in Wireless Technology. I would
    love to hear about the bipartisanship, and there is bipartisan
    agreement on the importance of extending spectrum auction
    authority to support our wireless networks and further
    innovation.
        However, I think it is critical the American people know
    how we plan to use tens of billions of dollars that will be
    raised from the spectrum auction, and I also have concerns
    about reports that Republicans may propose to use the revenue
    from spectrum auctions to give out tax cuts to billionaires and
    corporations. Instead, I believe that we should be using those
    dollars, investing in things to benefit all Americans such as
    through broadband and through public safety initiatives.
        Mr. Lewis, I am going to start with you. After witnessing
    firsthand the devastating impacts of the recent wildfires in
    the Los Angeles area, it is clear how important it is to have a
    strong emergency communication when disasters strike. We often
    hear about people on the wrong side of the digital divide and
    how they miss out on essential education, health, and commerce
    opportunities, and you touched upon this topic briefly, but you
    kind of ran out of time. So I want to follow up.
        If you could talk more about what it means when entire
    communities still have old, out-of-date 9-1-1 systems.
        Mr. Lewis. I think without NG 9-1-1 you have less--you have
    slower responses. You have missed opportunities to get location
    information from people's mobile devices, other communication
    beyond phones, like texting, that help people reach emergency
    services faster.
        And so it is incredibly important that we continue to
    deploy NG 9-1-1 everywhere.
        Ms. Barragan. Thank you. I think that is one of the reasons
    we should invest money from things like spectrum auctions and
    important communications priority like the Next Gen 9-1-1.
        Mr. Gillen, I want to follow up with you. How do wireless
    networks support public safety communications and emergency
    alerts, and are there any additional measures we should
    consider to ensure people in emergencies receive timely, life-
    saving information to improve response efforts?
        Mr. Gillen. Thank you for the question. And I think the
    last few weeks have reinforced the importance of that program.
        The wireless emergency alerts, we have sent over 84,000
    during that program. And one of the things we have learned
    recently is we have continued to add more functionality to that
    program. So before it went out through a broad area, we
    increasingly allow smaller geographic areas to go out, we give
    options as to how often a message is broadcast in your
    community in case your phone is off or other things.
        I think some of the challenges we saw the last few weeks
    underscores that we need to partner with those public safety
    originators who actually start the alert process as to how the
    tools work and what actually happens. But I think at its core,
    it is a critical functionality that we are proud to be able to
    help.
        We need to always continue to work to make that program
    stronger both in terms of how the originators add to it and the
    functionality we create both for consumers and for the public
    safety.
        Ms. Barragan. Thank you.
        Mr. Powell, there is a significant workforce shortage
    across the telecommunications sector, with tens of thousands of
    skilled workers needed to meet current and future demands. What
    steps are the companies you represent taking to address the
    shortage, and particularly through workforce development and
    engagement with underrepresented communities?
        Mr. Powell. Yes. This actually is a very serious problem.
    It is one of the big problems with the BEAD infrastructure
    program. Our expectations of what we are going to be able to
    build falls short of the amount of workforce available to build
    it.
        Consequently, our companies have focused on a number of
    significant workforce training programs. Some of them include
    particularly programs targeted at veterans. We have some
    programs targeted at young people to help them learn the skills
    and develop engineering talents that allow them to move into
    the cable industry. And we have very ongoing efforts daily in
    order to bring people into a company and train them.
        This is not simple cut-and-paste work. It is important,
    high-quality work, and we are committed to continuing to build
    a workforce that can allow us to bring broadband to every
    corner of the country.
        Ms. Barragan. Thank you.
        Mr. Gillen, is there anything you want to add about what--
    the companies you represent, what they may be doing, any policy
    recommendations, how Congress can help fill the gaps?
        Mr. Gillen. I echo everything that Chairman Powell said. We
    need to be in a position to have the workforce ready. I think
    the Wireless Industry Association is a great apprenticeship
    program. I think we are all working together to get people into
    this. These are good-paying jobs. These are good opportunities.
        I think one of the things Congress can do is if we know
    over the next 5 to 10 years when spectrum is coming--those
    tower companies know when the work is coming. So right now when
    you talk about gaps in time between auctions and everything
    else, we don't know when the next one is coming. And so I think
    when you are looking at companies with tower builders across
    this ecosystem, the more certainty we can provide is a roadmap
    to, like, I can hire because I know the work is going to be
    there.
        So I think the more certainty you can provide, but we would
    welcome your support because the workforce is critical to
    achieving everything we are doing.
        Ms. Barragan. Great. Thank you.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Allen. Thank you, Representative Barragan.
        Now, I recognize Representative Fulcher from Idaho for 5
    minutes for questioning.
        Mr. Fulcher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To the panel, thank
    you for being here today. We always learn something, and every
    time I listen to you all talk, I realize that I know about a
    fraction of what I need to know about some of these things. And
    so thank you for being here.
        A couple of questions just for clarification. Mr. Gillen, I
    come from a State with a lot of space. There is a lot of rural
    area in Idaho, but it is growing. And the needs are growing
    rapidly. It is a fast-growing State, a lot of open space, a lot
    of Federal land, all that.
        We have touched on some of this, but just for clarification
    purposes, would you just share, what is the cost of us doing
    nothing? What if we do nothing in regard to licensed spectrum
    shortage, identifying that? What is the cost of that?
        Mr. Gillen. The cost of it is, at its core, at some point
    this is going to stop working the way that you expect it to
    work. A lot of the innovation and expectations we want to talk
    about, whether it is AI or anything else, isn't going to have
    that platform to ride on. So that we are going to need to make
    sure from a licensed perspective and an unlicensed perspective,
    we have enough spectrum to actually meet our daily needs.
        The first thing you notice in high-traffic areas, you are
    going to see slowing down. And that is going to get
    progressively worse. But what it really is, we are accustomed
    to our wireless service getting better each and every year.
    Without more spectrum, that can't happen.
        Mr. Fulcher. Thank you for that. So that just shows the
    urgency that we are under here. I wanted to clarify that.
        Mr. Powell, good to see you again. Thanks for joining us
    here today. On a similar topic, let's go to WiFi just for a
    moment. I would like to get your input. WiFi handles, as we
    have talked about, a lot more traffic than any other wireless
    technology. WiFi 7 is coming. Can you touch on that and just
    tell us what--what from your vantage point, what is that going
    to bring, and what does this mean for spectrum policies as we
    advance WiFi?
        Mr. Powell. Yes. If you had walked the floor of the
    Consumer Electronics Show this past January, you would have
    seen a ton of emphasis on WiFi 7. WiFi 7 is a next-generation
    technology that, in short, allows faster--faster use, faster
    data rates and wider channels.
        One of the things we are having to manage in the home is an
    explosion of devices that need to be utilized on the same
    network. So when you get wider channels, you are able to get
    applications that require lower latency. So, for example, 4K or
    8K video, or another example would be virtual reality systems
    of any type, and gaming.
        So WiFi 7 is essentially critical to the kind of devices
    that are coming into the home and coming into the market as we
    continue to innovate.
        Mr. Fulcher. And also important for research, research
    development, being unlicensed spectrum?
        Mr. Powell. Oh, 100 percent. You know, we continue to use
    WiFi in research environments, medical environments,
    environments that have heavy reliance on it. And the more we
    have these advanced systems, the better we will be.
        Mr. Fulcher. Thank you for that.
        Ms. Rinaldo, I would like to steer a question to you. The
    Open RAN situation is an exciting one. Personally, as I hear
    you talk and as I just think through some of the things we have
    been through, I am concerned about equipment made by some of
    our adversaries. You mentioned the Huawei and some of that,
    some of those things that, quite frankly, at least some of us
    don't think can be trusted.
        What steps, if any, do you think that we should be taking
    in a leadership role to encourage trusted equipment, American
    equipment--whether it is American or anybody else, but trusted
    equipment? What steps should we be taking?
        Ms. Rinaldo. So the two biggest things that we face right
    now is lack of the deployable spectrum here in the United
    States--how do we get spectrum authority back up and going, how
    can we make more spectrum available?
        Also, as we look internationally, I would say how we use
    our investments, our international assistance programs. For
    instance, EXIM Bank, they have risk caps associated with, and
    telecom is such an infrastructure-heavy industry, we always
    bump up against those caps, and so no telecom projects are able
    to get funded.
        So we are currently working with Congress on legislation
    that would allow EXIM to waive risk if we are going up against
    a Huawei or a ZTE. So those are a handful of items that could
    really help make a difference in getting Open RAN deployed
    around the world.
        Mr. Fulcher. Great. Thank you for that.
        Mr. Chairman, I do have more questions but not enough time
    to ask them, so I am going to put those in written form. With
    that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Allen. Thank you, Representative Fulcher, for yielding.
        Next is Representative Menendez from New Jersey.
        You have 5 minutes for questioning, sir.
