An oversight hearing to examine the Federal Communications Commission.

1[Senate Hearing 119-389]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                                         S. Hrg. 119-38956                       OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL7                       COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION89=======================================================================1011                                HEARING1213                               before the1415                         COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,16                      SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION17                          UNITED STATES SENATE1819                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2021                             FIRST SESSION2223                               __________2425                           DECEMBER 17, 20252627                               __________2829Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation3031                 [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3233                Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov3435                               ______3637                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE383963-603  PDF                WASHINGTON : 20264041       SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION4243                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS4445                             FIRST SESSION4647                       TED CRUZ, Texas, Chairman48JOHN THUNE, South Dakota             MARIA CANTWELL, Washington,49ROGER WICKER, Mississippi                Ranking50DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota51JERRY MORAN, Kansas                  BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii52DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts53MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee          GARY PETERS, Michigan54TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin55TED BUDD, North Carolina             TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois56ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri               JACKY ROSEN, Nevada57JOHN CURTIS, Utah                    BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico58BERNIE MORENO, Ohio                  JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Colorado59TIM SHEEHY, Montana                  JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania60SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  ANDY KIM, New Jersey61CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming              LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware6263                 Brad Grantz, Republican Staff Director64           Nicole Christus, Republican Deputy Staff Director65                   Lila Harper Helms, Staff Director66                 Melissa Porter, Deputy Staff Director6768                            C O N T E N T S6970                              ----------71                                                                   Page72Hearing held on December 17, 2025................................     173Statement of Senator Cruz........................................     174    Letter dated April 11, 2018 to Hon. Ajit Pai, Chairman,75      Federal Communications Commission from Senators Maria76      Cantwell, Tom Udall, Patty Murray, Elizabeth Warren, Ron77      Wyden, Edward J. Markey, Richard Blumenthal, Tina Smith,78      Bernard Sanders, Jeffrey A. Merkley, Tammy Baldwin and Cory79      A. Booker..................................................    4980Statement of Senator Cantwell....................................     381Statement of Senator Fischer.....................................    2082Statement of Senator Klobuchar...................................    2283Statement of Senator Moran.......................................    2584Statement of Senator Schatz......................................    2785Statement of Senator Capito......................................    2986Statement of Senator Markey......................................    3187Statement of Senator Sullivan....................................    3488Statement of Senator Baldwin.....................................    3689Statement of Senator Blackburn...................................    3890Statement of Senator Lujan.......................................    4091    Screen shot of FCC Homepage..................................    4192Statement of Senator Young.......................................    4393Statement of Senator Kim.........................................    4594Statement of Senator Curtis......................................    5395Statement of Senator Blunt Rochester.............................    5696Statement of Senator Schmitt.....................................    5897Statement of Senator Peters......................................    6098Statement of Senator Budd........................................    6299Statement of Senator Rosen.......................................    64100Statement of Senator Hickenlooper................................    66101102                               Witnesses103104Hon. Brendan Carr, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission...     5105    Prepared statement...........................................     6106Olivia Trusty, Commissioner, Federal Communciations Commission...    11107    Prepared statement...........................................    12108Anna M. Gomez, Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission...    13109    Prepared statement...........................................    15110111                                Appendix112113Letter dated December 17, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria114  Cantwell from The Leadership Council on Civil and Human Rights.    69115Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Brendan Carr by:116    Hon. Ted Cruz................................................    71117    Hon. John Thune..............................................    72118    Hon. Roger Wicker............................................    73119    Hon. Deb Fischer.............................................    74120    Hon. Jerry Moran.............................................    75121    Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................    75122    Hon. Todd Young..............................................    76123    Hon. Eric Schmitt............................................    77124    Hon. Shelley Moore Capito....................................    77125    Hon. Cynthia Lummis..........................................    79126    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    80127    Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................    86128    Hon. Brian Schatz............................................    86129    Hon. Edward Markey...........................................    88130    Hon. Gary Peters.............................................    90131    Hon. Tammy Baldwin...........................................    90132    Hon. Jacky Rosen.............................................    91133    Hon. Ben Ray Lujan...........................................    91134    Hon. John Hickenlooper.......................................    96135Response to written questions submitted to Olivia Trusty by:136    Hon. John Thune..............................................    97137    Hon. Roger Wicker............................................    97138    Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................    98139    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    98140    Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................    99141    Hon. Brian Schatz............................................   100142    Hon. Gary Peters.............................................   101143    Hon. Tammy Baldwin...........................................   101144    Hon. Jacky Rosen.............................................   102145    Hon. Ben Ray Lujan...........................................   103146    Hon. Lisa Blunt Rochester....................................   103147Response to written questions submitted to Anna M. Gomez by:148    Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................   103149    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................   105150    Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................   107151    Hon. Brian Schatz............................................   109152    Hon. Gary Peters.............................................   111153    Hon. Tammy Baldwin...........................................   112154    Hon. Tammy Duckworth.........................................   113155    Hon. Jacky Rosen.............................................   116156    Hon. Ben Ray Lujan...........................................   117157    Hon. Lisa Blunt Rochester....................................   118158159                       OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL160                       COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION161162                              ----------163164                      WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 2025165166                                       U.S. Senate,167        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,168                                                    Washington, DC.169    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:08 a.m., in170room SDG-50, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ted Cruz,171Chairman of the Committee, presiding.172    Present: Senators Cruz [presiding], Wicker, Fischer, Moran,173Sullivan, Blackburn, Young, Budd, Schmitt, Curtis, Capito,174Cantwell, Klobuchar, Schatz, Markey, Peters, Baldwin, Rosen,175Lujan, Hickenlooper, Kim, and Blunt Rochester.176177              OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ,178                    U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS179180    The Chairman. Good morning.181    The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and182Transportation will come to order. Welcome to today's hearing,183``Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission.''184    The FCC plays a critical role in the lives of everyday185Americans, from TV and radio broadcasting to cellular and186satellite communications and Internet connectivity.187    The Commission sits at the center of the services and188technologies that power Americans' daily lives, that project189American leadership and influence across the globe, and that190form the backbone of our national economy. In other words, the191Commission's work is kind of a big deal.192    So I am pleased that we are joined today by our witnesses--193Chairman Carr and Commissioners Trusty and Gomez--for this194important hearing, and especially pleased that they agreed to195be here and that this is the first FCC oversight hearing this196committee has held since 2020.197    I believe Commissioner Trusty was sitting right here198staffing then Chairman Wicker at that hearing and so,199Commissioner, it is nice to see you have moved 30 feet to the200other side of the dais.201    We have a lot of important ground to cover today. The pace202of change in just the last year, let alone since the last FCC203oversight hearing by this committee, has been astounding.204    We have seen the deployment of 5G and early groundwork for2056G, major advancements in the satellite industry, particularly206the growth of low Earth orbit, high-speed internet, AI, and207seismic shifts across the media landscape, and we have seen the208enactment of President Trump's Working Families Tax Cut Act209which not only reinstated spectrum auction authority for the210FCC for the next decade but contained the largest single-211spectrum pipeline, 800 megahertz, ever enacted into law.212    This will raise billions of dollars for the taxpayer. It213will stimulate billions more in private sector investment as214U.S. companies bring faster and cheaper Internet to more215Americans, and it will lay the foundation for countless216technological innovations.217    These benefits will be felt nationwide and, indeed,218worldwide across multiple generations of Americans. On day one219of the new administration the FCC, under Chairman Carr, hit the220ground running and already has an impressive list of221accomplishments to show.222    These include the delete, delete, delete docket, which223continues to clear out the regulatory underbrush, ensuring the224integrity of the universal service programs and preventing225fraud by illegal aliens, reforming the FCC's satellite226licensing regime to help bolster America's position as the227global leader in space commerce, streamlining permitting to228speed broadband build out, and moving at lightning speed to229implement the new spectrum pipeline, already teeing up 100230megahertz of valuable C-band spectrum to be auctioned for231commercial use in the near future.232    But there is plenty more work to be done. Given the rapid233pace of evolution in technology and telecommunications, it is a234wonder that the legal regime governing these issues and the235Commission's role in regulating them has, largely, not been236updated since 1996, and there are any number of issues, from237the utility of the so-called public interest standard in the238modern era to retransmission consent rules in the streaming era239to the current media ownership caps, where a statutory update240might be worthwhile.241    The world of today, with mobile computers in every pocket242and artificial intelligence becoming exponentially more243capable, is markedly different from the time when cell phones244were the size of footballs, when Gordon Gekko walked on the245beach holding a brick to the side of his head, and from the246time when AOL was the leading edge of Internet connectivity.247    We live in a different world and it is worth considering248whether Congress should revisit the Communications Act and249update it for the modern age.250    On the public interest standard in particular, if my251colleagues across the aisle do what many expect and hammer the252Chairman over their newfound religion on the First Amendment253and free speech, I will be obliged to point out that those254concerns were miraculously absent when the Biden administration255was pressuring Big Tech to silence Americans for wrong think on256COVID and election security.257    It will underscore a simple truth, that the public interest258standard and its wretched offspring, like the news distortion259rule, have outlived whatever utility they once had and it is260long past time for Congress to pass reforms.261    I am grateful to our witnesses for being here today to talk262about what the FCC is doing and how to address some of these263important issues.264    The energy and focus Chairman Carr has brought to this265Commission in just the first year has been productive and266refreshing. I am excited for what the next several years will267bring.268    I now turn to Ranking Member Cantwell.269270               STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,271                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON272273    Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for274convening this important oversight hearing, and I thank our275witnesses for being here.276    The FCC's independence is central to protecting free and277diverse press, strengthening our national security, and278bringing down the cost of telecommunications and media279services.280    However, what we have seen this year in costs that281Americans are facing, prices are rising. The question is what282is the Chairman of the FCC and the FCC doing to bring down283costs for consumers?284    The American people deserve an FCC that protects them from285hidden fees and promotes affordability. The FCC, though, is, in286my mind, doing just the opposite in allowing consolidations287that reduce competition and can help drive up costs.288    Americans are paying more than ever for streaming, cable,289wireless services. Streaming costs are up 13 percent this year290alone, basic cable costs have more than doubled in the last 10291years, and Americans are paying more than almost any other292country for wireless.293    And what is the FCC doing to help drive down those costs?294Congress passed bipartisan legislation to ensure transparency295in billing, but Chairman Carr has proposed to punch holes in296those rules to implement that.297    He is making it easier for big corporations to tack on298hidden fees to your Internet bills. I have even heard299consideration by some groups saying that we should take away300spectrum from broadcast television stations because maybe they301are not getting enough use and maybe we should have even less302competition.303    So it is clear to me that the FCC, we need to do everything304to protect consumers including protecting them from the harms305of AI.306    So instead I see an FCC that is not focused enough on307affordability. That is why today we are releasing a snapshot308report from the minority here talking about why consolidation309and reduced competition is driving up costs.310    So, hopefully, we can ask some questions about that today311and focus on what we need to do to keep local journalism, to312keep broadcasting, and to make sure that we do not have undue313influence.314    We now know that this issue, as related to Jimmy Kimmel,315quote, ``the easy way or the hard way'' is just an example, and316I certainly appreciate Chairman Cruz's words saying it was317``dangerous as hell and right out of Goodfellas.''318    But I also appreciate Leader Thune and former Majority319Leader McConnell agreeing that this went too far. The question320is how do we now make sure that we continue to have not so much321consolidation?322    Because I know, Chairman Carr, you have supported323consolidation that makes it easier to have influence and to324have less competition. Local news and independent voices325matter, and consolidation undermines that independence and326drives up costs.327    What happens if a merger does take place and CBS and CNN328are in the same boat? Are they going to continue to be the same329competitive environment or what will we do to make sure that330consumers still have a choice?331    Earlier this year, Chairman Carr greenlit the Skydance332acquisition of Paramount, but not before Paramount agreed to333pay $16 million in a lawsuit.334    Using the FCC process should not be used in this kind of335extortion process but to focus on what will drive down costs336and help consumers in this process.337    People across the political spectrum agree there is too338much control in a few hands. Chris Ruddy, CEO of NewsMax, has339spoken about how corporate consolidation threatens local news.340    Chairman Carr, what are we doing to make sure that you are341going to continue to protect local media ownership and grow342this opportunity?343    We do not want to see content that is produced nationally344for local broadcast. I am right now suffering from an345unbelievable flood that has gone on for days and days.346    Today's latest challenge will be a blizzard. They are wall347to wall with news. For the safety of the citizenry of348Washington, I would hate to see broadcast content interrupted349or a station undermined to the point that they cannot do their350job in covering this unbelievable flood which is affecting351every corner--almost every corner of our state.352    But beyond bringing down costs and protecting independent353media, I am also concerned about safety. Chinese intelligence354orchestrated Salt Typhoon attacks, which then Senator Rubio,355Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, described as,356quote, ``The most disturbing and widespread incursion into our357telecommunications system in the history of the world,'' end358quote.359    That should have led the FCC to strengthen our defenses.360Instead, Chairman Carr, you rolled back the FCC's Salt Typhoon361rules, the only major regulatory response to those attacks, and362the rush to auction off critical spectrum I believe could363undermine military readiness and aviation safety.364    Earlier this year, we wrote to Secretaries Duffy and365Hegseth outlining those concerns about safety. So I hope that366today's hearing can have the proper oversight on these367important issues--what are we doing not only to protect368consumers from costs but protect them on their safety and369security.370    Mr. Chairman, it is an important time. Not all of these371issues have happened in the last year but, clearly, we need to372do our job in continuing to help the American consumer get373information in a competitive landscape and also drive down374costs.375    I thank the Chairman. Look forward to hearing from the376witnesses.377    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cantwell.378    I will now introduce our witnesses. Our first witness is379Brendan Carr, the Chairman of the Federal Communications380Commission. He was designated as Chairman on January 20, 2025,381by President Trump and he has served on the Commission since3822017.383    Our second witness is Olivia Trusty, Commissioner at the384FCC. She was nominated by President Trump and confirmed by the385Senate this past June.386    Our final witness is Anna M. Gomez, Commissioner at the387FCC. She has served on the Commission since September 2023.388    Chairman Carr, you are recognized for your opening389statement.390391           STATEMENT OF HON. BRENDAN CARR, CHAIRMAN,392               FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION393394    Mr. Carr. Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell,395distinguished members of the Committee, thank you for the396invitation to testify.397    It has been a busy and productive year at the FCC with the398agency focused on delivering great results for the country. So399I welcome the chance to join with my Commission colleagues400today and discuss the agency's important work.401    While this is not my first time testifying before the402Committee, it is my first time appearing before you as Chairman403of the FCC.404    So I want to thank President Trump for the honor of leading405this exceptional agency. I also want to start by saying how406proud I am of the FCC's dedicated staff and everything they407have accomplished for the American people.408    In my view, the FCC's public servants are simply the best409in government. At the outset, I would also like to applaud the410important work that this committee has accomplished this411Congress.412    For instance, thanks to Chairman Cruz and many of his413fellow committee members, the FCC's spectrum auction authority414has now been restored through President Trump's Working415Families Tax Cut Act, a historic legislative accomplishment.416    In terms of the FCC's work, the agency has been following417President Trump's strong leadership and we have moved quickly418to execute on an ambitious set of reforms.419    We are advancing a build America agenda, a concrete plan to420unleash high-speed infrastructure bills, drive down prices for421consumers, and restore U.S. leadership in wireless.422    We are reinvigorating the agency's consumer protection work423including new efforts to crack down on illegal robocalls.424    We are strengthening America's national security with work425underway that tracks Senator Fischer and Senator Lujan's leads426on the FACT Act and we are empowering broadcasters to meet427their public interest obligations.428    I lost my page for a second there. Much of this represents429significant change from the Biden years. Indeed, when I took430over as Chairman the FCC faced several challenges.431    For one, the Biden administration allowed the U.S. to fall432behind when it came to one of the most important features of433our economic strength, spectrum.434    The FCC's spectrum auction authority had lapsed two years435earlier. The Biden administration had failed to tee up a single436new spectrum ban for auction, and the prior administration's437spectrum strategy committed to freeing up exactly zero438megahertz of spectrum.439    On top of this, permitting reform was going nowhere. The440Biden administration was layering on heavy-handed regulations441that only inflated prices and made it harder for broadband442builders to start turning dirt.443    We had to turn things around, and fast. Thanks to President444Trump's leadership we are doing exactly that. As I detail in my445testimony, the FCC's ``Build'' agenda focuses on unleashing our446Nation's construction crews by advancing several core goals.447    For one, we are modernizing permitting rules and cutting448red tape. For another, we are freeing up the airwaves that are449necessary for America to lead the world again.450    Indeed, we now have a massive new spectrum pipeline and are451working on multiple new spectrum auctions. In fact, the FCC452just voted on a proposal to auction up to 180 megahertz in the453upper C-band.454    For still another, we are boosting America's space economy455and in all of this we are already seeing results. One carrier456alone just announced that they lit up spectrum. They gained457access to this year to over 23,000 cell sites in record time,458boosting 5G speeds by up to 80 percent.459    President Trump and the FCC's ``Build'' agenda are also460delivering for America's workers. Providers are now adopting461faster payment cycles and fairer pricing, they are closing462loopholes that allowed foreign groups to swoop in and undercut463U.S. workers, and they are improving safety.464    Finally, the FCC is now pursuing the largest deregulatory465effort in the agency's history. To date, we have teed up for466removal over 1,000 rules or regulations and terminated a record4672,000 inactive proceedings.468    Eliminating those costly regulations is part of our469affordability work, too. For instance, we shut down a Biden-era470plan that could have spiked the price of Internet for millions471of Americans living in apartments by up to 50 percent, and in472many ways we are just getting started.473    I look forward to continuing to deliver on this important474agenda and, in closing, I want to thank you again for the475opportunity to testify.476    I look forward to your questions.477    [The prepared statement of Mr. Carr follows:]478479          Prepared Statement of Hon. Brendan Carr, Chairman,480                   Federal Communications Commission481    Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and Members of the482Committee, thank you for the invitation to testify. I am grateful for483the opportunity to join with my Commission colleagues today and provide484an update on the FCC's work over the last year. I look forward to485sharing with you the priorities we have been advancing at the FCC since486January.487    While this is not my first time testifying before the Commerce488Committee, it is my first time appearing before you as Chairman, and489there are a number of new members on the Committee since the last FCC490oversight hearing in 2020. So I wanted to begin with a brief491introduction.492    I first joined the FCC as a staffer in 2012 over a dozen years ago.493In the time since, I have had the privilege of serving in a number of494different roles at the agency. I started out as an attorney in the495FCC's Office of General Counsel. I then worked as a legal advisor for a496Commissioner. Following that, I served as the General Counsel of the497FCC before President Trump nominated me to serve as a Commissioner in4982017. Having been confirmed by the Senate three times, I am very499grateful to President Trump for his decision to designate me as500Chairman of the FCC earlier this year.501    Working alongside my Commission colleagues here today and leading502the talented group of public servants at the agency is the honor of a503lifetime. I am proud of the work the agency's dedicated staff have been504getting done for the American people. And I am especially grateful for505their commitment to public service through the recent government506shutdown. It is great to have everyone back in the building again.507    I would also like to take a moment to recognize the important work508that this Committee has accomplished this Congress. Thanks to Chairman509Cruz, and many of his fellow Committee Members, the FCC's spectrum510auction authority has now been restored through President Trump's One511Big Beautiful Bill. When the FCC's auction authority lapsed for the512first time ever back in 2023, it put America's global leadership and513our connectivity goals at serious risk. I am glad we are correcting514course now. I also want to applaud Chairman Cruz and Senator Markey for515their leadership on the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act. This516legislation will help keep AM radio--a linchpin of our emergency517response system--in place and ensure that Americans can continue to518access local news, information, and entertainment programming.519    Following President Trump's strong leadership, the FCC has moved520quickly to execute on an ambitious set of reforms. We are advancing a521Build America Agenda--a concrete plan to unleash high-speed522infrastructure builds, drive down prices for consumers, and restore523U.S. leadership in wireless. We are reinvigorating the agency's524consumer protection work, including its efforts to crack down on525illegal robocalls. We are empowering broadcasters to meet their public526interest obligations. We are strengthening America's national security527and advancing public safety. We are undertaking the largest528deregulatory effort in the agency's history. And we are eliminating529waste while improving efficiency and modernizing agency operations.530    I detailed much of this agenda for the first time on a visit531earlier this year to a tower construction company's training center in532Sioux Falls, South Dakota. While Sioux Falls might not be everyone's533pick for rolling out a policy agenda for a Federal agency headquartered534in Washington, D.C., I could not think of a more appropriate setting.535For one, the communities spread across South Dakota are a great536reminder of the types of places we have to keep in mind as we develop537connectivity policies back here in Washington. For another, I first538visited that facility over seven years earlier--it was the first place539that I ever put on a harness and hardhat in this job and climbed a540tower. So it was a good reminder of the work ahead for America's541broadband builders, and why the FCC's agenda should focus on making542their jobs a little bit easier.543    As I detailed in those remarks, the FCC's Build America Agenda544focuses on a number of core priorities. I would like to provide the545Committee with an overview of those goals, and the work the FCC is546undertaking to advance them and some of the agency's other top agenda547items.548Unleashing High-Speed Infrastructure Builds549    The FCC is working to unleash high-speed infrastructure builds in550communities across the country. We are modernizing permitting rules and551cutting red tape. This includes making it easier for providers to552retire slow and old copper lines and replace them with the modern,553high-speed ones that consumers want. We are accelerating and554simplifying the process for extending new lines across existing utility555poles. And we are pursuing a range of additional steps that can remove556barriers to deployment and streamline regulatory approaches. These557actions will free up billions of dollars in capital that can go to work558closing the digital divide.559    At the same time, we are ending the Biden-era regulatory560overreaches that only made it harder to build high-speed infrastructure561in this country. This year, for instance, the FCC reversed a Biden-era562plan that would have slowed down infrastructure builds by subjecting563tower builds to additional, needless, and onerous regulations. We also564stopped a Biden-era proposal to regulate so-called ``bulk billing''565arrangements, which could have increased the price of Internet service566for Americans living in apartments by as much as 50 percent. And at the567very beginning of this year, a Federal court invalidated the prior568FCC's plan to expand government control of the Internet through heavy-569handed, Title II regulation.570Restoring America's Leadership in Wireless571    The FCC has also been working hard to free up airwaves and restore572the country's leadership in wireless. This is key because opening up573spectrum for more intensive use drives down prices for consumers,574brings families across the digital divide, and strengthens competition.575But at the beginning of this year, the FCC had a lot of work to do on576this front. Our spectrum auction authority had lapsed two years577earlier. And there was no pipeline of spectrum for the agency to578auction.579    Thanks to President Trump's leadership, we are turning things580around--and fast. At my very first meeting as FCC Chairman, we started581a proceeding to examine ideas for freeing up a large swath of spectrum582in the Upper C-band. The White House then initiated a ten-week583``spectrum sprint'' to study options for lighting up hundreds of584megahertz of spectrum. And President Trump leaned in--making it clear585that advancing America's 5G and 6G leadership would be a top priority586for the Administration.587    Chairman Cruz and many members of this Committee then spearheaded588the work to pass the spectrum provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill.589Those provisions restored the FCC's auction authority and established a590real spectrum pipeline--one with hard deadlines, clearing targets, and591candidate bands.592    For our part, the One Big Beautiful Bill requires the FCC to593auction at least 100 megahertz of spectrum in the Upper C-band by July5942027 and at least 300 megahertz total by 2034. The FCC has been working595hard to implement those provisions in coordination with other Federal596agencies and stakeholders. Indeed, just last month, the Commission597voted on a proposal to auction up to 180 megahertz of spectrum in the598Upper C-band--exceeding the 100 megahertz minimum set by Congress.599    Of course, a lot of work remains ahead on the C-band. Success will600require continued interagency coordination, especially with our Federal601partners at the FAA and NTIA. It also requires extensive cooperation602and information sharing between the wireless and aviation sectors. We603have been working well with all stakeholders, and I am pleased with the604collaboration we've seen to date.605    But our work to advance U.S. spectrum leadership is not limited to606the Upper C-band or even spectrum auctions alone. In the secondary607markets, we are now seeing large swaths of spectrum moving into the608hands of competitors that can put it to productive use quickly. On this609score, AT&T recently agreed to purchase 50 megahertz of spectrum. And610SpaceX has agreed to acquire 60 megahertz more. If approved, the latter611transaction could advance America's position as the world-leader in612next-generation, direct-to-cell technology. These secondary market613moves are already showing results. Indeed, just recently, one carrier614announced that they have already built out spectrum they gained access615to this year to over 23,000 cell sites in record time--boosting 5G616speeds by up to 80 percent.617Boosting America's Space Economy618    President Trump has been clear that the Administration is ushering619in a new Golden Age for space innovation in America. And President620Trump's leadership could not come at a better time. Our nation is in621the midst of what I refer to as a Space Race 2.0. This time around our622main competitor is the government of China, which has its sights set on623dominating in low-Earth orbit and up and down every orbital location.624    To win this second Space Race, the U.S. is going to rely on625American innovators. And I have had the chance to see these great626businesses firsthand on visits outside the Beltway. Earlier this year,627for instance, I visited Midland, Texas, with Chairman Cruz where we saw628some of the Nation's leading innovators building next-gen satellites in629West Texas.630    The FCC's efforts on this front are possible thanks to the631Executive Order President Trump signed earlier this year to streamline632regulations and foster a competitive commercial space industry. The FCC633is following the White House's lead. We are looking to add rocket fuel634to our space economy and give the private sector a predictable635regulatory framework by focusing on four main principles: speed,636simplicity, security, and satellite spectrum abundance. We are already637clearing out application backlogs and standardizing procedures in638furtherance of that agenda.639Strengthening America's Telecom Workers640    I have had the chance to climb towers, splice fiber, and string641lines with some of the country's most talented and hardworking telecom642crews. So it is important to me that the FCC do its part to strengthen643the Nation's telecom workforce. I am determined to ensure that our644nation's tower and telecom crews are rewarded for their work. And they645are poised to benefit greatly from President Trump's leadership and the646agency's Build America Agenda.647    We are already seeing good results. Over the last year, many648communications providers have committed to a range of workforce reforms649that will result in a more sustainable environment for America's tower650and telecom crews. Providers are now adopting