        Mr. Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Spectrum is one of our most valuable public resources. It
    has become a cornerstone of modern life for American families,
    enabling smartphones, navigation systems, telehealth services,
    emergency alerts, aviation systems like air traffic control,
    and the list goes on.
        How we manage our radio airwaves has a propound impact on
    access to and affordability of essential services,
    technological innovation, and digital inclusion, so it is vital
    that Federal spectrum policy is designed to support and benefit
    all Americans. This requires a range of spectrum access regimes
    that include both exclusive and shared-use licenses for
    reliable networks and access to unlicensed spectrum that
    supports innovation. Achieving the right balance is critical.
        Mr. Lewis, would you agree that if we use auction proceeds
    to invest in our digital infrastructure and programs that serve
    the public interest, we can further unlock the next generation
    of American innovation and close the digital divide?
        Mr. Lewis. Yes. I think it meets the mission of the
    Communications Act to do so and fills the gaps that we have in
    making sure that everyone is connected.
        Mr. Menendez. Great. And I agree. That is why I join
    Ranking Member Pallone in his concern of reports that our
    Republican colleagues are instead preparing to use
    reconciliation to put spectrum auction proceeds towards funding
    tax breaks for corporations and wealthy Americans.
        This is while we have heard a lot of talk from Republicans
    about affordability and putting America first. And here we are
    with a clear opportunity to invest in the public good in a way
    that will have a real impact on our constituents' access to
    affordable wireless services and on our Nation's ability to
    lead the world in wireless innovation.
        So this is a moment of truth, and I invite my colleagues
    across the aisle to make good on their promises and join us in
    making life more affordable for American families, to make our
    communities safer by improving FirstNet, and to maintain
    America's leadership in technological innovation.
        Mr. Lewis, I believe Federal spectrum policies must serve
    the public interest first and foremost. As we discuss extending
    the FCC's auction authority, we must be intentional about how
    licenses can provide the maximum benefit to our constituents.
        How should the FCC design spectrum licenses to ensure that
    wireless services are more accessible and affordable for our
    constituents?
        Mr. Lewis. I think it starts by using the new spectrum
    access models that have been studied to get the greatest
    benefit and the greatest efficiency of the use. We have heard
    at this hearing just how different bands can be used for
    multiple uses at the same time, including the military, while
    the mobile license carriers are using it, as well as unlicensed
    smaller power uses, all at the same time and managed through
    dynamic spectrum sharing.
        So finding the most efficient uses, I think, is incredibly
    important and then, after that, running auctions with the
    authority from Congress, hopefully, that produce additional
    public-interest benefits like NG 9-1-1.
        Mr. Menendez. That is great.
        And, building on that, how can licenses be structured to
    ensure that communities that tend to be underserved by
    commercial licenses are not deprived of digital opportunity?
        Mr. Lewis. I think the opportunity comes from those sharing
    examples. We have already seen some of this happen. You know,
    in the CBRS band, there are great opportunities for some of the
    most unconnected communities in rural areas--Tribal areas,
    especially, are our most unconnected--to use spectrum that is
    not being used, that may have licenses, but--prioritized, but
    creates opportunities for them to have community-owned built
    networks. And I think that is in the spirit of some of the
    relationships we have with our Tribal communities.
        So that is one example. There are many others.
        Mr. Menendez. Yes. That is great. And I would love to
    continue the conversation, but I am down to the last minute.
        In your past testimony, you noted that auctions, if
    designed correctly, have the potential to reshape the
    workforce. How can licenses be structured to promote a robust
    and diverse spectrum workforce and increase supplier diversity?
        Mr. Lewis. We have seen the FCC meet their statutory
    mandate to promote vendor diversity.
        They have the Office of Communications Business
    Opportunities that helps connect women and minority vendors to
    opportunities to work with larger carriers and big providers.
        They have created the ECIP program, which promotes taking
    licensed spectrum but creating a secondary market so that, if
    it is not being used by the large carriers, other groups can
    come and get access to that spectrum.
        So there are great opportunities if we design it and
    continue those programs.
        Mr. Menendez. That is great.
        I appreciate you all so much for being here.
        And I yield back.
        Mr. Hudson [presiding]. I thank the gentleman for yielding
    back.
        I now recognize the Representative from Texas, Mr. Pfluger,
    for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Pfluger. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I appreciate
    the opportunity to have this hearing.
        I will start with Mr. Gillen.
        I would like to talk about the EMBRSS report. And,
    basically, DoD, NTIA concluded that the 3 gigahertz band
    couldn't be cleared for exclusive use. So I kind of want to
    talk through a sharing model or a segment model.
        And, really, what I want to hear is what needs to happen,
    especially from DoD. What do we need DoD to come back with? How
    do we need to work together? What settings are we expecting
    that to happen in?
        I am familiar with this band, I have used it in my
    professional career, and kind of want to get to the bottom of
    where we need to go processwise.
        Mr. Gillen. Absolutely. And I think there has just been a
    misunderstanding amongst everybody as to what our goal here is.
        You think about the lower 3 gigahertz spectrum. It is 350
    megahertz. That is almost as much spectrum as 5G has available
    for it. No one thinks all those radars should go away. That is
    a bad idea. And too much of this conversation is, ``Oh, we need
    $200 billion and 20 years'' to do something that no one is
    asking them to do. Ultimately, we need to get to a place that
    we have engineer-to-engineer.
        We think segmentation makes the most sense around what is
    happening globally. So, if you look at just the top 150, and
    then in that top 150, what are those systems? There are
    systems--there is a missile defense facility in Alaska. No one
    should move that. There is no need to move that. There is
    AWACS, there is the airborne system out there that is going to
    get replaced by Wedgetail in 2032. So let's talk about what is
    available in 2032.
        There are other systems--let's say it is using Channel 5.
    It is like an old TV. Can it work on Channel 3? Other systems,
    can we talk about--can we use it, smaller channels, if we
    actually invest? Some of the money from the last auction is
    going to the Navy to move S radars to X radars that are
    actually better in a drone environment.
        So we think that we have to get away from a binary choice,
    it is either the military or wireless. We need both. We just
    need to be smarter and more efficient.
        Mr. Pfluger. Yes.
        Mr. Gillen. And we need to start with getting engineers
    talking on a system-by-system basis, understanding your needs,
    understanding our needs, and making everybody stronger.
        Mr. Pfluger. Well, I couldn't agree more. And I think,
    working together--and I used those AI radars. I flew those
    aircraft. I used the services of aircraft like AWACS. And I
    think the time and geographic--the ability to bifurcate those
    and to separate--so I want to explore more on the segmentation
    process.
        Mr. Powell, I will let you answer there, and I have a
    question for Ms. Rinaldo after that.
        Mr. Powell. Well, I think I can only incrementally add
    that, I mean, the answer we just heard sounded a little bit
    like finding ways to share. And that is exactly what we are
    supporting.
        I think the big conflict is, are we going to move
    forcefully in that direction, following the examples and
    precedents we have had in the past to do so, or are we going to
    continue to fight over how much we can actually take away for
    full power and exclusive use by the commercial industry?
        I mean, I appreciate that you could go through system by
    system, but I think we also have to respect the military
    experts' judgments on what they need and how they need it.
    Those of us in industry, engineers or otherwise, aren't
    necessarily the best people to make those national security
    decisions.
        Mr. Pfluger. Do you feel like that we have been together in
    the right rooms at the right classification level to understand
    each other?
        Mr. Powell. I probably don't have enough direct experience
    to answer that question, but I would say, look, there is a
    component of what happens on the military side that stays
    behind the confidential curtain. You have to trust that people
    are protecting things that must be protected. But, typically,
    we learn enough about what they are doing to have a pretty good
    appreciation of what the sort of range of possibilities is.
        Mr. Pfluger. I am convinced that we can share. I am
    convinced that there is a plan that we can make work. And,
    actually, the benefit will be innovation, and that will benefit
    DoD as well. It is a finite band.
        Ms. Rinaldo, I will come to you. In your testimony, you
    talk about the role of standard-setting bodies, such as the
    World Radio Conference--Radio Communications Conference, and
    what that plays in shaping technology.
        I think there are some concerns about that process and
    concerns about getting to that conference and having the U.S.
    take a leadership role. What needs to change in that process?
    And how do we affect it better beforehand?
        Ms. Rinaldo. So I think there has been a lot of chaos going
    into the WRC. And it is so incredibly important that we go in
    and we have debate, right, we have the fight in the room. That
    is where great ideas happen.
        But then when we leave that room, we need to have a
    decisive decision, and people need to stick to that decision.
    And that has been the breakdown. So, if we are at WRC and we
    are still fighting, then our adversary is winning.
        Mr. Pfluger. Mr. Chairman, great hearing today. Our
    national security depends on this. I am convinced that
    innovation will result from moving forward with an auction.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. I appreciate the gentleman yielding back. And I
    appreciate your perspective on this. I think your experience in
    the military uniquely qualifies you to help us figure this out.