faster payment cycles and651fairer pricing metrics. They are minimizing layers of subcontracting,652which will allow for greater oversight of crews and stronger safety653protections. And they are closing loopholes that allowed foreign, fly-654by-night groups to swoop in and undercut U.S. crews. The FCC will655continue to look out for American workers.656Reinvigorating the FCC's Consumer Protection Work657    The FCC has been working hard to reinvigorate and modernize our658consumer protection work. Of course, the issue the FCC hears about the659most through consumer complaints is illegal robocalls. And on this660front, the FCC has started a new campaign to tackle illegal robocalls661at every point in the call path. For years, the government's efforts in662this area have been described as a game of whack-a-mole. When we663address one type of scam, or fine a bad actor, another one pops up664using a new workaround.665    So we are now looking at every portion of the call lifecycle. We666are focusing on prevention--stopping bad actors from ever originating667calls in the first place. We are pushing carriers to block more illegal668robocalls before they reach consumers. We are giving consumers better669tools to distinguish legitimate calls from scams. We are looking to670curb scam calls that originate outside of the United States by671deterring the use of U.S. area codes for calls originating overseas.672And we are stepping up enforcement to make sure every provider doing673business in the U.S. takes proactive steps to mitigate robocalls.674Indeed, on my watch, the FCC has now removed over 1,200 non-compliant675voice service providers from the Robocall Mitigation Database, which676functionally disconnects them from the U.S. phone network. The FCC will677continue to crack down on shady providers using all of the tools at our678disposal.679    Our work on consumer protection matters also includes our efforts680to help Americans access the right resources during a time of crisis.681This year, for instance, we adopted rules requiring wireless providers682to develop the capability to transmit georouting data when someone683sends a text to 988. This means that someone reaching out for help684during a crisis will get the localized help they need.685Empowering Local Broadcasters686    The FCC is working to empower local broadcasters to serve the687public interest and meet the needs of their communities. As Congress,688the Supreme Court, and the FCC have all made clear, broadcasters are689different than every other distributor of media. Specifically,690broadcasters are required by both the Communications Act and the terms691of their FCC-issued licenses to operate in the public interest. This692sets them apart from cable channels, podcasts, streaming services,693social media, and countless other types of distributors that have no694public interest obligation. The FCC's broadcast hoax rule, its news695distortion policy, its political equal opportunity regulation, its696prohibition on obscene, indecent, and profane content, its localism697requirements--all of those and more apply uniquely to broadcasters.698Congress has instructed the FCC to enforce public interest requirements699on broadcasters. The FCC should do exactly that.700    Television broadcasters have this public interest obligation701because the government has given them the unique privilege of using a702scarce national resource--the public airwaves--and in doing so has703necessarily excluded others that might want to broadcast their own704programming over that same spectrum. That is why they are required to705serve, not just their own narrow interest, but the public interest,706including the needs of their local communities.707    To ensure that broadcasters can meet their public interest708obligations, the FCC has taken a number of actions, including seeking709public comment for the first time in more than 15 years on the710relationship between the large, national programmers on the one hand711and the many local broadcast television stations on the other. Comments712in that proceeding suggest that many local broadcasters are concerned713that the national programmers have amassed enormous power and influence714in recent years and have made it more challenging for local715broadcasters to fulfill their public interest obligations.716    The FCC is going to continue its efforts to empower local717broadcasters to meet their public interest obligations.718Promoting National Security and Advancing Public Safety719    The FCC has significantly ramped up its efforts this year to720promote our country's national security and advance public safety. For721one, at the beginning of my time as Chairman, I stood up a new Council722on National Security within the FCC to leverage all of the agency's723authorities, expertise, and relevant workstreams to counter the threats724posed by foreign adversaries, including the government of China. This725Council is already paying dividends. The FCC cracked down on what we726call ``Bad Labs''--labs that review and approve electronics for use in727the United States, but are owned or controlled by foreign adversary728governments. The Council on National Security also executed Operation729Clean Carts, which worked with e-commerce platforms to take down730millions of listings of devices on the FCC's Covered List or otherwise731prohibited for sale in the United States.732    And that's not all. In May, the FCC started the process of733identifying foreign adversaries that hold licenses or authorizations in734the communications sector, in line with the policy of Senator Fischer735and Senator Lujan's FACT Act. In August, the FCC adopted new rules on736undersea cable security, following President Trump's America First737Investment Policy Memorandum. In those rules, we took action to unleash738the build out of undersea cables to ensure the U.S. leads the world on739AI infrastructure, as the President's AI Action Plan calls for, while740mitigating threats to undersea cables from foreign adversaries. In741October, the FCC closed two loopholes that provided no check on old742models of covered equipment--potential spy gear--to be imported or743sold, as well as allowed devices to be approved that contain covered744equipment as module components. And most recently, in the wake of SALT745Typhoon, the FCC has worked directly with carriers to ensure that they746are adapting their cybersecurity practices and hardening their networks747against future attacks, including by working with Federal partners like748the FBI, NSA, and CISA to receive technical assistance on networks,749rapidly share information, and working together to strengthen cyber750defenses.751    Beyond threats from foreign adversaries, the FCC also continues to752foster network resilience in the face of natural disasters. My first753trip as Chairman of the FCC was to Western North Carolina where I754visited several of Hurricane Helene's hardest-hit areas and met with755emergency management and public safety officials, telecom crews,756broadcasters, and other government representatives that worked to757rebuild those communities. In July, we hosted a public roundtable758focused on collaboration between communications service providers,759electric utilities, and emergency management officials. Following the760discussion, we published Cross-Sector Best Practices for Hurricane761Season in September focused on disaster recovery, ``blue sky''762coordination efforts, and mutual cross-sector aid and assistance,763building on the work of the Mandatory Disaster Response Initiative.764    Earlier this year, the FCC also began the process of a ground-up765re-examination of the national alert and warning systems, including the766Emergency Alert System and Wireless Emergency Alerts. The underlying767frameworks of these systems are 31 and 13 years old, respectively, so768it is important to ensure the FCC is leveraging the latest technology769to save lives.770    The FCC has also worked to strengthen and modernize our Nation's771public safety systems. In March, the FCC proposed requirements to772improve location precision for 911 callers in multistory buildings. We773also moved forward with a proposal that would make the transition from774legacy 911 to NG911 effective and reliable without creating new775vulnerabilities in critical public safety networks.776Streamlining Regulations and Modernizing Agency Operations777    Right now, the FCC is also undertaking the largest deregulatory778initiative in the agency's history. At the beginning of my tenure as779Chairman, I launched an effort titled ``In Re: Delete, Delete,780Delete.'' Since then, the FCC has been reviewing every rule,781regulation, and guidance document for the purpose of eliminating782unnecessary regulatory burdens, and we sought feedback from783stakeholders to get their perspectives as well.784    I am now pleased to report that to date the FCC has removed or teed785up for removal 1,108 rules and regulations, 134,928 words, and 312786pages of the Code of Federal Regulations. The FCC has also worked to787close out inactive dockets and has terminated a record 2,048 inactive788proceedings. These initiatives further the Commission's goal of789promoting good governance, increasing efficiency, and modernizing790agency processes.791    Improving efficiency at the FCC does not stop with examining the792CFR and open FCC dockets. We are also working to be good stewards of793the taxpayers' funds. In Fiscal Year 2025, we generated millions of794dollars in savings by eliminating or modifying unnecessary contracts.795We also brought agency staff back into the building to foster in-person796collaboration to deliver on the FCC's mission.797    As you can tell, the FCC and its hardworking staff have been moving798fast to deliver great results for the American people this year. I799thank them for their dedicated service. And I look forward to the800important work ahead.801                                 * * *802    In closing, I want to thank you again Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member803Cantwell, and Members of the Committee for holding this hearing and for804the opportunity to testify. I look forward to answering your questions.805806    The Chairman. Thank you.807    Commissioner Trusty.808809           STATEMENT OF OLIVIA TRUSTY, COMMISSIONER,810               FEDERAL COMMUNCIATIONS COMMISSION811812    Ms. Trusty. Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and813members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to814appear before you today.815    It has been nearly six months since I was sworn in as a816commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission. In that817time, I have had the privilege of working on policies to expand818access to high-speed connectivity, enhance the resilience of819the Nation's communications networks, and restore U.S.820leadership in next-generation communications technologies.821    Critical to my work has been the opportunity to travel822across the country and around the world to hear directly from823broadband providers, tower engineers, fiber splicers,824consumers, and our international partners and allies.825    Whether in Jackson, Mississippi; Eek, Alaska; or Baku,826Azerbaijan; I heard about the state of the communications827marketplace and how access to fixed, mobile, and satellite828connectivity is delivering on the promise of job creation,829technological innovation, and economic prosperity.830    In Jackson, Mississippi, I saw how broadband is delivering831quality, life-saving care straight into the homes of832Mississippians across the Magnolia state.833    Doctors at the University of Mississippi Medical Center are834treating chronic illnesses, managing high-risk pregnancies, and835delivering mental health care by video to rural communities836that would otherwise go without these essential services.837    In Bethel and Eek, Alaska, I saw how access to broadband is838transforming lives. These Alaskan towns are home to some of the839most rugged and hard-to-reach terrain, and broadband is840enabling Alaskan Natives and non-Natives alike to contribute to841and benefit from the global digital economy while maintaining842their treasured culture and way of life.843    And this fall I traveled to Baku, Azerbaijan, to represent844the United States at the International Telecommunication845Union's World Telecommunication Development Conference.846    There, ministers and regulators from around the globe847highlighted their progress on closing the digital divide within848their nation's borders.849    They also used this forum to seek U.S. guidance and850leadership on maximizing spectrum efficiency, building trusted851networks and secure supply chains, and creating a regulatory852environment that invites continued innovation, investment, and853competition while protecting consumers and enhancing public854safety.855    These are issues we confront at the FCC in almost every856proceeding. They also inform the three priorities guiding my857work: universal connectivity, network resilience, and U.S.858leadership.859    Ensuring that every American has access to communication860services has been the FCC's core mission since its founding.861Following my confirmation, the Supreme Court affirmed the862constitutionality of the Universal Service Fund.863    I commend the bipartisan, bicameral, congressional USF864working group for taking the initiative to identify reforms to865ensure the program's sustainability and continued support for866the operation and maintenance of communications networks in867rural and remote areas.868    In an era of growing digital hostility, however, achieving869universal connectivity requires increased focus on the870deployment of trusted and resilient network infrastructure.871    Our communications networks are the backbone of both our872economy and our defense. From robocall scams to foreign-made873network components to infrastructure vandalism and copper874theft, the threats are evolving rapidly.875    Recent Commission actions to remove foreign adversary-owned876labs from our equipment authorization process, to block illegal877robocalls from exploiting American consumers, and to garner878commitments from broadband providers to harden their network879infrastructure will enhance network integrity while allowing us880to maintain agility in responding to new and emerging threats.881    U.S. leadership in next-generation technologies--6G, AI,882emerging commercial services in space, and more--hinges on our883ability to deploy high-speed and resilient communications884infrastructure to every corner of the country.885    Thanks to President Trump and the leadership of Chairman886Cruz and the members of this committee, the Commission's887general spectrum auction authority has been restored, along888with the creation of a long-term spectrum pipeline.889    This positions America to lead in wireless innovation and890beyond. Our continued success in technological advancement will891ultimately be determined by a domestic and international892regulatory environment that emphasizes innovation, competition,893and global cooperation.894    Importantly, U.S. leadership is not inevitable. It must be895earned. I look forward to working with members of this896committee and our interagency partners to ensure the United897States is positioned to capture first-mover advantages in the898technologies that will define the future of our economic and899national security.900    Mr. Chairman, thank you again for this opportunity to901testify. I look forward to answering your questions.902    [The prepared statement of Ms. Trusty follows:]903904          Prepared Statement of Olivia Trusty, Commissioner,905                   Federal Communications Commission906    Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members of the907Committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.908    It has been nearly six months since I was sworn in as a909Commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission. In that time, I910have had the privilege of working on policies to expand access to high-911speed connectivity, enhance the resilience of the Nation's912communications networks, and restore U.S. leadership in next-generation913communications technologies.914    Critical to my work has been the opportunity to travel across the915country and around the world to hear directly from broadband providers,916tower engineers, fiber splicers, consumers, and our international917partners and allies. Whether in Jackson, Mississippi, Eek, Alaska, or918Baku, Azerbaijan, I heard about the state of the communications919marketplace and how access to fixed, mobile, and satellite connectivity920is delivering on the promise of job creation, technological innovation,921and economic prosperity.922    In Jackson, Mississippi, I saw how broadband is delivering quality,923life-saving care straight into the homes of Mississippians across the924Magnolia State. Doctors at the University of Mississippi Medical Center925are treating chronic illnesses, managing high-risk pregnancies, and926delivering mental health care by video to rural communities that would927otherwise go without these essential services.928    In Bethel and Eek, Alaska, I saw how access to broadband is929transforming lives. These Alaskan towns are home to some of the most930rugged and hard-to-reach terrain, and broadband is enabling Alaska931Natives and Non-Natives alike to contribute to, and benefit from, the932global digital economy, while maintaining their treasured culture and933way of life.934    And this fall, I traveled to Baku, Azerbaijan, to represent the935United States at the International Telecommunication Union's World936Telecommunication Development Conference. There, ministers and937regulators from around the globe highlighted their progress on closing938the digital divide within their nation's borders. They also used this939forum to seek U.S. guidance and leadership on maximizing spectrum940efficiency, building trusted networks and secure supply chains, and941creating a regulatory environment that invites continued innovation,942investment, and competition, while protecting consumers and enhancing943public safety.944    These are issues we confront at the FCC in almost every proceeding.945They also inform the three priorities guiding my work: universal946connectivity, network resilience, and U.S. leadership.947    Ensuring that every American has access to communications services948has been the FCC's core mission since its founding. Following my949confirmation, the Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of the950Universal Service Fund. I commend the bipartisan, bicameral951congressional USF Working Group for taking the initiative to identify952reforms to ensure the program's sustainability and continued support953for the operation and maintenance of communications networks in rural954and remote areas.955    In an era of growing digital hostility, however, achieving956universal connectivity requires increased focus on the deployment of957trusted and resilient network infrastructure. Our communications958networks are the backbone of both our economy and our defense. From959robocall scams to foreign-made network components, to infrastructure960vandalism and copper theft, the threats are evolving rapidly. Recent961Commission actions to remove foreign adversary-owned labs from our962equipment authorization process, to block illegal robocalls from963exploiting American consumers, and to garner commitments from broadband964providers to harden their network infrastructure, will enhance network965integrity, while allowing us to maintain agility in responding to new966and emerging threats.967    U.S. leadership in next-generation technologies--6G, AI, emerging968commercial services in space and more--hinges on our ability to deploy969high-speed and resilient communications infrastructure to every corner970of the country. Thanks to President Trump and the leadership of971Chairman Cruz, and the members of this Committee, the Commission's972general spectrum auction authority has been restored, along with the973creation of a long-term spectrum pipeline. This positions America to974lead in wireless innovation and beyond. Our continued success in975technological advancement will ultimately be determined by a domestic976and international regulatory environment that emphasizes innovation,977competition, and global cooperation. Importantly, U.S. leadership isn't978inevitable, it must be earned. I look forward to working with members979of this committee and our interagency partners to ensure the United980States is positioned to capture first-mover advantages in technologies981that will define the future of our economic and national security.982    Mr. Chairman, thank you, again, for this opportunity to testify. I983look forward to your questions.984985    The Chairman. Thank you.986    Commissioner Gomez.987988           STATEMENT OF ANNA M. GOMEZ, COMMISSIONER,989               FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION990991    Ms. Gomez. Thank you.992    Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and the993distinguished members of this Committee, thank you for the994opportunity to appear before you today.995    As Commissioner, my priorities have centered on expanding996reliable and affordable connectivity to every community,997maintaining U.S. leadership through smart spectrum policy,998preserving localism in a vibrant media ecosystem, and ensuring999first responders have the tools they need to reach the public1000when it matters most.1001    These priorities reflect longstanding bipartisan goals and1002they are the areas where I had hoped we would be spending our1003time and energy with a shared commitment to serving consumers.1004    Instead, over the past 10 months, the Commission has taken1005a markedly different approach, one that has undermined its1006reputation as a stable, independent, and expert-driven1007regulatory body.1008    Nowhere is that departure more concerning than in its1009actions to intimidate government critics, pressure media1010companies, and challenge the boundaries of the First Amendment.1011    It is precisely because of these concerns that I launched a1012First Amendment tour earlier this year, traveling across the1013country to hear directly from communities.1014    My goal was simple--to listen, engage, and to reaffirm that1015the FCC's work must remain grounded in constitutional1016principles and public trust, and I have found myself aligned1017with voices across the ideological spectrum, united by a shared1018belief that the First Amendment is fundamental to our democracy1019and worth defending, even when doing so is politically1020inconvenient.1021    In that spirit, I want to thank Chairman Cruz for speaking1022out in defense of the First Amendment and for his continued1023engagement on this critical issue.1024    One thing I learned during these conversations is that when1025the FCC strays from its core mission, consumers pay the price.1026That reality results in higher costs, fewer voices and choices,1027and missed opportunities to expand access across communications1028ecosystems.1029    One clear example of where Congress and the Commission have1030been aligned is spectrum policy. I want to thank Congress for1031restoring our spectrum auction authority. This is an important1032step toward expanding capacity, promoting competition, and1033maintaining U.S. leadership in wireless innovation.1034    When spectrum policy is done properly, it lowers costs for1035consumers and it fuels economic growth. Yet, spectrum is only1036part of the story. Millions of households have faced rising1037broadband costs following the lapse of the Affordable1038Connectivity Program with little action from the Commission1039focused on affordability or consumer relief.1040    These missed opportunities reflect a troubling lack of1041focus on the everyday challenges consumers face in accessing1042and affording essential communications services. Beyond missed1043opportunities, the FCC has taken affirmative actions that have1044raised costs and reduced the choice for consumers.1045    FCC actions contributed to the loss of a potential fourth1046competitor on national wireless front, weakening competition1047and increasing the risk of higher prices.1048    At the same time, the Commission reversed the work it had1049previously done under congressional mandate to lower the cost1050of prison communications and chose to increase the cost of1051phone and video calls, leaving some of the most vulnerable1052families paying excessive rates to stay connected with loved1053ones.1054    These affordability concerns are especially acute in the1055media landscape. The FCC has advanced plans that would allow1056billion-dollar media companies to grow even larger at the1057expense of local news and community-driven reporting.1058    This push comes at a time when major media companies are1059already consolidating across broadcasting, streaming, and1060content production, raising serious questions about market1061power, editorial independence, and the future of community-1062based journalism.1063    The national television ownership cap is established by law1064and reflects Congress' judgment about the importance of1065competition, localism, and viewpoint diversity.1066    Efforts to sidestep that statutory limit present1067significant issues concerning the scope of the FCC's authority1068and the consequences for those it regulates and serves.1069    Whether in broadcasting or streaming, media consolidation1070should not erode the independence of the press or diminish the1071voices of local communities.1072    I have always believed that the FCC does its best work when1073it honors the needs of the people it serves. When the agency1074focuses on lowering costs, expanding opportunity, and1075protecting the ability of communities to communicate and to be1076heard, it builds public trust and produces real benefits for1077consumers.1078    I look forward to working with this committee to ensure the1079FCC returns to that mission and continues to serve the American1080people with integrity and independence.1081    Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.1082    [The prepared statement of Ms. Gomez follows:]10831084          Prepared Statement of Anna M. Gomez, Commissioner,1085                   Federal Communications Commission1086    Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and distinguished Members1087of the Senate Commerce Committee, thank you for the opportunity to1088appear before you today.1089    When I was confirmed as an FCC Commissioner just over two years1090ago, I could not have anticipated the pace or the magnitude of the1091challenges we now face.1092    As Commissioner, my priorities have centered on expanding reliable1093and affordable high-speed connectivity to every community; maintaining1094U.S. leadership in wireless innovation through smart spectrum policy;1095preserving localism and a vibrant media ecosystem; and ensuring first1096responders have the tools they need to reach the public when it matters1097most.1098    These priorities reflect long-standing, bipartisan goals that1099should unite this Committee and the Commission alike. They are the1100kinds of issues the FCC has traditionally addressed with seriousness1101and a shared commitment to serving consumers. And they are the areas1102where I had hoped we would be spending our time and energy.1103    Instead, over the past ten months, the Commission has taken a1104markedly different approach, one that has undermined its reputation as1105a stable, independent, and expert-driven regulatory body.1106    Nowhere is that departure more concerning than in its actions to1107intimidate government critics, pressure media companies, and challenge1108the boundaries of the First Amendment.1109    It is precisely because of these concerns that I launched a First1110Amendment Tour earlier this year, traveling across the country to hear1111directly from communities in Mississippi, Kentucky, Florida, Illinois,1112Maryland, Washington State, New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, and1113California. My goal was simple: to listen, to engage, and to reaffirm1114that the FCC's work must remain grounded in constitutional principles1115and public trust.1116    And, I have found myself aligned with voices across the ideological1117spectrum, united by a shared belief that the First Amendment is1118fundamental to our democracy and worth defending, even when doing so is1119politically inconvenient. In that spirit, I want to thank Chairman Cruz1120for speaking out in defense of the First Amendment and for his1121continued engagement on this critical issue.1122    One thing I learned during these conversations is that when the FCC1123loses its focus and strays from its core mission, consumers pay the1124price. That reality results in higher costs, fewer choices, and missed1125opportunities to expand access across the communications ecosystem.1126    One clear example of where Congress and the Commission has been1127aligned is spectrum policy. For years, the FCC was hamstrung by the1128lack of auction authority, limiting our ability to innovate and bring1129new spectrum to market. I want to thank Congress for restoring our1130spectrum auction authority. This is an important step toward expanding1131capacity, promoting competition, and maintaining U.S. leadership in1132wireless innovation. When spectrum policy is done properly, it lowers1133costs for consumers and fuels economic growth. Over the next few1134months, continued bipartisan engagement on this issue will be critical1135to getting it right.1136    Yet spectrum is only part of the story. At the same time, millions1137of households have faced rising broadband costs following the lapse of1138the Affordable Connectivity Program, with little action from the1139Commission focused on affordability or consumer relief. Taken together,1140these missed opportunities reflect a troubling lack of focus on the1141everyday challenges consumers face in accessing and affording essential1142communications services.1143    Beyond missed opportunities, this FCC has taken affirmative actions1144that have raised costs and reduced choice for consumers. In the1145wireless market, FCC actions contributed to the loss of a potential1146fourth national wireless competitor, weakening competition and1147increasing the risk of higher prices. At the same time, the Commission1148reversed the work it had previously done under congressional mandate to1149lower the cost of prison communications and chose to increase the cost1150of phone and video calls, leaving some of the most vulnerable families1151paying excessive rates to stay connected with loved ones.1152    These concerns are especially acute in the media landscape. The FCC1153has advanced plans that would allow billion-dollar media companies to1154grow even larger, likely at the expense of local news and community-1155driven reporting. This push comes at a time when major media companies1156are already consolidating across broadcasting, streaming, and content1157production, raising serious questions about market power, editorial1158independence, and the future of community-based journalism.1159    The national television ownership cap is established by law and1160reflects Congress's judgment about the importance of competition,1161localism, and viewpoint diversity. Efforts by this FCC to reinterpret1162or effectively sidestep that statutory limit present significant issues1163concerning the scope of the FCC's authority and the consequences for1164those it regulates and serves. Whether in broadcasting or streaming,1165media consolidation should not erode the independence of the press or1166diminish the voices of local communities. Taken together, these actions1167underscore the need for the FCC to refocus on the principles that1168matter in the real world and the impacts its decisions have beyond1169Washington.1170    I have always believed that the FCC does its best work when it1171honors the needs of the people it serves. When the agency focuses on1172lowering costs, expanding opportunity, and protecting the ability of1173communities to communicate and be heard, it builds public trust and1174produces real benefits for consumers. I look forward to working with1175this Committee to ensure the FCC returns to that mission and continues1176to serve the American people with integrity and independence.1177    Thank you again for the opportunity to join you today. I look1178forward to your questions.11791180    The Chairman. Thank you to each of you.1181    Chairman Carr, let us start with free speech. I think you1182would agree that the FCC's public interest standard has been1183weaponized against conservatives in the past.1184    In 2018, Senate Democrats tried to pressure the FCC to use1185the public interest standard to stop Sinclair Broadcasting1186Group from acquiring Tribune Media.1187    In 2023, leftists sought to stop a routine renewal of a1188Fox-owned broadcast station over complaints about 2020 election1189coverage.1190    Do you agree that that was wrong?1191    Mr. Carr. Yes, Senator, I agree, and those are cases, in1192fact, where rather than following FCC precedent the agency1193broke from it and did so in a weaponized way.1194    The Chairman. Now, another area of agreement between you1195and I is that Jimmy Kimmel is angry, overtly partisan, and1196profoundly unfunny. That, sadly, is true for most late-night1197comedians today who seem to have been collectively broken by1198President Trump's election.1199    Jimmy's remarks about Charlie Kirk were tasteless, and ABC1200and its affiliates would have been fully within their rights to1201fire him or simply to no longer air his program. That was their1202choice.1203    But what government cannot do is force private entities to1204take actions that the government cannot take directly.1205Government officials threatening adverse consequences for1206disfavored content is an unconstitutional coercion that chills1207protected speech.1208    This is why it was so insidious how the Biden1209administration jawboned social media into shutting down1210conservatives online over accurate information on COVID or1211voter fraud.1212    My Democrat colleagues were persistently silent over that1213scandal, but I welcome them now having discovered the First1214Amendment and the Bill of Rights. Democrat or Republican, we1215cannot have the government arbitrating truth or opinion.1216    Mr. Chairman, my question is this. So long as there is a1217public interest standard should it not be understood to1218encompass robust First Amendment protections to ensure that the1219FCC cannot use it to chill speech?1220    Mr. Carr. Yes, Senator, I agree with you there, and I think1221the examples you laid out of weaponization during the Biden1222years are perfect examples.1223    The Fox case you mentioned was a renewal for a broadcast TV1224license and petitioners sought to have the FCC not renew it1225based on content that aired on a separate cable channel.1226    In a cable context, it is entirely different. There is no1227license. There is no public interest standard. So first and1228foremost, we have to make sure the FCC is hewing to precedent.1229    Similarly, we saw Democrats in Congress write letters to1230cable companies pressuring them to drop Fox News, OAN, and1231Newsmax because they disagreed with the political perspectives1232of those cable channels and there, again, it is cable.1233    No broadcast license, no public interest standard. So the1234FCC has to write within the four corners of our precedents to1235be consistent with the Communications Act and the First1236Amendment concerns as well.1237    The Chairman. All right. Let us shift to spectrum.1238    One of the biggest economic and national security wins in1239the Working Families Tax Cut Act was restoring the FCC's1240auction authority and creating the largest spectrum pipeline--1241800 megahertz of spectrum--in U.S. history.1242    It will not just bring faster and cheaper wireless to1243consumers, but it will keep the United States competitive in1244the global 6G race against communist China. I am encouraged1245that the FCC has already begun the process of freeing up1246potentially as much as 180 megahertz of C-band spectrum.1247    Chairman Carr, is the Commission on track to meet the law's1248spectrum deadlines and to fully deliver on the bill's1249obligations?1250    Mr. Carr. Yes, Senator, and, again, thank you to you for1251restoring the FCC's auction authority. We had fallen into a1252deep spectrum malaise during the Biden years. We were losing1253our leadership position.1254    Right now, we are very actively working with our partners1255across government, Department of Transportation, FAA, NTIA, and1256we are all aligned to deliver on the statutory deadline of July12572027 for that auction.1258    The Chairman. And what will the benefits to consumers be of1259800 megahertz of spectrum being made available for auction for1260the private sector?1261    Mr. Carr. First of all, this will allow us to catch back up1262to China. When President Trump left at the end of his Trump 451263administration, we had leapfrogged China and were set up in a1264very good position.1265    But then we did not move forward with any new spectrum1266bands and China moved ahead. So this is important for national1267security but also for prices for consumers.1268    The data shows when we free up more spectrum we can allow1269providers, for instance, to compete for in-home broadband and1270when they do that with fixed wireless we have seen that cable1271modem prices drop by 37 percent where they used to have a1272monopoly.1273    So it