    And I think this committee is determined, on both sides of the
    aisle, to figure this out. So thank you.
        The Chair now recognizes the Representative from Virginia,
    Ms. McClellan, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Ms. McClellan. Thank you, Chairman Hudson and Ranking
    Member Matsui, for convening today's hearing.
        As many of you know, I began my legal career a little over
    a year after the Telecommunications Act of 1996 passed. That is
    how I started as a lawyer. I ended as a lawyer, right before
    coming here 2 years ago, figuring out how to implement the BEAD
    program and to expand broadband.
        I have witnessed first--I had a front-row seat at the
    table, witnessing the transition of the telecom industry from
    regulated monopoly, where mainly landline was the form of
    communication, to now a WiFi-based, wireless-based, data-based
    industry. And I have seen firsthand the explosion in the use of
    and the demand for more bandwidth, for more and more data,
    growing at an explosive rate.
        So I am very excited that my first hearing as a member of
    this committee has brought me back home, dealing with issues
    that I have dealt with since I was a baby lawyer.
        And, with that, I would like to first focus on the
    discussion we have had about spectrum being a finite natural
    resource that does form the foundation for technical innovation
    in our dramatically increasing digital world. Its allocation
    and utilization carries significant potential to either bridge
    or widen the digital divide, particularly for our rural,
    underrepresented, and marginalized communities.
        And so, for Mr. Powell and Mr. Lewis, could you elaborate
    on the benefits of unlicensed spectrum, including how it has
    historically driven innovation and expanded connectivity,
    especially in underserved, rural, and Tribal communities?
        Mr. Powell. Thanks. I am happy to go first.
        I would say a couple things real quickly.
        First of all, it is important to understand how much value
    WiFi brought to the typical American family over the way the
    internet first unfolded. When I was first at the FCC, you paid
    $60, you got a single connection, and you got one computer to
    operate on that connection. Today, that price is about the same
    and every single person in the house can use it. So you have
    dramatically increased the value and the affordability of the
    service for all communities.
        Secondly, the thing that we are learning is WiFi is very
    effective as a public resource. Anybody can get on it--in the
    airport, in the public park, in the library, in the famed
    McDonald's parking lots where students have studied at times.
    During the pandemic, we wouldn't have survived without WiFi
    being able to allow us to operate at home.
        The other thing is, as we move to share models, we are
    learning that people can take matters into their own hands. I
    have a great respect for the wireless industry. They are great,
    but they have challenges in building out infrastructure. But
    we, with CBRS, we empower local communities to set up their own
    wireless networks. We have small utilities who are able to use
    CBRS and provide services to their communities. We have small
    wireless internet service providers who use these bands that
    they are able to get at low cost to provide services to rural
    communities.
        So one thing to remember in the models that we are
    championing is that you allow anybody to take delivering
    wireless service into their own hands and use it privately--in
    manufacturing facilities, in stadiums, in football fields. The
    NFL is going to use it for all of their 24 stadiums. So it is a
    democratizing approach. And I think we think we see a lot of
    benefits that come from that.
        Mr. Lewis. Just to add on, it is democratizing in how it
    impacts folks who then get to innovate on unlicensed spectrum.
    We talked earlier about, you know, the important research that
    can be done to build new devices, and we want to see that
    happen everywhere, whether it is, you know, on HBCU campuses or
    in high schools around the country.
        It is benefiting in both rural and urban areas. You see
    WiFi create local networks in urban areas, like Harlem, and the
    most remote rural areas. Tribal communities are building on
    multiple bands. There is, in California, the EnerTribe, serving
    the Yurok and Karuk and Hoopa Tribes--``Hopa'' Tribes, I might
    have mispronounced it--where they have built their own networks
    using the shared CBRS structure but on the unlicensed level.
        Ms. McClellan. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        In my last 10 seconds, I would just like to ask, for Mr.
    Powell and Mr. Gillen, if you could share in written response
    back what steps Congress can take to ensure that vital programs
    like the now-expired Affordable Connectivity Program can foster
    greater competition in the wireless market and to drive down
    prices, while also ensuring providers have the resources
    necessary to deploy and maintain the networks that are
    necessary to provide those services.
        And, with that, I yield back.
        Mr. Gillen. We will do that. Thank you.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank you.
        The gentlewoman yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes the Representative from Georgia,
    Mr. Carter, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Carter of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        And congratulations to you, Mr. Chair, on your chairmanship
    of this subcommittee. It is a great subcommittee, and I served
    as vice chair for a while last session. I will tell you, they
    have a great team too. So you have surrounded--they have
    surrounded yourself with good people. And we appreciate it,
    because it is extremely important. This area, as we all know,
    is extremely important.
        Mr. Gillen, I want to start with you. You said today that
    we, as the U.S., are watching other countries, whether it is
    allies or rivals, make more 5G spectrum available for their 5G
    networks than it is in the U.S.
        Can you talk more about that and why other countries are
    doing--what they are doing with spectrum, why it matters? And
    specifically about China.
        Mr. Gillen. Absolutely. Thank you for the question,
    Congressman.
        You go around the world: England has twice as much of the
    spectrum that we do, Japan has three times as much. There has
    just been a recognition when you look at these demand curves,
    what are we going to need to actually meet that moment and also
    to create innovation?
        If you think about all the innovation in the sharing
    economy, all those apps, they happened in the United States
    because 4G was the best in the world in the United States. And
    we need to get back to that place in 5G.
        What we see in China is, both domestically they want to be
    able to deliver innovation, manufacturing--their pushing
    forward of the smart manufacturing--leveraging that spectrum.
    They also want to--as Ms. Rinaldo has talked about, they want
    to export their values, their equipment through spectrum
    policy.
        So, right now, globally, there are four 5G spectrum bands
    out there for the globe to use. China supports three of them.
    We support zero of them for 5G. We are not in the game right
    now to be able to help shape where our allies--where we go,
    which impacts our manufacturing base to have someone to sell
    equipment to. It impacts our ability to innovate. So----
        Mr. Carter of Georgia. OK.
        Mr. Gillen [continuing]. The faster we get back to more
    spectrum, the better off we will be.
        Mr. Carter of Georgia. Great. Thank you for that
    explanation.
        Mr. Powell, how will the unlicensed and the shared
    community help us address the China threat as it was just
    explained?
        Mr. Powell. Thank you for the question.
        One example I would like to share, which is Georgia-based,
    is the United States Marine Corps at the Logistics Base in
    Albany, Georgia, is using CBRS shared spectrum right now to
    advance our warfighters' abilities to use robotics on the
    battlefield.
        I think it is important to remember that, you know, China
    is a threat on multiple fronts, and if they invade Taiwan, we
    are going to find out the most important one is whether we are
    able to meet that threat. So CBRS shared spectrum has been a
    solution on a number of military bases to allow them to set up
    their own private networks in order to train and operate
    equipment.
        Mr. Carter of Georgia. Good. Thank you for that.
        Mr. Gillen, I want to go back to you. As you know, I
    introduced the American Broadband Deployment Act that takes
    steps to eliminate the bureaucracy and the red tape.
        And I will tell you, that is one thing we are--the Trump
    administration is going to address, is just all the permitting,
    all the regulations that go throughout all of our economy. I
    don't care if you are talking about healthcare, if you are
    talking about technology or energy--everywhere I go, everybody
    is telling me permitting, regulation is crushing us, crushing
    us.
        So, obviously, in the previous Trump FCC, they made great
    strides in this area, and Chairman Carr's leadership has been
    needed. I am wondering, do you think it is important to codify
    those changes, and should we go even further?
        Mr. Gillen. Yes. I think your bill is a key companion to
    this conversation around spectrum, that in order--particularly
    as we are waiting years to get spectrum access, we need to hit
    the ground running. And I think what Chairman Carr did
    previously on permitting reform, we need to do more. We need to
    go beyond small cells to macro cells, how do we get to Federal
    land.
        So I think your legislation is a key piece of how do we
    actually codify that commonsense modernization that we need to
    actually get people out building again.
        Mr. Carter of Georgia. Do you think spectrum would be more
    valuable if broadband permitting was faster and more
    transparent at the local and the State level?
        Mr. Gillen. Yes. It gives us a roadmap to how quickly we
    can build; if you buy that asset, how quickly can you put it on
    the towers across the country, actually delivering service to
    consumers.
        Mr. Carter of Georgia. I think that is very important, and
    I hear it all the time as well, about problems not only at the
    Federal level but at the State and local level as well, and we
    need to be assisting them in that as well.
        Mr. Gillen. Absolutely.
        Mr. Carter of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
        And thank all of you for being here. Again, this is
    extremely important. We all know that, and we recognize that.
    So your input is very valuable, and we appreciate you taking
    time out to spend with us.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. The gentleman yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes the Representative from New York,
    Ms. Clarke, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Ms. Clarke. Thank you.