is good for our economy, for innovation, and for1274prices for consumers as well.1275    The Chairman. Commissioner Trusty, how does the spectrum1276auction pipeline and the Working Families Tax Cut help position1277the United States for success at the 2027 World Radio1278Conference?1279    Ms. Trusty. Yes, thank you so much for the question,1280Senator, and thank you again for your leadership in restoring1281the FCC's general spectrum auction authority and creating this1282long-term spectrum pipeline.1283    I think these spectrum provisions are foundational to1284developing a unified strategy going into the next World Radio1285Communications Conference where we can focus on key U.S.1286interests.1287    We can work with our international allies in advance to1288preempt those who are seeking to undermine U.S. interests at1289the conference in Shanghai, China.1290    In 2023, at the last World Radio Communications Conference1291we did not have this kind of legislative backing or support. We1292did not have auction authority. We did not have a long-term1293spectrum pipeline, and so we were sidelined on very important1294conversations.1295    Now that we have this authority, thanks to your leadership,1296we can constructively and meaningfully engage in these1297conversations that I think position us better to come out of1298this conference with wins that are essential for economic and1299national security and global leadership in next-generation1300communications technologies.1301    The Chairman. Terrific. Thank you.1302    Ranking Member Cantwell.1303    Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1304    Commissioner Carr--Chairman Carr--obviously, Salt Typhoon1305was a major attack on the United States infrastructure,1306government espionage by them, specifically exploiting the1307wiretap system built by law enforcement to track millions of1308Americans, their location, real-time phone calls, text1309messages, and according to senior officials, breached largely1310because the telecom companies did not implement basic1311cybersecurity measures like not putting a patch in place or1312router vulnerabilities.1313    At the beginning of the year, the FCC issued a ruling to1314hold the FCC companies accountable but the FCC rolled that back1315last month. So are these Chinese hackers still in the American1316telecom system?1317    Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator, for the question.1318    I agree with you that the Salt Typhoon incident should1319never have been allowed to happen. At the beginning of the year1320the Biden administration put forward a declaratory ruling, but1321no rules themselves were adopted at the time, and the FCC's1322decision itself did not go through the agency's normal review1323process.1324    When I spoke with the career intel officials then they were1325urging me not to move forward with a rulemaking but instead to1326work collaboratively and directly with the carriers to make1327sure they were taking real-time actions to address and1328remediate.1329    In fact, that is what we have been doing. We have worked1330directly with the carriers----1331    Senator Cantwell. Do you think there are still hackers in1332the system?1333    Mr. Carr. Well, recently over the summer, the FBI's Cyber1334Director--I will refer you to his remarks that are very1335specific on this and the Cyber Director for the FBI said that1336the hackers behind Salt Typhoon are, quote, ``largely1337contained,'' end quote, dormant in the networks, that they are1338not actively infiltrating information.1339    So I would, again, refer you to sort of the FBI which is1340the lead spokesperson on this issue. What we have done----1341    Senator Cantwell. I mean, I know what the FBI and CISA1342recommended. They said that you should use Signal, that1343everybody in America should get off of these systems and use1344other messaging services that had encrypted calling.1345    So I do not think this issue is solved and I think rolling1346back the rules that protect Americans--I think in this1347information age you need to have robust, robust security1348measures and you need to make sure that the telecom industry is1349implementing them. Otherwise, we will continue to have these1350kind of hacks on the system.1351    And so I do not agree with the rolling back of these1352issues. I do want to bring up a second issue, which is on cost1353and, Ms. Gomez, you articulated this as it related to EchoStar1354Dish, I think, but I think it is bigger than that.1355    We are seeing this massive amount of consolidation in the1356marketplace. I think we have a chart back here--if somebody1357could just hold it up for a second--about how, you know, we pay1358the most in wireless costs, we pay--or second in the world--the1359most or second most in broadband costs writ large.1360    And so the question is what are we going to do to drive1361down costs for consumers and how are these consolidations1362basically making it more challenging for us to give consumers1363real choice in the marketplace without cost?1364    And while I love spectrum and I want good international1365competition, I am more impressive with spectrum that does not1366interfere with DOD.1367    I am more impressed with spectrum that basically helps1368expand into rural areas and drives down costs, and more1369impressed with a spectrum policy that basically takes that low1370end of the market that does not have affordable costs and1371basically does something to help them participate in the1372market.1373    Why give more spectrum if the telecom companies float and1374decide not to do the rules on security and they just become1375basically richer while the American consumer becomes poorer?1376    And, again, this is just one example of how the United1377States is one of the most expensive in the country. But could1378you help explain a little more on your thoughts about what we1379do to increase competition and lower costs?1380    Ms. Gomez. Thank you, Senator.1381    I am a firm believer that robust competition results in1382benefits for consumers including lower costs, and I am1383concerned that the level of consolidation in this country is1384actually reducing the incentives that lead to lower costs for1385consumers.1386    And since you raised affordability, I am so glad you raised1387that because one of the things that I am very concerned about1388is the lack of a program to provide affordable access to1389connectivity for consumers throughout this country.1390    We are spending billions of dollars in order to deploy1391networks in the hardest to reach areas but we are not going to1392make sure that they are sustainable if people cannot afford to1393actually purchase that service. So we need----1394    Senator Cantwell. Is that not what has been wrong with1395spectrum policy writ large is we just--we sell the spectrum, we1396give it to the telco industry.1397    They basically expand to the areas that they can have1398customers but not to the hard-to-serve areas or figuring out a1399price point that will allow them to deliver a service so we can1400expand to the whatever it is, 20 million Americans that do not1401have broadband.1402    Ms. Gomez. Yes, that is exactly right. I mean, it is an1403incentive, as your economic incentive is where the profits are.1404So that is where government steps in.1405    Senator Cantwell. Well, I do not think that is where the1406FCC is stepping in.1407    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1408    The Chairman. Thank you.1409    Senator Fischer.14101411                STATEMENT OF HON. DEB FISCHER,1412                   U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA14131414    Senator Fischer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to1415our Commissioners for being here today.1416    Congress codified the Universal Service Mission three1417decades ago. It has been a fundamental building block in1418providing reliable communications and Internet across this1419country and in the hardest-to-reach places.1420    However, communications in the 1990s looked a lot different1421than they do in 2025.1422    Chairman Carr, given this reality and ongoing legal1423challenges to the Fund, would you agree that Congress has a1424vital role in modernizing the USF?1425    Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator, and thanks for your long-time1426leadership on these universal service issues. I have enjoyed1427the chance to visit with you in your state and see the1428important work that the Universal Service Program has done.1429    I commend the working group that is ongoing in the Senate1430looking at this issue, and I think you are right. I think it is1431time for Congress to take a fundamental look at the program to1432make sure it is fit for service in the coming years.1433    Senator Fischer. And Commissioner Trusty and Gomez, do you1434have anything you would like to add to that?1435    Commissioner Trusty.1436    Ms. Trusty. Thank you for the question, Senator. I agree.1437Thank you for your leadership on these issues. You have been a1438long-time leader on making sure we can meet connectivity needs1439in these areas.1440    I do agree that reforms for USF are very important. This is1441the cornerstone of the FCC's mission in connecting Americans1442across the country and USF is a part of that effort.1443    Senator Fischer. And, Senator Gomez, anything to add? Any1444comments about reforms?1445    Ms. Gomez. Yes, thank you, Senator, and, again, also thank1446you for yours and Senator Lujan's leadership on this issue.1447    I think it is very important for the Senate to help us to1448make the Universal Service Fund a sustainable program that1449ensures affordable access for all Americans, and I am really1450hopeful that what you are able to provide is that sustainable1451affordability program as part of your--the reforms that you put1452forward.1453    Senator Fischer. Thank you. As co-chair of the working1454group, I sent the Commission a letter with Senator Lujan1455earlier today and it requests a briefing to help inform1456Congress' efforts in this regard.1457    Chairman Carr, will you commit to getting a briefing on the1458books in January for our staff and the appropriate Commission1459personnel?1460    Mr. Carr. Yes, I look forward to working with you on this1461issue.1462    Senator Fischer. Great. Thank you.1463    The U.S. role in shaping global communications policy is1464vital for countering foreign threats to our networks and all1465the assets that they connect, and adding to--an element to this1466challenge is the upcoming World Radio Communication Conference1467that will take place in China.1468    Commissioner Trusty, what will be the biggest risks that1469this adds to a complex process?1470    Ms. Trusty. Thank you for the question, Senator.1471    I think security is the business risk that adds to this1472process, and as, you know, we are working at the FCC to ensure1473that providers uphold their commitments to patch outdated1474equipment, to update their access controls, to make sure they1475are improving threat intelligence sharing to further harden our1476networks, and I think a part of this process will mean more1477public-private partnerships so that we can share information,1478educating providers about how they can harden their networks as1479well as we travel over to Shanghai to participate in this1480conference.1481    I think there needs to continue to be whole-of-government1482conversations about how to protect our assets in this forum.1483    Senator Fischer. I would imagine that those are many of the1484things that you will take into account as the United States1485develops its positions at this conference, correct?1486    Ms. Trusty. That is absolutely right.1487    Senator Fischer. Thank you.1488    Senator Cantwell brought up spectrum. I cannot let it go by1489without also chiming in.1490    There are a lot of decisionmaking ahead for the Commission1491as it charts out spectrum resources for both licensed and1492unlicensed use, and I believe that balance needs to be the key1493here.1494    We know that unlicensed and shared spectrum technologies1495carry up to 90 percent of the U.S. communications each and1496every day.1497    Commissioner Trusty, moving forward, how should the1498Commission ensure that shared technologies can continue to1499flourish and innovate, and how do you preserve value between1500the different types of spectrum licensing in striking a1501balance?1502    Ms. Trusty. Thank you for this very important question,1503Senator.1504    I think the FCC has an all-of-the-above approach to looking1505at spectrum to accommodate a variety of users, use cases, and1506technologies.1507    So our immediate priority is the upper C-band, which will1508result in exclusive license use, but we also need more spectrum1509for unlicensed uses, for WiFi 7, WiFi 8, to support the1510Internet of Things and other forms of connectivity that is1511benefiting all Americans.1512    We also need spectrum for satellite and space uses so we1513have the satellite spectrum abundance proceeding where we are1514looking to make upward of 20,000 megahertz available for1515satellite and space reasons, and we are looking more1516intensively at bands above the 24 gigahertz band for fixed1517satellite services.1518    So the whole thing is we need an all-of-the-above approach1519so that we can accommodate a variety of users and use cases and1520advance U.S. leadership in these technologies.1521    Senator Fischer. Thank you very much. I look forward to1522having conversations with all of you on this in the future.1523    Thank you.1524    The Chairman. Thank you.1525    Senator Klobuchar.15261527               STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR,1528                  U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA15291530    Senator Klobuchar. Thank you. I would prefer to be asking1531questions about the bipartisan work that needs to be done on1532universal service and broadband and spectrum, and I will ask1533that in writing, but the events of this year move me to focus1534on free speech and our democracy.1535    Chairman Carr, in 2022 you tweeted, ``Political satire is1536one of the oldest and most important forms of free speech. It1537challenges those in power while using humor to draw more people1538into the discussion. That is why people in influential1539positions have always targeted it for censorship.''1540    Yes or no, do you still agree that political satire should1541be protected speech?1542    Mr. Carr. Yes, Senator, and whenever that satire or any1543other programming is over the public airways for broadcasters1544there is a public interest standard and there is a news1545distortion rule, a broadcast hoax rule, a political----1546    Senator Klobuchar. You answered it. You answered it yes and1547I am just----1548    Mr. Carr.--equal opportunity rule.1549    Senator Klobuchar. I am going to go on.1550    Mr. Carr. That particular instance, too, had to do with1551speech on social media where Biden administrations were trying1552to shut down political speech, again, an area where there is no1553license, there is no public interest standard. We want robust1554wide-open speech.1555    Senator Klobuchar. We will get to that in a minute. You1556know, I believe, too, that there is no place in chilling1557political satire, but after Jimmy Kimmel's monologue you went1558on a podcast and suggested that ABC should take Kimmel off the1559air saying, ``We can do this the easy way or the hard way.''1560    Those were your words. Do you think it is appropriate to1561use your position to threaten companies that broadcast1562political satire?1563    Mr. Carr. I think any licensee that operates on the public1564airways has a responsibility to comply with the public interest1565standard and that has been the case for decades.1566    Senator Klobuchar. I asked if you should--if you think it1567is appropriate for you to use your position to threaten1568companies, and this incident with Kimmel was not an isolated1569event.1570    You have launched investigations into every major broadcast1571network except Fox. Is that correct?1572    Mr. Carr. I do not know if that is true or not. We do have1573investigations going on NPR and PBS. We have a number of1574investigations that are ongoing.1575    I think if you step back, over the years I think the FCC1576has walked away from enforcing the public interest standard and1577I do not think that is a good thing.1578    Senator Klobuchar. OK. You brought up social media. So do1579you think it is appropriate for after a horrific murder and the1580stabbing--the stabbing of Rob Reiner and his wife--do you think1581it is appropriate for someone to say that it happened when they1582know better, reportedly due to the anger he caused others1583through his massive unyielding and incurable affliction with a1584mind-crippling disease known as Trump Derangement Syndrome?1585    He was known to have driven people crazy by his raging1586obsession of President Donald J. Trump with his obvious1587paranoia reaching new heights.1588    Do you think that is appropriate for the President of the1589United States to do that, and if Jimmy Kimmel would have said1590that would you have threatened to take him off the air?1591    Mr. Carr. Senator, look, Democrats on this dais are1592accusing me of engaging in censorship and now you are trying to1593encourage me to police speech on the internet. I am simply not1594going to do it. Broadcast television is----1595    Senator Klobuchar. Oh, I am just asking what kind of words.1596I think they are cruel. I think they hurt President Trump to1597say that kind of thing. I think it hurts him with trust in the1598American people.1599    But this is the kind of stuff that is going on right now,1600and yet you are going after broadcast stations except for Fox1601and making threats.1602    Mr. Carr. Senator, we are applying the law.1603    Let us step back. Broadcast TV is fundamentally different1604than any other forms of media, whether it is cable or podcast1605or a soapbox or a man on the street. There is a public trustee1606model that Congress has set up. When you are on a podcast----1607    Senator Klobuchar. So you think there should be no rules in1608place when it comes to tech platforms then?1609    Mr. Carr. I think there is no public interest obligation.1610There is no license. There is no----1611    Senator Klobuchar. Do you think we should change the laws?1612Here is one.1613    Mr. Carr. There is no news----1614    Senator Klobuchar. Last week, President Trump came out with1615this dangerous and likely illegal AI rule that preempts all the1616states from doing anything to try to save people, whether it is1617kids that are being exposed to content they should not see or1618fentanyl or political videos that are lies.1619    So, do you think Congress has the authority to preempt1620state laws or do you think President Trump and the agencies1621like yourself have the authority to preempt state law when it1622comes to the Internet and safety with AI?1623    Mr. Carr. Well, when it comes to AI in particular there is1624an executive order. It asks the FCC to initiate a proceeding.1625We are going to initiate a proceeding. We are open minded on1626where that goes.1627    But look, if you want to step back and talk about1628weaponization, we saw that for 4 years in the Biden1629administration. Senate Democrats including Democrats----1630    Senator Klobuchar. Joe Biden is no longer president. You1631are head of the FCC and Donald Trump is President, and I am1632trying to deal with this right now.1633    So I would ask you, Ms. Gomez, what are the risks of the1634Commission trying to preempt state laws, particularly when1635there are no Federal guardrails? Because our colleagues,1636despite some good efforts, refuse to pass any kind of even1637minimal rules when it comes to AI.1638    What are the risks of the Commission or a President then1639trying to preempt state laws that can legally put state laws in1640place?1641    Ms. Gomez. Thank you, Senator.1642    I believe that the FCC has very dubious authority to1643actually preempt state laws in this case, because without a1644comprehensive Federal framework there is nothing for the FCC to1645preempt.1646    The Communications Act did not actually talk about1647artificial intelligence or provide authority to the FCC to do1648this preemption. So I am very dubious of our authority to do1649so.1650    That said, we have sought comment on this.1651    Senator Klobuchar. OK. Thank you very much.1652    The Chairman. Senator Moran.16531654                STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY MORAN,1655                    U.S. SENATOR FROM KANSAS16561657    Senator Moran. Chairman Cruz, thank you. Thank you and1658Senator Cantwell for this hearing. Welcome, Commissioners.1659    Chairman Carr, I sent you a letter in May urging the FCC to1660modernize broadcast ownership rules, quote, ``to enable local1661broadcasters to compete with today's media giants,'' and it is1662my local broadcasters that are at significant risk from1663competition from media giants, traditional and otherwise.1664    And in that letter I described the impact of applying1665legacy media rules to a fundamentally changed media landscape1666on local broadcasters versus national players.1667    I firmly believe--there is no question that follows my1668statement this morning but I want to reiterate this to you1669today in this hearing.1670    I firmly believe that local broadcasters are best suited to1671deliver local journalism and as a small town print journalism1672has succumbed to even stronger headwinds, the importance of1673local broadcasters has increased by orders of magnitude.1674    Across Kansas local broadcasters are hugely important and1675provide the news, the weather, the sports, and we need to make1676certain that their viability is enhanced by ownership rules1677that the Commission has talked about and considering.1678    I also want to highlight broadband mapping. Seems like deja1679vu, a conversation we have had since 2017 when the maps were1680first provided to Congress and the country. It was clear that1681they were desperately or damagingly flawed.1682    More than five years ago, Congress passed and the President1683signed the Broadband Data Act which required the FCC to update1684its approach to broadband data collection, verification, and1685reporting.1686    I appreciate the FCC's work to implement that legislation1687including operationalizing the broadband data collection1688platform, the broadband serviceable location fabric, and the1689national broadband map.1690    But I notice when I am ever going to--on the occasion I get1691a compliment it is usually followed by a word but and that is1692what I am doing here.1693    But everything that I know from Kansas providers is that1694while the maps themselves have been improved, providers still1695face an arduous and outdated challenging process that makes it1696difficult to update the maps with the most recently available1697data.1698    This circumstance is particularly concerning given that1699NTIA makes use of the FCC's data in adjusting the eligibility1700locations for services under broadband.1701    So I would encourage you to, again, continue your efforts1702to recover from the mapping process that includes improvements1703in the ability for those in Kansas and across the country to1704make changes in the maps based upon actuality and the reality1705of what we actually provide in service to Kansans.1706    This is true in cellular coverage and telephone service,1707and certainly in broadband. The Telecommunications Act of 19961708provided the statutory basis for the Universal Service Fund1709that Senator Fischer has talked about.1710    I serve on that, her task force--her working group to make1711certain that we better empower the FCC to deliver on its1712universal service mission and I appreciate the answers that you1713provided to Senator Fischer about your willingness to work with1714us to accomplish that goal.1715    Earlier this year my colleagues and I sent you a letter1716encouraging the Commission to take a balanced approach to1717implementation of spectrum requirements.1718    I described--that protect current uses and certain uses of1719spectrum bands, especially unlicensed users in the 6 gigahertz1720band.1721    Again, you have addressed this previously in answers to1722questions from my colleagues but I, again, highlight the1723importance of that balanced approach and I know in my1724conversation with you, Commissioner Trusty, and what you said1725this morning, again, that balanced approach involving1726unlicensed spectrum remains an important issue for you and I1727assume that is true.1728    Ms. Gomez--Commissioner Gomez--you and I have not had this1729conversation but I would be happy to have you confirm that you1730agree with me.1731    Ms. Gomez. Apologies. I am happy to have this discussion1732with you.1733    Senator Moran. Thank you.1734    Finally, the Federal broadband programs are encumbered by1735inconsistent coordination between entities on the myriad of1736programs that offer broadband services to America, provide the1737support for broadband services to America.1738    In April, a GAO audit noted that--just that and lamented1739that the lack of a national strategy on coordinating1740administration of these programs. Major Federal investments in1741broadband like BEAD, which is administered by NTIA, will1742require a focused coordination to make certain that these1743programs are delivering appropriate levels of service.1744    Chairman Carr, what specific actions is the FCC taking to1745coordinate with NTIA in the run up to the broadband deployment1746under the BEAD program?1747    Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator, for the question.1748    This is a really important issue. As you indicated, there1749was a GAO report not that long ago that said there was over a1750hundred different broadband funding programs. They were spread1751out over more than a dozen different agencies and they were1752entirely uncoordinated.1753    Right now, we have got a great working relationship across1754the FCC, the NTIA, the NEC, and many other agencies that have1755broadband funding to make sure that we are addressing some of1756this coordination issue that has been a challenge before.1757    Senator Moran. And when you say making certain we address,1758you are addressing them and there will be a different outcome1759than what we would expect in the absence of that addressing1760those problems, true?1761    Mr. Carr. Yes, sir. Yes.1762    Senator Moran. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chairman.1763    Senator Capito [presiding]. Senator Schatz.17641765                STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ,1766                    U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII17671768    Senator Schatz. Thank you to all the Commissioners. Thanks1769to the Committee for conducting this hearing.1770    Chairman Carr, you and I have actually known each other for1771maybe 10 years now. We have had several meetings in our office1772and it is usually--I do not want to say mundane but it is1773technocratic, it is technical, it is nonpartisan, and all the1774rest of it. And so I am hoping----1775    Mr. Carr. We can do that again right here. It is fine.1776    Senator Schatz. I am hoping we can do that again right here1777but it is a more sensitive topic. So I am just going to ask you1778a couple of ``yes or no'' questions.1779    I do not mind a quick explanation but, you know, I will1780make a promise to you not to hector you for three or four1781minutes if you can give me quick yes or nos or at least quick1782explanations.1783    Chairman Cruz said, ``I think it is unbelievably dangerous1784for the government to put itself in the position of saying we1785are going to decide what speech we like and what we do not, and1786we are going to threaten to take you off the air if we do not1787like what you are saying.''1788    Do you see this issue the same way as the Chairman?1789    Mr. Carr. Well, my position on this is pretty clear. We1790have a public interest standard that Congress has put into the1791law and there is a number of very specific rules and doctrines1792that flow from that--the broadcast hoax rule, the news1793distortion rule.1794    Senator Schatz. OK. So do you----1795    Mr. Carr. So my position and I think the Trump1796administration position is that we should be enforcing those1797rules and policies. If Congress wants to change it you are free1798to change it.1799    Senator Schatz. So under the--so you think you have1800jurisdiction over political satire under the public interest1801standard and the news distortion standard, just to put a fine1802point on it?1803    Mr. Carr. My position is that----1804    Senator Schatz. Just a--that one is a yes or no. Do you1805have jurisdiction or not?1806    Mr. Carr. We have jurisdiction with respect to the1807broadcast airwaves uniquely to ensure that their operations are1808in the public interest and there is very specific rules here1809for broadcast hoax and news distortion.1810    Senator Schatz. So if there is a--so if there is a1811determination by the Federal Communications Commission that1812satire is not in the public interest you believe you have the1813authority to revoke the license of the broadcaster?1814    Mr. Carr. That is not my position at all.1815    Senator Schatz. OK. So but the----1816    Mr. Carr. My position is if the use of the facility is in1817the public interest----1818    Senator Schatz. Hold on. Hold on. Let me just--let me1819clarify the question.1820    Mr. Carr. Satire that is not broadcast hoax, that is not1821news distortion policy, is perfectly fine.1822    Senator Schatz. So----1823    Mr. Carr. But I also do not understand the conversation1824about--what satire are we talking about? Where was there1825satire?1826    Senator Schatz. We are not doing the questions in this1827direction.1828    Mr. Carr. OK.1829    Senator Schatz. What is the FCC standards for making this1830kind of evaluation about whether you--whether news has been1831distorted?1832    My understanding is that this has been used eight times.1833The Chairman--and I think he is right--is saying, like, this is1834rarely invoked and there is a reason for that because, yes, we1835have a statute that governs what the FCC is supposed to do.1836    But basically the FCC has decided we need to get out of the1837business of refereeing what is offensive, and if something is1838indecent or obscene, that is one thing, right?1839    If they are violating the terms of their broadcast license1840that is another thing. If they just say an awful thing on the1841air it seems to me, Chairman, that is not your jurisdiction.1842    And I know you are quick and you understand this law1843backward and forwards. I understand. I remember you when you1844were Counsel for Chairman Pai. So I do not doubt your ability1845to race right into how--the architecture of the originating1846statute.1847    But I am asking you, do you think it is appropriate for you1848to have an opinion at all in your official capacity about what1849a comedian says, as offensive as it may have been?1850    Mr. Carr. Senator, my job is to implement the law passed by1851Congress and Congress has said that broadcast is fundamentally1852different, that there is a public interest standard. There is1853decades of precedent on this.1854    Senator Schatz. Do you think there are any--do you think1855there are any conservative commentators or conservative1856comedians or conservative satirists that ever say anything1857offensive that you would consider investigating?1858    Mr. Carr. I am not looking at things that are offensive or1859awful, to use your words. I am looking at things that are1860consistent with our public interest rules and regulations. That1861is the full scope of what we are looking at.1862    Senator Schatz. And in what way--so I am a little confused1863because it seems to me that in subsequent conversations I1864forgot after Ted and John Thune and Dave McCormick and others1865said, oh, this seems like a little much for you, Chairman, that1866you went out and you said, that was fake news--I did not do1867that. This is fake news. I am not doing that. I am not going1868after Jimmy Kimmel.1869    And now you are saying you have a perfect right to go after1870Jimmy Kimmel and I am wondering which one it is?1871    Mr. Carr. No, two different things. Democrats at the time1872were saying that we explicitly threatened to pull a license if1873Jimmy Kimmel was not fired. That never happened. That was1874nothing more than projection and distortion by Democrats.1875    What I am saying is any broadcaster that uses the airwaves,1876whether radio or TV, has to comply with the public interest,1877and licenses are not sacred cows. Yes, you can do things to1878lose a license.1879    But if we want to change that that is up to Congress and1880one idea, for instance, is why do we not put all the broadcast1881TV licenses up for auction and if people want to buy them1882without the public interest obligation they can do that.1883    But look, there was a bargain here.1884    Senator Schatz. But you are--I mean, you are kind of1885tiptoeing through the tulips here, right? Because what you1886actually said is they have a license granted by us at the FCC1887that comes with an obligation to operate in the public1888interest.1889    We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These1890companies can find ways to change conduct and take action,1891frankly, on Kimmel--on Kimmel--or there is going to be1892additional work for the FCC ahead.1893    Chairman, my final comment is I have actually enjoyed our1894relationship. I have praised you behind your back as a solid--1895someone I disagree with but solid, knowledgeable person.1896    This stuff, at least up until the last year, has been out1897of character and it will not age well, and it will not age well1898on the conservative side of the aisle and the liberal side of1899the aisle.1900    This is not American FCC behavior and I am hoping we can1901recalibrate.1902    Mr. Carr. Let me try to understand this. Did you have an1903issue when Senator Markey told the FCC to investigate Sinclair1904for their news activities? Was there any issue raised there?1905    Senator Schatz. I am going to allow this because I was1906tough on you. You did ask me a question. This is the first time1907I am ever going to respond to a question from a witness.1908    I did not sign that letter.19091910            STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,1911                U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA19121913    Senator Capito. All right. Thank you.1914    I am going to continue with the questioning, and I1915appreciate all of you all being here and your good hard work at1916the FCC.1917    A lot of my interests are really along the same lines as1918Senator Moran, representing a rural state, an underserved state1919in terms of connectivity and some of the challenges that we1920have had trying to get us to close the digital divide in a1921small state like West Virginia.1922    So, Chairman Carr, he did talk about the mapping issue and1923the issues of small providers alleviating the barriers that1924they have and then the possible penalties that they might1925accrue if some of the maps are inaccurate or if they are unable1926to--failing to serve locations that do not actually exist and1927are not residential or their business.1928    Do you have the necessary data from agencies to be able to1929have more accurate maps? And, you know, as we get down to the1930nitty gritty here where we are actually going to get to the1931last house, the last home, this is going to really be1932important.1933    So where are you with the maps and what kind of1934formulations for improvements have you considered and you as1935all of you?1936    Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator, for your leadership on this1937issue.1938    I think we have actually been making some real significant1939progress on the mapping issue, the fabric itself. The locations1940are starting to stabilize. We are seeing less than one percent1941change in terms of iterations of the map. We have solved a lot1942of issues.1943    One that is popping up recently and I have heard from you1944is the challenge process, and it is difficult because some1945could argue that the original provider would have an incentive1946to overstate and then others would say that the challenging1947provider would have incentives to overstate their challenge and1948we have a regulation of that process, but perhaps we need to do1949a little bit better job at streamlining that and I am open to1950looking at that.1951    Senator Capito. Right. Commissioner Trusty, did you have1952something to say on that issue on the mapping?1953    Ms. Trusty. Sure. One of the issues that I have heard about1954on mapping just this year testability--how do you test whether1955or not broadband is available in a particular area--and I know1956that FCC staff is working very closely with providers to try to1957make this a more efficient process and less costly.1958    Senator Capito. Thank you. Commissioner Gomez, do you have1959anything to add there?1960    Ms. Gomez. No, I agree with my colleagues. We still hear1961complaints, of course, both of where areas are shown as served1962that are actually not served----1963    Senator Capito. Right.1964    Ms. Gomez.