        Good afternoon, everyone.
        And thank you, Chairman Hudson, and thank you, Ranking
    Member Matsui, for convening this important hearing.
        Let me also thank our panel of experts for joining us this
    afternoon.
        Finally, my warmest regards and welcome to all of my new
    colleagues on the subcommittee and the Energy and Commerce
    Committee.
        Spectrum policy is such an important part of this
    committee's jurisdiction and a fitting topic for our first
    subcommittee hearing of the 119th Congress, particularly given
    the continued lapse in the FCC's spectrum auction authority.
        While I am disappointed the Senate was unable to follow our
    lead in the 118th Congress on auction authority, I am proud of
    the work this committee has done in recent years on spectrum
    policy.
        The need to advance and enact legislation that reinstates
    auction authority and thoughtful spectrum policy is more
    important than ever, given the multiyear lapse, but it is
    equally important that we get it right.
        Spectrum is a public resource and must be treated as such.
    Our spectrum policies must carefully balance the needs of both
    Federal and non-Federal users while fostering new innovations
    that maintain our global leadership. Spectrum auction proceeds
    must also be reinvested for the public good and not as a pay-
    for for additional tax cuts for billionaires.
        This committee has historically shown an ability to work in
    a bipartisan manner to establish a creative regulatory
    framework that fosters the kind of innovation and competition
    that made us global leaders in the first place. CBRS is a prime
    example of the kind of creativity that we can achieve when we
    work together. And I believe that, together, we can break this
    logjam and advance innovative spectrum policies that serve the
    public interest.
        At the heart of this impasse is the fundamental tension
    between critical national security needs and the priorities of
    wireless carriers. Reauthorizing spectrum auction authority
    requires addressing this tension head-on. And a successful
    framework must enable technologies to coexist, ensuring that
    neither side feels the need to obstruct future attempts to
    reauthorize the authority.
        Having said that, Chairman Powell, in light of your
    response to Rep. Pfluger, what are your thoughts on spectrum-
    sharing frameworks like CBRS? And how can this help us chart a
    path forward?
        Mr. Powell. Yes. Thank you.
        Think about just the number of top-line benefits when you
    pursue spectrum in this way. Number 1, you help resolve the
    conflicts we have all been talking about. Rather than having a
    tug of war between two different important interests, we find a
    way to have them share.
        Secondly, it tracks a lot more investment. So, you know,
    when you had CBRS, you had 228 winners, not 1 or 2. They are
    all able, then, to provide a whole range of diverse services.
    You could provide wireless high-speed service, precision
    agriculture----
        Ms. Clarke. Uh-huh.
        Mr. Powell [continuing]. New networks for your school. And
    you allow people to do that without further permission from the
    government. These are enormous benefits.
        So, you know, I think, when you add that all up, it is a
    very important tool in the quiver of Congress and the United
    States Government as it tries to think about a forward-looking
    spectrum policy.
        Because, no matter what, when we resolve this band, we are
    going to be here next year and the year after talking about
    wanting more, and it is going to get harder and harder. The
    more we squeeze, the more we try to get more juice out of the
    lemon, you know, we are going to get to the pit. And we are
    going to have to find some new, creative way to continue to
    have spectrum roll off the assembly line and into the market.
        Ms. Clarke. Very well. Thank you very much.
        As we all know, different communities have different needs
    when it comes to connectivity.
        Mr. Lewis, can you discuss whether and how different
    spectrum access models affect the ability of people from
    different backgrounds, regardless of socioeconomic status, to
    access the latest wireless technology?
        Mr. Lewis. Each community can use unlicensed spectrum in
    different ways. And we are seeing some of those different
    access models allow for that flexibility.
        In rural areas, we have seen the use of TV white spaces to
    get broadband deployment out to communities that don't have it.
    We have seen--I have talked about the Tribal communities, but
    also we have seen in urban areas folks build co-ops using
    unlicensed spectrum because of both sharing models as well as
    broad unlicensed bands that the FCC has reserved. We need to
    continue to do that.
        I can't overexaggerate, I think, the importance of WiFi 7
    that was talked about earlier, the broad channels that are
    needed to make that happen so that, when we get 6G, when we
    get, you know, gigabit broadband to a lot of places, you don't
    want to have that slowdown when you get to the modem inside the
    building. WiFi 7 allows for that.
        So all these different sorts of access models are just
    critically important to keep everyone connected, whether you
    live in urban areas, densely populated areas with co-ops and
    mesh networks, or rural areas with white spaces and community-
    built networks.
        Ms. Clarke. Very well.
        I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Hudson. Thanks.
        Ms. Clarke yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes the Representative from Florida,
    Mrs. Cammack, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mrs. Cammack. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And
    congratulations on the new role. It is so great to be back at
    work on so many important issues with our colleagues.
        And, of course, spectrum, as we know, is critical to our
    economic and national security. And it has never been a
    partisan issue, which is honestly why I was so disappointed to
    hear the ranking member and several of my colleagues on the
    other side of the aisle attempt to assert that spectrum auction
    authority will be used as a means, in his words, to quote/
    unquote ``give tax cuts to billionaires'' by extending the tax
    cuts from the Trump tax cut plan.
        Now, that is clearly a hyperpartisan and false attack, and
    I highly doubt that the constituents of the ranking member's
    district in New Jersey 6 would appreciate the 19 percent annual
    tax increase across the board on working-class families, nor
    would the 98,800 families in his district appreciate their
    family's Child Tax Credit getting cut in half if we do not, in
    fact, extend the Trump tax cuts.
        A similar comment was echoed by my Democratic colleague
    from California, Ms. Barragan--which, again, I don't think that
    her constituents in California's 44th District would appreciate
    a tax increase, on average, of $1,621 annually.
        So, Mr. Chairman, I felt it appropriate to set the record
    straight, seeing as how we are only a few hours into the first
    hearing of the 119th, and attempts are already being made to
    turn this vital issue of both economic and national importance
    into a political wedge.
        So I am sure their constituents, just like mine, care
    deeply about the national and economic security and would
    appreciate folks staying focused on the primary mission here
    rather than partisan attacks.
        So, Ms. Rinaldo, you had started down a line of answering
    Representative Joyce's questions, and you had mentioned
    oversight, talking about what you would like to see Congress do
    more of in this space. Please elaborate on the oversight
    elements that you were alluding to.
        Ms. Rinaldo. Yes. So sometimes through--we have seen in the
    past, through an interagency process, the failure to come to a
    decision, and then you just get to a stalemate. I think when
    you are talking about these issues, it is so incredibly
    important to continue to move the ball forward. You, as Members
    of Congress, can provide that oversight to hold feet to the
    fire to make sure that we are able to move forward.
        Mrs. Cammack. Can you give any examples of a particular
    stalemate where a decision has kind of lingered?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Yes. So I think somebody else asked about--oh,
    actually, it was Chairman Guthrie--asked about other agencies
    looking to separate out of the IRAC system, which is the
    management of all spectrum management. That is so incredibly
    important, to keep that group together. You lose all
    efficiencies--and it does have national security implications--
    if agencies are protecting on their own terms and not through
    the collective good of the entire ecosystem.
        Mrs. Cammack. So, a little bit in that same vein, you
    started discussing--I think it was Representative Fulcher who
    started talking about this--you started talking about the risk
    caps and how telecommunications infrastructure typically gets
    excluded, because it is so capital intensive, from funding
    opportunities.
        Obviously, that hinders our ability to compete with China,
    as you started talking about. Can you continue down that line
    for me?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Sure. So EXIM Bank--we have the tools. They
    already exist. We don't need to recreate the wheel. We just
    need to retool them to ensure that we are able to get capital
    out.
        So, again, the legislation would just allow--it doesn't
    require--would allow them to waive the risk caps if a company
    was up against Huawei.
        Mrs. Cammack. Now, let's say beyond EXIM, I mean, is the
    Development Finance Corporation also an area where this is a
    problem?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Correct. Absolutely.
        Mrs. Cammack. OK.
        Now, talking a little bit more in the Department of Defense
    realm, how can we--I know, obviously, you talked about the risk
    caps. What other ways can DoD and others--can we be competitive
    and support operations abroad?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Yes. So, again, I would say that DoD needs to
    be fully funded at their 5G department. The Open RAN Coalition,
    we have an excellent relationship with the 5G office and the
    FutureG office, but their budgets continue to be cut in half so
    they are unable to deploy 5G around the world.
        Mrs. Cammack. Do you feel that in the previous radio
    conference the United States was adequately represented?
        Ms. Rinaldo. I think there are lots of leadership changes
    that led to disorganization.
        Mrs. Cammack. And how would we address that disorganization
    going forward?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Again, it is ensuring that we get people
    identified and in position earlier.
        China has an advantage. They rule by fiat. But we go in
    through a multistakeholder process. Our process, at the end of
    the day, is going to create a broader, more impactful decision,
    but it does mean that we have to start earlier and we have to
    work harder.