--which is problematic. So the staff continue to1965update and update and update the map and I--you know, every1966iteration makes it better but it still needs improvement.1967    Senator Capito. Right, and a lot of these areas are the1968smaller providers. Capacity is an issue to be able to help1969verify. So anything that can smooth that process would be very1970much appreciated.1971    Commissioner--Chairman Carr, I appreciate the work, and it1972is interesting to listen to the debate over the broadcasters in1973terms of consolidation and everything.1974    I mean, I have a view similar to what Senator Moran1975expressed in that in the rural areas our local broadcasters are1976so essential, whether--and he even mentioned the top three:1977weather, sports, local government.1978    And they are--try to preserve that local news as we have1979seen what has happened to our newspapers. Our broadcast is so1980very important.1981    You know, we just had a food drive and our local television1982providers, you know, did this and publicized it so that it was1983much broader and bigger than it would have been without that1984local flavor and that local input and involvement.1985    So a number of senators wrote to you to ask what you are1986doing to ensure that our local broadcasters are able to compete1987in this changing landscape and I think he mentioned that as1988well and he mentioned the letter.1989    What is the update on the ownership rule proceedings that1990the Commission has started since we sent the letter over?1991    Mr. Carr. Well, thank you, Senator. We are, you know, very1992open minded as to how to resolve that proceeding. We have not1993made a final decision yet.1994    I think this is actually one area where I heard some strong1995alignment between me and Ranking Member Cantwell on this. She1996talked about the importance and value of local news,1997particularly when there is natural disasters.1998    One of the things I am trying to do with our media policy1999as a general matter is to reempower those local broadcasters to2000invest in local news because what has happened over the years2001we have had a consolidation of power into what are national2002programmers--Comcast, Disney and others--and, effectively, a2003lot of local broadcast stations are just mouthpieces for that2004national programming made in New York and Hollywood and I am2005not sure that is going to be consistent with the public2006interest, again, when it comes to a natural disaster like in2007Washington State right now.2008    So one of the lenses that we are looking at this media2009ownership proceeding is is that consistent with our goal of2010constraining the power of some of those national programmers.2011But we have not made a decision there yet.2012    Senator Capito. Thank you. I will be interested to hear2013what happens there.2014    I will say as a compliment when I first started in this2015role and got very active with rural broadband there was a lot2016of confusion in a state such as mine as, you know, who is2017covering this area, can RDOF go? Can ReConnect go? Can BEAD go?2018    And you mentioned more programs than I even had concept of2019that are still trying to, as I said, connect that last home and2020last mile.2021    We are hearing less about the lack of coordination between2022all these different entities and I think that is--particularly2023at the Federal level and I think that is extremely important2024because, number one, we do not want to overbill but we do not2025want to under bill, too, and we do not want to squash2026innovation.2027    So I thank you all for your efforts in that. I think it has2028been very helpful and I appreciate that we can keep working on2029that because I think that will make the dollars go quicker and2030make the connectivity come faster as well.2031    So with that, I will recognize Senator Markey.20322033               STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY,2034                U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS20352036    Senator Markey. Thank you.2037    Chairman Carr, you are not reinvigorating the public2038interest standard. You are weaponizing the public interest2039standard. That is what the Carr FCC is doing every single day.2040    Behind me are your past tweets declaring your commitment to2041the First Amendment. You even defended political satire, saying2042in 2022 it challenges those in power and that is why people in2043influential positions have always targeted it for censorship.2044    That is why your threats against ABC and Disney over Jimmy2045Kimmel's political monologue was so outrageous, and here is2046what you said. In September 2025 as the Chairman of the FCC,2047``We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies2048can find ways to change conduct or take action, frankly, on2049Kimmel, or there is going to be additional work for the FCC2050ahead.''2051    Now, that statement was roundly condemned across the2052political spectrum. Chairman Cruz called it ``dangerous as2053hell''.2054    Chairman Carr, do you regret making that statement, yes or2055no?2056    Mr. Carr. Senator Markey, thank you for the question. My2057job is to enforce the law as passed by Congress. That includes2058a public interest standard and broadcast TV is fundamentally2059different than any other media. We have a news distortion2060rule----2061    Senator Markey. Do you regret making that statement?2062    Mr. Carr. Senator, my job is to enforce the law.2063    Senator Markey. So you do not regret making that statement?2064    Well, that is a refusal----2065    Mr. Carr. Senator----2066    Senator Markey.--to take accountability for your language,2067for your use--your abuse of power. You will not say that you2068made a mistake.2069    For example, in your response to my oversight letter in2070September on the Kimmel incident you repeatedly stated that the2071media companies made their own decisions in preempting and2072suspending Kimmel.2073    You seem to think that your words, the most powerful2074communications regulator in America, especially your threats,2075do not matter.2076    So just to be clear, your position is that your mafia2077threats had nothing to do with Nexstar and Sinclair and2078Disney's decisions to preempt and suspend Kimmel.2079    Is that your position? Is that your point, that you had2080nothing to do with the suspension of Kimmel?2081    Mr. Carr. Senator, if you look at the evidence, the2082expressed statements by every single company involved from2083Nexstar to Sinclair to Disney as recently as last week is that2084they made these business decisions on their own. The record is2085clear on this.2086    Senator Markey. And, again, you are refusing to take2087accountability for your own words. You intimidate the2088companies, they do what you want, and then you say, well, it2089was up to them.2090    You are the Chairman of the Federal Communications2091Commission. Actually, you are now the Chairman of the Federal2092Censorship Commission, and these broadcasters they feel that2093censorship. You have broad authority over the media industry,2094especially broadcasters. Your words and actions matter.2095    Now I am going to give you another chance to take2096accountability for your actions. In 2022, you said, quote, ``A2097newsroom's decision about what stories to cover and how to2098frame them should be beyond the reach of any government2099official, not targeted by them,'' by government officials. Do2100you stand by that statement?2101    Mr. Carr. This was a letter written by Senate--I am sorry,2102House Democrats to cable companies pressuring them to drop Fox2103News, OAN, and Newsmax simply because those Democrats thought2104they were right wing.2105    Senator Markey. So do you stand by your statement? Do you2106stand by--do you stand by your statement?2107    Mr. Carr. Yes, I do. I think it is inappropriate what the2108Democrats said there.2109    Senator Markey. OK. Well, OK. Good. I just want to--I just2110want to get your own views out here on the record for people to2111hear.2112    So in February, under your leadership the Federal2113Communications Commission opened an investigation into a San2114Francisco radio station over its coverage of a Federal2115immigration raid.2116    FCC investigation is a big deal for a local station. In a2117worst case scenario, the FCC could shut down the station by2118revoking its license. In fact, you have repeatedly suggested2119over the past year that the FCC could revoke station licenses.2120    Yet, this investigation was based solely on the news2121content of the radio station's coverage of an immigration raid.2122I have the entire news statement that they put out that day.2123    This happens every day everywhere across the country for2124broadcast journalists. This investigation was based solely on2125this very brief statement that is in everyday coverage and I2126have that transcript, and the anchor was literally reporting on2127the information that was released by the mayor, by the local2128city council member, and a community group.2129    So you are telling me that reporting on statements from2130public officials and a community group is grounds for an FCC2131investigation?2132    Mr. Carr. Senator, the concern there in the report was that2133there may have been interference with lawful ICE operations and2134so we were asking questions about what happened.2135    This was a period of time, remember, when ICE agents were2136being attacked, their locations--undercover locations were2137being disclosed----2138    Senator Markey. There is nothing in here that discloses2139anything. There is no risk to anyone except the risk----2140    Mr. Carr. And they can provide that to us.2141    Senator Markey. No, no. The risk that is posed here is to2142you, to the broadcast journalist coverage. That is what really2143happened. The news journalists were just covering an important2144news story and some conservatives were upset by the coverage.2145    So you used your power as FCC Chair to hang a sword of2146Damocles over a local radio station's head and that is2147precisely what you warned about in 2022, the government2148targeting a newsroom's editorial decision.2149    Well, guess what happened? The station demoted the anchor2150who first read that news report over the air and pulled back on2151his political coverage. You got what you wanted.2152    One former journalist at the station said ``chilling effect2153does not begin to describe the neutering of our political2154coverage.'' That is what you wanted, that is what you got, but2155it affected stations everywhere.2156    So just let me say again, the neutering of our political2157coverage this is government censorship, plain and simple.2158    Was it a mistake in retrospect for you to say that, to2159instigate an investigation of that San Francisco radio station?2160Was that a mistake?2161    Mr. Carr. Senator, broadcasters understand, perhaps the2162first time in years, that they are going to be held accountable2163to the public interest, to broadcast hoax rules, to the news2164distortion policy, I think that is a good thing.2165    I do not have a poster board but, listen, in 2018 you2166signed this letter right here to the FCC.2167    Senator Markey. OK. No, you--OK. You are--you are here2168right----2169    Mr. Carr. You signed a letter to the FCC asking us to2170investigate Sinclair's news activities.2171    Senator Markey. You are--you are--OK.2172    Mr. Carr. You said investigate Sinclair's news activities--2173--2174    Senator Markey. OK. You are here right----2175    Mr. Carr.--and you know what happened after that?2176    Senator Markey. You are here right now----2177    Mr. Carr. Over 227 licenses were up for renewal----2178    Senator Markey. This is--Madam Chair, please ask the2179witness----2180    Mr. Carr.--or due during the Biden years.2181    Senator Capito. I am going to ask the witness----2182    Mr. Carr. Almost none of them were renewed after your2183letter. Your letter produced the results that we are seeking.2184    Senator Capito. Chairman Carr--Chairman Carr----2185    Senator Markey. Madam Chair----2186    Senator Capito. Well, you are well over your time here so2187in----2188    Senator Markey. Well, a lot of it is because----2189    Senator Capito. Well, no, it is not because I looked at the2190clock and you were already two minutes over. But----2191    Senator Markey. All right. So I will just finish, Madam2192Chair. He is turning the Federal Communications Commission into2193the Federal Censorship Commission.2194    It is a betrayal of the FCC's mission. You should resign,2195Mr. Chairman. You are creating a chilling effect on broadcast--2196--2197    Mr. Carr. Do you regret sending this letter in 2018 asking2198the FCC to investigate Sinclair's news activities?2199    Senator Capito. Senator Markey, please. There are a lot of2200people on this committee.2201    Senator Markey. Thank you. Thank you.2202    Senator Capito. Chairman Carr--please suspend, Chairman2203Carr. We will move to the next question.2204    Senator Sullivan.22052206                STATEMENT OF HON. DAN SULLIVAN,2207                    U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA22082209    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Madam Chair, and Mr. Chairman2210and the other commissioners.2211    I am going to turn back to the topic that Senator Capito,2212the Chair was talking about and that is rural broadband, which2213is really important to so many of us. There is rural broadband,2214Mr. Chairman, as you know, and then there is Alaska, which is2215super rural.2216    So I want to commend you in particular on your sustained2217focus on my state during your tenure first as a commissioner,2218now as Chairman.2219    As you know, you, Commissioner Trusty, Commissioner Gomez--2220all the FCC Commissioners--have come up to Alaska and I just2221want to give some statistics here, which I think are important.2222    The Alaska Connect Fund Order from the FCC through 20232223is--according to the fund order that was in front of the2224Commission the Alaska plan helped deploy and upgrade broadband2225to more than 96,000 previously unserved locations, delivered2226new or improved 4G LTE or better wireless services to, roughly,222765,000 Alaskans, and laid the groundwork for the Alaska Connect2228fund to carry that success forward with added flexibility.2229    So I want to thank the FCC's leadership, in particular you,2230Mr. Chairman, who has enabled this strong coordination with2231other Federal programs and to help what is in the law, which is2232to be able to connect all Americans to broadband and Internet2233connectivity regardless of if you live in a city, in the lower223448, or a rural native village in Alaska.2235    So can you speak to how this Alaska-specific approach has2236helped drive these outcomes which have been very positive, and2237why continuing this model is so important for connecting rural2238and remote Alaskans?2239    And, again, Mr. Chairman, I know you are taking a lot of2240incoming here. I want to compliment you on the good work that2241you have done as Chairman and as a Commissioner on the issues2242of focusing on my state, who are Americans who have very2243challenged communications issues because our state is so big2244and remote, and I think you have done an exceptional job.2245    So can you talk to those issues?2246    Mr. Carr. Yes. Thank you, Senator, and, frankly, I do not2247think people understand the change in trajectory that you have2248brought to Alaska in terms of connectivity.2249    I remember the very first time you had me come up to Alaska2250which, again, I agree with you, it is the only really way to2251understand the challenges that are up there. Frankly, in my2252view, I do not think the FCC had been taking the appropriate2253lawful approach with respect to Alaska there.2254    Senator Sullivan. And by the way, this is not some earmark.2255It is in the law, right?2256    Mr. Carr. And we brought that to you as well.2257    Senator Sullivan. Required for all Americans and my2258constituents are Americans.2259    Mr. Carr. And you brought that to my attention and others.2260When I went up there in 2018, I had a chance to visit Unalaska,2261Dutch Harbor. It is an island part of the way out the Aleutian2262chain.2263    There had been some talk about maybe bringing an undersea2264fiber cable across the Aleutians but the plans were getting2265scuttled because of uncertainty caused by the FCC's, in my2266view, sort of missed application of the Communications Act.2267    And you worked with the agency over a period of time with2268diligence and corrected that, and that created the stability to2269be able to see that investment. In fact, the phase one of that2270undersea cable is now complete.2271    Unalaska is getting connected to next-gen high speed2272Internet thanks to that. There is a phase two that is coming.2273It is just not there.2274    On a subsequent visit, you took me to a small village2275Napaskiak, which you would only reach by boat, and it was a2276place that had been long left behind in terms of the digital2277divide, and we had a multi-billion dollar effort to close the2278divide. But Napaskiak was not even on the national broadband2279map.2280    Senator Sullivan. Yes.2281    Mr. Carr. The FCC acted and Commerce Department back then2282in the Biden years acted like it did not even exist, and after2283you took us there----2284    Senator Sullivan. From their perspective it did not exist.2285It was not on the map. You and I were in there. We did a town2286hall, 600 people, and we looked at everybody saying, according2287to the maps back in D.C., this town and all of you people from2288Alaska do not exist.2289    So I am glad you mentioned that one.2290    Mr. Carr. Look, there is obviously a long ways to go still2291but the digital divide has been closing in Alaska and, again,2292you know, Senator, I do not think we would be in the position2293where we are in Alaska right now with connectivity but for the2294leadership you have had on this committee.2295    Senator Sullivan. Well, look, it has been your leadership2296and others. I want to thank Commissioner Trusty. I am glad you2297were up in Alaska, Commissioner Gomez. It is an issue I think2298that unites the FCC, all the commissioners.2299    Can you very quickly--maybe each one of you very quickly2300speak to how the FCC's Alaska specific funding frameworks,2301including the Alaska plan and the Alaska Connect fund, will2302help ensure that projects like the one you just mentioned, the2303Unalaska project.2304    And, again, if you look at a map, this is the Aleutian2305Island chain. It goes way out in the Pacific, actually crosses2306the international dateline, which a lot of people do not know.2307But these are Americans out there and it is a very strategic2308part of our country, very close to China and Russia and Japan2309and our allies.2310    But can I just very quickly, because I am running