        Mrs. Cammack. Excellent.
        My time has almost expired. I will submit the rest of my
    questions in writing.
        Thank you to all our witnesses for appearing before us.
        And I am so sorry, it is freaking freezing in here.
        Mr. Landsman. It really is. Amen.
        Mrs. Cammack. Can we do something about that?
        Mr. Landsman. So cold.
        Mrs. Cammack. It is freezing.
        Mr. Hudson. Well, the gentlelady has----
        Mrs. Cammack. I yield.
        Mr. Hudson [continuing]. Yielded back.
        I will assure you, it is colder outside than it is inside.
        The Chair now recognizes the Representative from Florida,
    Ms. Castor, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Ms. Castor. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am so looking
    forward to working with you and Ranking Member Matsui on this
    important subcommittee. It is really critical to innovation,
    keeping WiFi and the internet affordable for our families and
    small businesses, and to our national security.
        And I know this subcommittee did a lot of good bipartisan
    work last year, and you passed a spectrum auction bill
    unanimously out of committee.
        Why didn't it--why wasn't it brought to the floor? I would
    ask--I am just curious. What is your view on that, Mr. Powell?
        Mr. Powell [to Mr. Gillen]. What is your view of that?
        Ms. Castor. Mr. Gillen?
        Just quickly.
        Mr. Powell. You know, I think I would stand with our--we
    have been--we have all so forcefully seen the value of the FCC
    spectrum auction. I stewarded that responsibility at the FCC. I
    think it was a tragedy that we lost it.
        It is important to remember, when the FCC has auction
    authority, it is not just that they can move forward with an
    auction. They are empowered to find bands and spectrum to bring
    to auction. So they are stalemated in playing the leading role
    that they have always played.
        I think, unfortunately, we get back to this issue: There is
    a lot of conflict about how these bands should be used and who
    should be using them. And if people believe it is a political
    opportunity to bias the outcome of that study in a way that
    they might want or to protect constituencies, even those
    protecting the Defense Department, it can lead to political
    stalemate.
        Which is why we continue to believe that we have to start
    looking toward technological solutions like CBRS and shared
    spectrum to try to resolve those conflicts, as opposed to have
    them always thrown at your doorstep and ask lobbying and
    advocacy to produce spectrum policy.
        Ms. Castor. And you all have talked about it before, on the
    lack of trust. Is there something else that I was missing on
    all that, why it didn't--broadly bipartisan.
        Just quickly. Just quickly.
        Mr. Gillen. No, I think Chairman Powell covered it.
        Ms. Castor. OK.
        Mr. Gillen. A lot of the conversation right now is--we are
    having conversations around winners or losers, and we need to
    get to a place that these are win-win opportunities.
        Ms. Castor. Yes. I agree with that.
        Mr. Gillen. And so I----
        Ms. Castor. And that is one reason why we are concerned
    that spectrum proceeds could be used to fund tax cuts,
    whereas--Mr. Lewis started off, this is in the public interest.
    You use those proceeds in the public interest.
        And why we are bringing it up is, now, the chairman of the
    Budget Committee--there is a list and a paper out on the street
    that has it pegged, spectrum proceeds, as a possible pay-for.
    And that is why we are very concerned. It shouldn't go to fund
    tax cuts for big corporations and millionaires and
    billionaires. It needs to stay in the public realm.
        And I can tell you, back home in the Tampa Bay area, as we
    recover from the most damaging and costly hurricane season and
    we look out at the other damage across North Carolina, to our
    neighbors across--fellow Americans in southern California, no
    place has been immune to these extreme climate catastrophes.
    But, you know, we are learning a lot in the aftermath. In the
    aftermath, we learn how to better prepare and respond.
        And the Florida Department of Emergency Management and the
    University of Florida piloted a new tool to provide emergency
    responders and local governments with a dependable means to
    share alerts. I mean, information is critical during
    emergencies. They have the new Broadcast Emergency Alerting and
    Communication Operational Network, BEACON, that uses AI to
    quickly convert text into speech for AM radio broadcast, and it
    has the ability to translate into different languages.
        Automating these kind of critical safety broadcasts before,
    during, and after a disaster, they really help the first
    responders. They help get critical information to neighbors at
    a time of need. Cell phones go down, you lose the internet. And
    this is the kind of critical infrastructure that spectrum
    supports and that Congress should be encouraging.
        Mr. Lewis, in your written testimony, you say that spectrum
    policy is about innovation and connectivity and that revenue
    raised should serve the public interest. Is this the kind of
    thing you were talking about?
        Mr. Lewis. It is.
        You know, just with the public safety and emergency alert
    systems, when I was growing up--I am 45 years old. When I was
    growing up, emergency alerts came over the television. Now they
    come over your phone. And so, whether you are in your home or
    you are on the move, receiving those is critical, and so we
    want to support those and continue to build them.
        NG 9-1-1 is a part of that----
        Ms. Castor. Right.
        Mr. Lewis [continuing]. As well as other resiliency and
    infrastructure supports that we have talked about as public-
    interest needs.
        Ms. Castor. Good. And I hope that is the tack we can take.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. The gentlelady yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes the Representative from South
    Carolina, Mr. Fry, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Fry. Thank you, Chairman. And congratulations on your
    chairmanship.
        I will note just for the record that I appreciate North
    Carolina peanuts, and they are good, but South Carolina peanuts
    might just be a little bit better.
        But thank you.
        This is a crash course, as a new Member, into spectrum and
    what that means for the country, and I really appreciate the
    discussion today. I am glad that this is a largely bipartisan
    affair.
        Mr. Gillen, earlier you talked about China a little bit and
    the risks that they pose in this space of spectrum. What are
    the consequences of China taking a lead in making 5G spectrum
    available to their carriers?
        Mr. Gillen. Thank you for the question.
        As someone with teenagers, I spend my weekend talking about
    TikTok. And, ultimately, at the core, that is China exporting
    technology. You know, if you go back to 4G, 3G, that was the
    U.S. in that position. That is TikTok.
        Now, imagine, extrapolate from that impacts on
    manufacturing, on ports, on how we are doing so many other
    different things. It is that innovation runs to connectivity,
    it runs to capacity. And so, really, it is, all the things we
    want to lead in going forward is going to go where the capacity
    and the connectivity are.
        Mr. Fry. Thank you for that.
        Chairman Powell, obviously, the internet economy has
    drastically changed over the last 12 years. Everything is
    different. The way we communicate is different. The amount of
    video content that we absorb is different. The way consumers
    use wireless technology is vastly different.
        How might our--other than--I think we have talked about
    auctions a lot. How might our policies change as well, given
    how the world is changing?
        Mr. Powell. Yes, I think one of the things that I would
    recommend to the committee is to keep the consumer at the
    center of the focus of the policy. How do Americans really use
    spectrum? What do they most depend on?
        I think one of the reasons we celebrate the WiFi story is
    that the vast majority of Americans' interaction with the
    internet goes over that infrastructure. We spend 90 percent of
    our days indoors, and when we are indoors, we are utilizing
    those services. If you are watching Netflix tonight, you are on
    WiFi. Frankly, if you are using your cell phone, 80 to 90
    percent of the time you are also using WiFi, not even the
    cellular network. It is the sort of workhorse of the entire
    internet economy.
        So, as you focus and align your spectrum policies, I think
    just keeping in mind the rapid innovation, the way consumers
    are evolving. You mentioned 12 years ago. The stuff in my house
    today, as opposed to 12 years ago, that expects to find and
    utilize my network is stunning compared to 12 years ago.
        Mr. Fry. Thank you for that.
        Ms. Rinaldo, how does access to spectrum allow innovative
    companies like those in the Open RAN Policy Coalition to
    continue to lead on the design of the next-generation networks?
        And, as a followup, as the spectrum environment gets more
    congested, could new technologies like AI-driven network
    management help manage the spectrum issues and lead us to more
    commercial spectrum on the market?
        Ms. Rinaldo. So I would say that Open RAN is a nascent
    concept, really first rolled out by Rakuten and Japan in 2017.
    So we kind of missed the 5G wave. And so, as new spectrum bands
    come on line, we are able to build out using Open RAN. I would
    say, other than Dish, who has deployed 20-plus-thousand--AT&T
    has made an investment of $14 billion in Open RAN--we are
    really focused internationally at this point. So more bands,
    more Open RAN.
        And, as far as AI, it has been a great story for the
    telecommunications industry. We can use it for everything from
    management of spectrum, energy efficiency. And there is a lot
    of talk these days, as you can imagine, with concerns around
    drones, can we do detection using AI.
        Mr. Fry. Thank you for that.
        And this is a broader question, I think, for the panel, but
    we will just go down.
        What specific actions would you recommend for us, as
    Congress, to take? I mean, obviously, we talked about some of
    the legal problems, some of the regulatory hurdles, some of the
    outdated regulations that may exist. What would you share with
    Congress about ways that we can modernize our system?
        We will start with you, sir.
        Mr. Lewis. I think we all agree, I hope auction authority
    is where you start.
        Mr. Fry. Correct.
        Mr. Lewis. And I would say, make it permanent. Provide the
    reliability that the FCC has the power to do it. And then how
    that then impacts band planning in the future.
        Mr. Fry. OK.
        Ms. Rinaldo. Auction authority, RNG, and then just working
    with our allies around the world to deploy safe and secure
    networks globally.
        Mr. Fry. OK.
        Mr. Gillen. Same. Auction authority with a plan associated
    with it, and permitting reform.
        Mr. Fry. Permitting reform. OK.
        Mr. Gillen. Yes.
        Mr. Powell. I would agree with that. I think auction
    authority, improvement in the interagency coordination process
    with appropriate congressional oversight, and assistance to the
    administration on developing uniform and single-voice policies
    when we appear at the next WRC in 2027.
        Mr. Fry. Thank you for that.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. The gentleman yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes the Representative from Ohio, Mr.
    Landsman, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Landsman. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Ranking Member, for
    this incredibly important hearing.
        The broadband/WiFi work that we do, probably one of the
    most important things we have to get right nationally. And,
    obviously, Congress has to play a big leadership role in that.
    And this has been, as one of my colleagues said, largely a
    bipartisan discussion, because it is a bipartisan issue.
        I mean, there are two pieces that are really important,
    that stand out for me.
        One is just the relevancy, the impact it has on our
    economy. I mean, growing economies are economies where there
    are massive investments in infrastructure and education. And
    broadband is obviously a huge, huge piece of the
    infrastructure, and it is core to our global competitiveness.
        The second is just the impact it has on our daily lives,
    which, Chairman Powell, you have talked a lot about. I
    represent southwest Ohio. It is a city, suburbs, rural Ohio.
    And it is one of the most important things that we do, to make
    sure that everyone has access, because of how important it is
    to their healthcare, to their education, to their connection to
    the world and to each other.
        Two big questions have emerged here for me. One has to do
    with reauthorization and, you know, how we divvy up the
    spectrum capacity. And the second has to do with what we do
    with that revenue, right? Those are two big questions that I
    think we will sort out in a bipartisan way.
        Let me start on the reauthorization question. Maybe each
    one of you could just talk a little bit about--give one big--I
    have heard a little bit from each of you about priorities, but
    one big priority. You know, I am new. So, if there is one thing
    you want us to really nail as we work on reauthorization, what
    would it be?
        Mr. Gillen. For us, it is key, when you go back, each time
    Congress has done this--1997, 2005, 2012--it has always been
    authority-plus.
        Sometimes you direct specific auctions. Sometimes you say,
    ``You need to auction a certain amount.'' But particularly
    because the government controls so much of this, if you give
    the FCC, an independent agency, authority to auction without
    something to sell, it can be an empty tool.
        Mr. Landsman. Got it.
        Mr. Gillen. And so, for us, it really is that connection.
        Mr. Powell. I think the authority is important, but I would
    slightly disagree with Mr. Gillen. You know, the FCC, when it
    has plenary auction authority, it has the authority to find an
    auction spectrum without further direction from Congress. So I
    wouldn't want to leave you with the impression that you have to
    tell them what spectrum to authorize. They have been doing that
    for the better part of this century. So I think that is
    important.
        And I also think that if you entertain the idea of
    assigning specific spectrum bands, then you have to wrestle
    with the conflict we have spent all morning talking about. You
    have to figure out how you are going to resolve the complexity
    of the Defense Department systems. That needs to be done by
    experts down at the agency----
        Mr. Landsman. Yes.
        Ms. Rinaldo. So I would say that the NTIA Administrator
    needs to be an Under Secretary. And government titles matter,
    and it makes a huge difference. If you are the NTIA
    Administrator, you are having to brief the Deputy Secretary to
    talk to----
        Mr. Landsman. Yes.
        Ms. Rinaldo [continuing]. You know, an agency about an
    issue that they know nothing about.
        Mr. Landsman. Mr. Lewis?
        Thank you.
        Mr. Lewis. I would agree with that.
        Mr. Landsman. Yes.
        Mr. Lewis. And with auction authority, I would say--I would
    agree with the former Chairman. You don't have to be
    prescriptive, because there is not a lot of new spectrum bands
    out there. Letting Ms. Rinaldo's old agency, the NTIA, and the
    FCC do the studies that point in the right direction is
    important. And preserving the balance of licensed, unlicensed,
    and sharing, WiFi 7, is a great opportunity but requires 360
    megahertz of spectrum band. Yes.
        Mr. Landsman. And then the second piece is on the revenue.
    Obviously, there is some consternation, some worry, because of
    a document that came out that maybe these dollars could be used
    for pay-fors.
        And on the tax piece, you know, I think there is broad
    support for tax relief for working folks, middle class, small
    businesses. It is the top 1 percent that I think folks like me
    struggle with.
        The revenue, assuming it stays here--and anyone, but, Mr.
    Lewis, start with you. Just--you mentioned a few big things. I
    mean, again, if you had to pick one major investment, I am
    assuming it is the expansion and then the inclusion, but I am
    curious what piece--where do those dollars need to go?
        Mr. Lewis. I usually highlight two. Definitely digital
    inclusion work on the ground needs long-term funding, as do
    other broadband--other----
        Mr. Landsman. That is really just making sure that more
    people have it.
        Mr. Lewis. Yes, addressing all three drivers of the digital
    divide--not just infrastructure, not just affordability, but
    adoption and helping people get it.
        But if I picked a second, NG 9-1-1. I mean, kudos to the
    chairman and former Congresswoman Eshoo for leading on the NG
    9-1-1 bill last year.
        Mr. Landsman. Thank you.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. I thank the gentleman for yielding back.
        The Chair now recognizes the Representative from New
    Jersey, Mr. Kean.
        You are recognized for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Kean. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you to all of our witnesses for being here today.
        Mr. Powell and Mr. Gillen, my district boasts some of the
    most capable innovators in the world. It also has areas that
    still face gaps in connectivity.
        How can technologies using licensed and unlicensed spectrum
    both supercharge our existing industries and generate growth in
    more rural areas?
        Whichever one of you would like to go first.
        Mr. Gillen. Thank you for the question.
        The power of wireless, particularly full-power 5G wireless,
    gives you the opportunity to push out broadband to other
    places.
        Rappahannock County, Virginia, rural Virginia, there is no
    terrestrial fiber cable services. Right now, because of
    broadband auctions you made possible, there is now 5G home
    service available. So roughly 20 percent of those new customers
    had never had broadband before, because that is an ability to
    scale and move quickly.
        So I would offer, it is one of the places that you can push
    out beyond where we are today.
        Mr. Kean. Thank you. Thank you.
        Mr. Powell?
        Mr. Powell. I think one of the challenges in rural is
    always infrastructure. One of the challenges the wireless
    companies have is, in order to serve those communities
    effectively, you have to densify the network. You have to go
    out there and spend the money to put up towers to concentrate.
    That is expensive. That is a big capital expense for them. And
    so that has been slow.
        If you look at shared spectrum on CBRS, it covers 70
    percent of all unserved rural areas. That is why you are seeing
    projects that allow communities to take matters into their own
    hands. And in your own State, CBRS spectrum is being used at
    Newark International Airport without having to await the use
    from a commercial service.
        Mr. Kean. Thank you.
        Ms. Rinaldo, can you speak to the effect that adoption of
    Open RAN technologies could have on our supply chain and
    strengthening American wireless competitiveness globally? And
    can you also provide an update on where the development and
    deployment of these technologies now stand?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Absolutely.
        I think one of the biggest concerns is that we wake up one
    day and there is only one vendor for the entire world. So the
    concept of Open RAN, I believe, has been so successful because
    we have gone from a handful of vendors now to hundreds--a lot
    here in the United States, but also Japan, Taiwan, and Europe.
        So, since we launched this coalition, there are now over
    100 global deployments. I mentioned Tellis earlier. Tellis,
    they are going to deploy 100 percent by 2029. Viettel in
    Vietnam is deploying using Qualcomm and DeepSig to ORPC
    members.
        Palau, a small island in the South Pacific, they just put
    out an RFP, and the number of proposals they received were
    astonishing, because the competitiveness of Open RAN does allow
    more vendors to participate in the market. So it is really a
    win-win.
        Mr. Kean. Thank you.
        And then, Mr. Powell and Mr. Gillen, can you both speak to
    how licensed and unlicensed spectrum are used in emergency
    response in cooperation with first responders? And what needs
    to be done to make sure that spectrum is used as effectively as
    possible to keep Americans safe in the event of an emergency or
    a disaster?
        Mr. Powell. I think both are critical. I want to say that.
        I have been involved in these situations. I will give you
    an example just in the L.A. wildfire situation. Charter was
    able to open 35,000 WiFi hotspots immediately to try to improve
    communications when other infrastructure had been devastated.
        You know, that is really important, to be able to use every
    technological resource to get a network up quickly in these
    communities, often ones that are suffering without power as
    well as communications infrastructure.
        Mr. Kean. Thank you.
        Mr. Gillen?
        Mr. Gillen. I agree with the chairman. This is a disaster.
    We all need to be working together, and all these technologies
    can complement each other.
        In terms of wireless, we are proud that 80 percent of 9-1-1
    calls are made on a smartphone today. The amount that we have
    invested to make sure that first responders can find you when
    you make that call with location accuracy. And the power of
    wireless emergency alerts to be an amplifier to voice--and Mr.
    Lewis talked about how far we have come in that program.
        And then in terms of the disaster recovery themselves, the
    technologies that we are leveraging now, there are COWs and
    COLTs--we put cell phones on wheels, we put cell phones on
    trucks--to go into an area to immediately have coverage.
    Because it is so critical. You have lost everything. You need
    that connectivity.
        And so we take that responsibility very seriously. And that
    situation--you know, we can disagree on a lot of things. When
    it comes to disaster relief, we all come together to serve
    customers.
        Mr. Kean. Thank you to all of our witnesses.
        And I will yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. I thank the gentleman for yielding back.
        The Chair now recognizes the Representative from Indiana,
    Mrs. Houchin, for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mrs. Houchin. Thank you, Chairman Hudson and Ranking Member
    Matsui.
        And thanks to the witnesses for your testimony and for
    speaking with us today.
        I want to start my remarks first by saying how excited I am
    to be here as a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.
    This is my first hearing as a member of E&C, and I look forward
    to working on the issues under this committee's jurisdiction.
        Back home, as a State senator, I worked on expanding
    broadband access, particularly in rural areas. I was proud to
    lead that fight, and it is a fight that I am excited to
    continue at the Federal level.
        I look forward to certainly working with each member of the
    committee, Mr. Chairman, on our shared priorities and hope that
    we can find some common ground to bring real and positive
    results for the American people.
        And I am glad we are starting this work this Congress on
    this issue of importance of both national security and global
    competitiveness, and that is spectrum.
        While we may not realize it, spectrum directly impacts the
    ways in which millions of Americans go about their daily lives,
    both at home and at work. From listening to the radio to
    watching television, to using cell phones and browsing the
    internet, spectrum determines how these devices carry data.
        That said, it is a limited resource. And I recognize that
    the United States must play a leading role in innovation
    relative to spectrum to maintain our position as the world's
    leader in new technology.
        So my first question is for Mr. Gillen.
        My district in southern Indiana is largely rural, made up
    of small towns and cities. And I am certainly proud of the work
    that we did in the State senate to level the playing field for
    rural parts of the State, but the truth is, we continue to lag
    behind the coasts and urban areas in access to the internet and
    the tools that spectrum can provide.
        How can your company's use of spectrum help with closing
    the digital divide for rural America?
        Mr. Gillen. Thank you for the question.
        NERA, earlier today, released a report that said, for every
    100 megahertz of new spectrum available, it can help create
    access for 275,000 households that don't have it today. And so
    the opportunity, particularly with the 5G home product, to get
    to places that home broadband hasn't gotten to yet--that the
    benefit of that opportunity, we can see that happen in real
    time.
        Accenture says that we can get to roughly 40 percent of
    houses without any help. And then the question is, Where does
    the help come, whether it is the 5G fund at the FCC or the BEAD
    fund at NTIA? We are going to need the government's help. But
    with spectrum, we can continually provide more and more
    coverage throughout the area.
        Mrs. Houchin. Great.
        Mr. Powell, do you have anything in addition to that to add
    about how the company's use of spectrum can help close the
    digital divide?
        Mr. Powell. Yes. As we talked about earlier, when you use
    some of the CBRS shared spectrum, you are allowed to let
    communities take matters into their own hands and build
    networks while they are awaiting commercial systems to come and
    densify their network.
        I also want to put a plug in--because it is equally in this
    committee's jurisdiction--it is getting the fixed
    infrastructure out there too. A lot of wireless needs fixed
    infrastructure in order to put those signals into the ground
    pretty quickly.
        So, with the BEAD investments that we are making, and the
    companies that I represent are deepening their penetration into
    rural America, these things have to be seen as complements. One
    will not survive without the other.
        Mrs. Houchin. Thank you.
        We have talked a little bit--my colleague from New Jersey
    talked about Open RAN. So I want to ask a few questions about
    that.
        I am excited by the prospects there to potentially increase
    vendor diversity, both in the United States and with our
    trusted partners around the globe, to open the door for new
    entrants into radio access and to the network marketplace.
        So, Ms. Rinaldo, how can ORAN technology help us stay
    competitive with China?
        Ms. Rinaldo. So, for so long, especially--so I used to work
    for the House Intelligence Committee when they wrote the Huawei
    report and then at NTIA. And it was the policy of the United
    States to go around the world and say, ``Don't use Huawei. It
    is a security concern.''
        Open RAN is the ``If not them, then who?'' We give people
    something to run to, as opposed to run away from. And I believe
    that is why it has been so incredibly successful.
        So, as we have 5G and as we look to 6G, it is software-
    defined networks and virtualization.
        I will use an example about Tellis. Tellis is ripping and
    replacing right now, and an executive said they are going to
    move to Open RAN because he never wants to be in a position of
    vendor lock ever again. So we are bringing that national
    security, supplier diversity, as well as the opportunity that
    Open RAN can bring.
        Mrs. Houchin. Well, that lends particularly to my next
    question. Does the deployment of 5-to-6G help with deployment
    of Open RAN? I think the answer to that is yes.
        Are there any barriers that do stand in the way of
    deploying the networks currently? And when do you believe we
    might expect more widespread development?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Yes, so the inability to auction new spectrum
    and make new spectrum bands available, that is going to impact
    deployment.
        As well as, as we look internationally. I think it is
    important that we use diplomacy as much as possible to ensure
    that we are getting a supplied telecommunications chain out
    there.
        Mrs. Houchin. Thank you.
        Thank you for your testimony.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Hudson. The gentlelady yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes the Representatives from Texas,
    Mr. Goldman.
        You are recognized for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mr. Goldman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much.
        I had about 100 questions that have all been asked already.
    But I do appreciate you all's time today and for being here
    today. I will ask a couple of quick questions, and we will move
    on to my colleague from North Dakota.
        This is both for Ms. Rinaldo and Mr. Powell.
        Ms. Rinaldo, if you will go first.
        How can we protect important national security missions
    while also fostering innovation? And how do shared spectrum
    approaches help us avoid those national security risks while
    still helping us find new spectrum for commercial use?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Yes. So there is currently an ongoing
    multistakeholder process that I am participating in that brings
    the private sector as well as the public sector together. They
    are going to start classified sessions soon.
        And so I think, as has been mentioned, you bring the
    engineers in the room, and then we can get things moving a
    little faster. So it is, how do we take the emotion, take the
    policy out of it, and get the engineers to, you know, pave the
    path forward?
        Mr. Goldman. Understood. Thank you.
        Mr. Powell?
        Mr. Powell. I think the quick answer is coexistence. How do
    you allow people to live together and both be able to do and
    operate and provide the services that are critical, whether
    they are military/national security services or commercial
    services?
        Many of the bands we have had in the past have pioneered
    approaches to sharing. There are a lot of bands. Even in the
    CBRS band, we have protection of incumbent military systems,
    particularly naval, coastal systems. And it allows them to
    operate effectively while we are able to offer a commercial
    service.
        Mr. Goldman. Great. Thank you very much.
        And, Mr. Gillen, your testimony notes that significant
    demand for wireless networks and more commercial licensed
    spectrum is necessary to keep pace with that demand.
        Can you explain how the various types of spectrum auctions
    the FCC has used over the last decade work and how those
    address the American consumer needs?
        Mr. Gillen. Absolutely.
        The FCC has auctioned both commercial spectrum and
    government spectrum over the last 10 years, particularly in the
    3 gigahertz range. A lot of the spectrum we are talking about
    is midband spectrum today. We were able to work through a
    process with the military to auction 100 megahertz for $22
    billion in 3.45. And then C-band was satellite spectrum that we
    were able to repurpose for 5G.
        And that is the--you know, we have had 87 percent growth at
    our networks over the last 2 years. It was those spectrum bands
    that made it possible for us to have the capacity to meet that
    demand. And so, when we look at what is coming next, it is: How
    do we replicate the successes of those, and where do we find
    that spectrum? And we think both of those bands adjacent to it,
    we can run that same playbook in an effective way.
        Mr. Goldman. Interesting.
        Thank you all again very much.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back the rest of my time.
        Mr. Hudson. Thank you.
        The Representative yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes the Representative from North
    Dakota, Mrs. Fedorchak.
        You are recognized for 5 minutes to ask your questions.
        Mrs. Fedorchak. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for
    organizing this great hearing today.
        As a Representative from North Dakota, I am big into
    natural resources and resources. And spectrum is a very
    important national resource. So I appreciate the opportunity
    this hearing has to talk about how to best manage this resource
    for the benefit of American citizens.
        I will have to say that, you know, to the extent that
    managing this resource results in additional funding for the
    Federal Government, I am really confident that my host
    colleagues, especially in this committee and on the Republican
    side of things, are committed to putting any additional
    revenues that might be generated from the sale of those to the
    benefit of everyday Americans--the farmers, the ranchers, the
    coal miners, the oil field workers, teachers, nurses, those
    folks from North Dakota and throughout the country who are hard
    at work. I know that we will be very diligent to use those
    resources appropriately.
        So, for all of you, thank you for your time. You have been
    sitting here a long time now. You probably are thinking about
    lunch and bathrooms and other things, so I promise I will be--I
    just have two questions. But your expertise is really vital to
    helping us make the best decision on how to use these
    resources.
        So, quickly, I wanted to ask Mr. Gillen: Help me understand
    the need for the dedicated spectrum and what sort of uses you
    use in that space that can't be done in the open, the
    unlicensed spectrum, and what the interference is that is
    created in the unlicensed that causes problems for you.
        Mr. Gillen. Yes. Thank you for the question.
        I think, when we pick up our phones, we want that
    reliability. And what interference protection gives you is the
    security that you know that when we are going to build out that
    spectrum--$30 billion last year--we know that we control that
    spectrum and that our neighbors or others can't use that same
    spectrum. And so the certainty or reliability that you rely on
    every day comes from that licensed spectrum.
        And I think a lot of the conversation today--all spectrum
    is shared at some core. There is no cleared spectrum, really.
    It is just a matter of what different tools of shared spectrum
    you are using and whether or not government has preemptable
    rights, whether or not you have full-power ability to do it.
        So, for a lot of these conversations, it is, how do we work
    around the government, how do we work with systems to make sure
    that it is something that works for us to be able to compete
    against China but also safeguard incumbent users as well.
        Mrs. Fedorchak. OK. Thank you. That is helpful.
        And then the second question is to both you and Mr. Powell:
    If you were designing the proper mix between licensed and
    unlicensed, how would you do that? How would you separate it
    out?
        Mr. Powell. For my mind, as a former policymaker, I would
    evaluate the demand uses that American citizens make of the
    spectrum.
        It is not a simple matter of comparing who has how many
    megahertz versus who else has how many megahertz. You have to
    assign weights to that. You know, if 60 percent of all data is
    going over unlicensed networks and WiFi, if 80 to 90 percent of
    that cell phone data is going over WiFi, then it is a false
    equivalency to say they have exactly the same amount. You need
    to allocate more toward the highest and greatest demands.
        Now, I think there is a--just so I am not misunderstood--
    there is a place for exclusive licensing and high-powered
    spectrum. It is about getting that right. But I think that we
    have underappreciated the significant uses that Americans make,
    and I would focus more on how to find shared solutions.
        Mrs. Fedorchak. OK.
        Mr. Gillen. You will be surprised to know I have a slightly
    different take.
        So, for our perspective----
        Mr. Powell. Really?
        Mr. Gillen [continuing]. We absolutely need both. And we
    lead the world today in WiFi access, and I think we need to get
    back to there on 5G.
        And so I think, in our minds, you look at where the data
    growth is on our networks, what the congestion is. I think the
    congestion and how much actual capacity challenges should
    dictate a lot of this conversation.
        And I think, absolutely, we use WiFi a lot on this device.
    Because when we are at home, we love these devices. You are not
    plugging into a desktop. So a lot of these statistics, no
    matter--you know, when you are out of your house, it is not on
    WiFi; you are on this. And we need both of them to work.
        So I think we need to work towards a policy that we are the
    best at both of these things.
        Mrs. Fedorchak. Awesome. Thank you.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield.
        Mr. Hudson I thank the gentlelady for yielding back.
        And I want to welcome Representative Miller-Meeks from Iowa
    to the subcommittee.
        And you are going to bring us home here. I recognize you
    for 5 minutes for your questions.
        Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
    Chairman Hudson. It is wonderful to be back on this committee--
    and Ranking Member Matsui, as well, for allowing me to waive on
    to this critically important hearing today--critically
    important because, as the chairman said, I am from Iowa, and I
    also happen to be a military veteran. So, both from the
    national security and the connectivity viewpoint, this is an
    important hearing today.
        And I also want to thank our witnesses for testifying
    before the subcommittee. You have been here a long time, so I
    will try to be brief.
        I am just going to make a mention of something Mr. Gillen
    just said. We don't want you to work around the government.
    That has a different context, when we say that. We want you to
    work with the government. Because we know that the DoD needs
    access to this spectrum and they may need to preempt other
    uses.
        In Iowa, our farmers depend on the latest technology to
    make their operations more efficient. Think precision ag, and I
    think you mentioned that, Mr. Powell. Our schools, our
    healthcare facilities rely on strong connectivity for
    educational tools and telemedicine. And businesses across the
    State need access to cutting-edge communication systems to
    remain competitive in the global market.
        When as a State senator in Iowa I passed broadband bills, I
    lovingly named these ``Please get Dr. Miller-Meeks better
    internet connection so her children will come home for more
    than a day.'' That is how bad it was. And I cannot tell you how
    many WiFi providers I switched, so--or satellite providers.
        Spectrum, which makes all of this possible, is a finite
    resource that must be responsibly managed.
        Mr. Powell, in your testimony you point out that the U.S.
    could potentially fall behind in 5G and 6G deployment. And when
    I have traveled overseas, I would echo that sentiment.
        Without embracing shared spectrum policies, what safeguards
    do you propose to ensure that critical national security
    infrastructure and government operations are not jeopardized in
    the process?
        Mr. Powell. Yes, I think the whole predicate, why we are
    champions of this spectrum policy approach, is that it
    fundamentally presumes that we will work together and share
    with those systems, as opposed to displace them or to minimize
    them.
        That doesn't mean that is always possible, but we think
    that is the going and effective approach when we know both have
    equally compelling uses. You should try to figure out if there
    is a way for them to coexist first.
        Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Mr. Gillen, you noted that 5G is helping
    to create high-paying jobs and economic opportunities in
    manufacturing and agriculture.
        And as an advocate for U.S. industry, as we both are, can
    you explain how 5G is specifically contributing to the growth
    of these sectors--you might have in your posters----
        Mr. Gillen. Yes.
        Mrs. Miller-Meeks [continuing]. Particularly in the context
    of rural economies like Iowa's, and what additional spectrum
    could do to accelerate these benefits?
        Mr. Gillen. So, on the first piece, I think manufacturing
    is one of the places that we really feel opportunity. How do
    you bring manufacturing back? And you look at--Ericsson has a
    plant in Texas that has 120 percent employee productivity
    improvement. So it is one of those opportunities that is a
    roadmap for how we can do this.
        In terms of a rural, it really is a matter of the 5G home
    product is beginning to make a dent to the challenges that you
    faced in the State legislature. And the more spectrum gives us
    the ability--it is a capacity-starved service, and so you need
    to have--like, more capacity lets us do it for more people. So
    one provider has a million people on the waiting list right
    now. We could make those subscribers with more spectrum.
        Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Ms. Rinaldo, in your testimony, you
    mention the PRC's aggressive efforts to dominate wireless
    technologies and markets through state-sponsored corporate
    theft and market manipulation.
        How do you propose the U.S. respond to these efforts? And
    what role can American companies and policymakers play in
    countering this state-driven competition?
        Ms. Rinaldo. Help support vendor diversity, and work with
    our partners around the world to do the same.
        Mrs. Miller-Meeks. And given the ongoing cybersecurity
    threats from adversaries such as the PRC, what specific
    policies or investments would you recommend to enhance the
    security and resilience of the U.S. wireless network,
    particularly in protecting our vital communications
    infrastructure?
        Ms. Rinaldo. So Congress needs to reauthorize the
    Cybersecurity Act of 2015, which allows information sharing. It
    needs teeth.
        Mrs. Miller-Meeks. I was plugging that for you.
        Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you.
        Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I yield
    back.
        Mr. Hudson. I thank the Representative for yielding back.
        Seeing that there are no further Members wishing to be
    recognized, I would like to thank our witnesses for being here
    today and staying for over 3 hours.
        I ask unanimous consent to insert in the record the
    documents included on the staff hearing document list.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        [The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
        Mr. Hudson. I will remind Members that they have 10
    business days to submit questions for the record, and I ask the
    witnesses to respond to the questions promptly. Members should
    submit their questions by the close of business on Wednesday,
    February 6th.
        Without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 1:10 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
        [Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
       [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]