out of2311time here, to just help these specific programs to continue2312delivering reliability in terms of connectivity in rural,2313remote parts of the state?2314    Can I just get your commitment to continue to working on2315that, all of you?2316    Mr. Carr. Yes, Senator.2317    Ms. Trusty. Absolutely.2318    Senator Sullivan. Commissioner?2319    Ms. Gomez. Yes, Senator.2320    Senator Sullivan. OK, great. Thank you, Madam Chair.2321    Senator Capito. Certainly.2322    Senator Baldwin.23232324               STATEMENT OF HON. TAMMY BALDWIN,2325                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN23262327    Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Madam Chair.2328    I need to echo the concerns of my Democratic colleagues.2329    Chairman Carr, in September you used your position within2330the Federal Government to take Jimmy Kimmel off the air in a2331clear attempt to chill free speech.2332    You told ABC, ``We can do this the easy way or the hard2333way.'' The FCC is not a political weapon to be used against the2334President's critics and, yet, you have also used it to go after2335``60 Minutes,'' ``Saturday Night Live,'' and Seth Meyers, all2336because the President did not like their criticism or because2337they gave airtime to his opponents.2338    Your Twitter account before 2025 would seem to align with2339what I am saying. It is filled to the brim with statements2340defending freedom of speech as well as stating that the FCC2341does not have a roving mandate to police speech in the name of2342public interest.2343    Sadly, those principles seem to have evaporated into thin2344air. There are many things that Chair Cruz and I do not agree2345on but when he said that your actions have been, quote,2346``dangerous as hell,'' that I can agree with.2347    So your attempts to coerce private companies to censor2348speech that you and the President did not want to hear is2349really a blatant attack on the First Amendment, a foundational2350principle of American democracy.2351    The Trump administration has been attacking free speech2352across the government since day one. President Trump and2353Secretary Hegseth have expelled all legitimate journalists from2354the Pentagon.2355    President Trump and Secretary McMahon have curtailed2356academic freedom in research and stifled lawful protests.2357President Trump and Attorney General Bondi have rolled back2358protections that allow journalists to protect their sources.2359    President Trump and Senate Republicans defunded the2360Corporation for Public Broadcasting and NPR. You have become a2361parrot for President Trump and diminished the independence of2362the FCC.2363    So the FCC has an incredibly important role in reviewing2364market consolidation in local broadcasting, cable, broadband,2365telephone, and wireless industries.2366    We know that consolidation in any industry often results in2367a bad deal for consumers: higher prices, fewer choices, and2368reduced incentives for companies to compete.2369    Chairman Carr, you have repeatedly signaled your desire to2370use merger reviews to force companies to enact policies favored2371by the Trump administration. This summer the FCC approved the2372merger between Paramount Global and Skydance Media.2373    This approval only came after Paramount agreed to pay the2374President $16 million to settle a frivolous lawsuit and2375Paramount agreed to change its news editorial policies.2376    And then just this month, the FCC approved AT&T's purchase2377of U.S. Cellular's wireless license, just one day after AT&T2378terminated their diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI,2379policy.2380    If the timing of this announcement was not suspicious2381enough, Chairman Carr, you took to X to boast about AT&T's2382decision.2383    Commissioner Gomez, you voted against both of these2384mergers. Can you share why you opposed them?2385    Ms. Gomez. Thank you for your question, Senator.2386    I have had strong concerns about the strong-arming by the2387FCC of these companies, using its power over these merger2388approvals and transactions in order to delve into what is2389really private employment matters completely unrelated to the2390transactions themselves.2391    Traditionally, when the FCC has concessions as part of a2392merger review it does so to address a harm that is caused by2393that particular transaction.2394    The Paramount transaction had this voluntary concession to2395appoint an ombudsperson reporting to the President of Paramount2396to police concerns about bias and content. That is completely2397unprecedented, and I know what my colleagues would say--there2398was an ombudsperson in the Comcast merger.2399    That ombudsman's job was to make sure that the corporation2400did not interfere with news decisions of the news division.2401That is completely different than saying you are going to2402become a bias monitor.2403    So I had strong concerns about us using our authority in2404order to demand these types of concessions from the companies.2405    Senator Baldwin. Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.2406    The Chairman [presiding]. Thank you.2407    Senator Blackburn.24082409              STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN,2410                  U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE24112412    Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2413    Chairman Carr, I want to chat with you for a minute about2414the new form of payola, or showola, as some of our entertainers2415in Tennessee call it, and what has happened is broadcast2416stations use events in exchange for airplay and they2417particularly like to couple this with threats of reduced2418airplay if the band or the artist cannot give them these free2419events.2420    Now, in the opinion of so many of our musicians, that2421violates the FCC's payola rules, and I know that you have2422looked at this coerced performance issue and wanted to know if2423you have any update and if you could speak to that for a2424moment?2425    Mr. Carr. Well, thank you, Senator, for your leadership on2426this.2427    Historically, there has been a law on the books that2428prevents radio stations from accepting or seeking unreported2429payment of money or any other compensation to influence2430airplay, the time that music is played on the stations.2431    One concern that you brought to my attention early on2432including through a letter earlier this year is that a lot of2433radio stations are holding music festivals and the concern that2434has been raised is that they are effectively pressuring2435musicians--that could be, you know, ones that are well off or2436ones that are just getting started--to perform for free under2437threat that they may suffer airplay on radio stations if they2438do not do that.2439    I think that is a concern. We issued an enforcement2440advisory right after being aware of this from you and we are2441going to be, and are, investigating some issues around this.2442    Senator Blackburn. Thank you very much for that.2443    Ms. Trusty, thank you so much for your time yesterday. We2444talked a little bit about the World Radio Communication2445Conference and, Ms. Gomez, I know last year you kind of2446struggled. You had two jobs on your plate and it was hard to2447prepare for that.2448    But, Ms. Trusty, I know that it is going to be essential to2449prepare for it because it is going to be in China. So give me a2450minute about what you are going to do in preparation for that2451conference?2452    Ms. Trusty. Sure. Thank you so much for the question,2453Senator. Thank you for your leadership on spectrum policy.2454    The WRC is a really important forum for the United States2455to promote American values, our economic competitiveness, and2456our national security, and thanks to the spectrum provisions in2457the Working Families Tax Cut Act, we now have the ability to2458develop a unified strategy where we are working and focusing on2459key U.S. priorities, and we can work with our international2460allies in advance to preempt those seeking to undermine U.S.2461interests in Shanghai, China.2462    As I mentioned a little bit earlier, in 2023 at the2463previous World Radio Communications Conference we did not have2464this kind of legislative support. We did not have auction2465authority, which really set us back.2466    And so I think with the restoration of auction authority2467and a long-term spectrum pipeline we are positioned to emerge2468from that conference with wins so that we are the leader in the2469next generation of communications technologies.2470    Senator Blackburn. Thank you.2471    Staying on spectrum, Mr. Chairman, coming to you, looking2472at mid-band spectrum, about 60 percent of our mid-band is held2473by government agencies and about 5 percent is licensed2474commercial users and, of course, with 5G and 6G we absolutely2475cannot afford this.2476    So I have advocated for years for a full inventory of2477government spectrum licenses and Senator Moran and I have had2478the Spectrum Inventory Act, and I think it is important for the2479record for you to speak about the importance of freeing up the2480spectrum, getting it in the hands of commercial users.2481    And then also talk a little bit about how the FCC and NTIA,2482which is responsible for the inventory, can work together and2483move this auction forward, that 800 megahertz that the Big2484Beautiful Bill allowed for?2485    Mr. Carr. Well, thank you, Senator, for your leadership on2486this.2487    I agree that we have to have a balanced spectrum policy and2488if you step back, though, particularly over the Biden years, we2489sort of walked into a bit of a cul-de-sac where we over2490leveraged to some extent with respect to unlicensed spectrum,2491with respect to shared spectrum, and to some extent government2492spectrum as well because we have a very small sliver of2493spectrum that is truly exclusive use, high power, the type of2494stuff you want to build 5G and 6G on.2495    So that is what we are addressing in the near term,2496particularly in the C-band, working very well across the2497administration. The NTIA Administrator Arielle Roth is doing a2498fantastic job. They are going to be identifying some additional2499bands for us to move on.2500    But I also think, to your point, we have to make sure we2501have intensity of use of spectrum, not just buildout. One of2502the things we push for is to encourage providers to make sure2503they are actually loading their spectrum up and, again, I think2504that is part of why you see AT&T now, you know, quickly putting2505new spectrum on 23,000 cell sites.2506    And I should say, I mean, in terms of the wireless2507services, I was a bit surprised to see some of the remarks2508earlier. If you look at the data, the prices for wireless phone2509services are actually down 2 percent year over year.2510    In fact, they are down 5 percent over Biden-era highs. It2511is not where, you know, we want to keep driving down by2512eliminating inflationary prices but we are heading in the right2513direction. We just have to keep at it.2514    Senator Blackburn. Thank you. Thanks.2515    The Chairman. Thank you.2516    Senator Lujan.25172518               STATEMENT OF HON. BEN RAY LUJAN,2519                  U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO25202521    Senator Lujan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2522    Chairman Carr, yes or no--and please, yes or no--is the FCC2523an independent agency?2524    Mr. Carr. Senator, thanks for that question. I think----2525    Senator Lujan. Yes or no is all we need, sir. Yes or no, is2526it independent?2527    Mr. Carr. Well, there is a test for this in the law and the2528key portion of that test----2529    Senator Lujan. Just yes or no, Brendan.2530    Mr. Carr. The key portion of that test is----2531    Senator Lujan. OK. I am going to go to Commissioner Trusty.2532    So just so you know, Brendan, on your website it just2533simply says, man, the FCC is independent. This is not a trick2534question. Is it yes or no?2535    Mr. Carr. OK. The FCC is not. Is not.2536    Senator Lujan. OK.2537    Mr. Carr. Is not an independent----2538    Senator Lujan. So is your website wrong? Is your website2539lying?2540    Mr. Carr. Possibly. The FCC is not an independent agency2541because----2542    Senator Lujan. OK. Can I read this to you? The FCC's2543mission--on the home page of the FCC, man--an independent U.S.2544Government agency overseen by Congress. Is that factual or is2545that a lie?2546    Mr. Carr. The FCC is not formally an independent agency.2547    Senator Lujan. Is this true or is this a lie?2548    Mr. Carr. I can--I am happy to answer your question.2549    OK. The sine qua non of independence would be removable by2550the President.2551    Senator Lujan. Mr. Chairman, I will get back to you.2552    Chairman--Chairman, I have a little bit of time. I will get2553back to you, sir.2554    Mr. Carr. The FCC is not an independent agency, formally2555speaking.2556    Senator Lujan. Appreciate you saying that and being honest2557with the American people.2558    Commissioner Trusty.2559    Ms. Trusty. Senator, thank you for the question.2560    The President is the Chief Executive vested with all2561executive power in our government and FCC commissioners are2562not--we do not have for cause removal protections, which means2563that we are not independent.2564    Senator Lujan. So is the--is your website lying?2565    Ms. Trusty. I cannot speak to the website. I have not seen2566that.2567    Senator Lujan. You all are the Commissioners in charge of2568this place, right? So this stuff has to be approved by one of2569you. If this is lying then you should just fix it.2570    Let me just say that. That was not even my gotcha question.2571I am surprised that I have burned up 3 minutes talking about2572this damn thing.2573    Commissioner Gomez.2574    Ms. Gomez. Yes, and we should be.2575    Senator Lujan. I appreciate that.2576    Well, Mr. Chairman, if I could just submit the printout of2577the homepage of the FCC into the record that says it is an2578independent agency.2579    And if it is not true then change it.2580    The Chairman. Without objection.2581    [The information referred to follows:]25822583[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]25842585    Senator Lujan. I appreciate that, sir.2586    Chairman Carr, with that being said, does Congress need to2587clarify that the FCC is an independent agency?2588    Mr. Carr. Well, it is up to Congress to pass any2589legislation. The Constitution is clear that all executive power2590is vested in the President and Congress cannot change that by2591legislation.2592    Senator Lujan. Yes or no, is it appropriate for the FCC to2593revoke broadcast licenses based on the viewpoint of the2594licensee?2595    Mr. Carr. It is appropriate for the FCC to take action2596under our public interest standard and hold broadcasters2597accountable to things like broadcast hoax, news distortion,2598localism. Those are things that we should be taking action on2599and enforcing.2600    Senator Lujan. Commissioner Trusty, same question to you.2601Is it appropriate for the FCC to revoke broadcast licenses2602based on the viewpoint of the licensee?2603    Ms. Trusty. Senator, my job is to enforce the law as it2604relates to broadcasters. Broadcasters have public interest2605obligations and it relies on a case-by-case basis.2606    As you know, the FCC does have the authority to revoke2607licenses and the conditions for which are spelled out in2608Section 312 of the Communications Act.2609    Senator Lujan. Commissioner Gomez?2610    Ms. Gomez. Absolutely not. The First Amendment applies to2611broadcasters regardless of whether they use spectrum or not,2612and the Communications Act prohibits the FCC from censoring2613broadcasters.2614    We should not be revoking licenses based on their2615viewpoint. In fact, what we should be doing is ensuring more2616viewpoints because if you do not like speech the answer is more2617speech.2618    Senator Lujan. I appreciate that. I think that is something2619that this body would agree with.2620    Chairman Carr, you supported the broadband label that the2621FCC adopted back in 2022. Is that correct?2622    Mr. Carr. Yes, Senator.2623    Senator Lujan. Even though broadband providers, as you are2624aware, they have been displaying these broadband labels for2625over a year, you recently proposed changes to making it harder2626for consumers to understand what plans they are subscribed to2627or what they are paying for at the end of the month.2628    As you know, it is hard to understand why this action would2629have been taken. You also want to eliminate the requirement2630that broadband labels be translated in the languages in which2631the providers are already marketing their services. Is that2632correct?2633    Mr. Carr. That is not correct, sir.2634    Senator Lujan. So you will reverse the notion that these2635labels will not be done in English and other languages?2636    Mr. Carr. No. What I am saying is consumers want clear,2637concise, accurate information. I think we agree on that. We2638have started a proceeding to make sure that they are not2639overwhelmed by irrelevant information.2640    We have not made any decision to eliminate any particular2641feature of this. We are open minded. We have sought comment on2642different portions of the existing process.2643    Senator Lujan. So, Chairman, just to be clear, there will2644be no action taken by the Commission that prevents these2645companies from putting that information--the same languages2646used in marketing, those languages can be used in other ways?2647    Mr. Carr. Yes, we will not take any action to prevent them2648from doing that.2649    Senator Lujan. I appreciate that clarity. Do you think2650then, consumers benefit from seeing the full price they pay at2651the end of the month with no hidden fees?2652    Mr. Carr. Yes, we want clarity. We want transparency. We2653want just like nutrition labels. Again, the concern is did we2654strike the right balance or did we add information that2655effectively put in wheat and chaff. We want to separate the2656wheat from the chaff and make it clear for consumers.2657    Senator Lujan. Mr. Chairman, I hope you keep your word2658there and that there is more information, not less information,2659in these labels and that----2660    Mr. Carr. We want clarity. We want clarity. I do not know2661if it is more or less.2662    Senator Lujan. Amen, brother. I just hope that it is more,2663better information, however you want to talk about it, that2664whatever the Commission--the action that you all take that you2665just do not make it harder.2666    Mr. Chairman, I have other questions that I was hoping to2667get to but my little back and forth on this web page got me2668stuck, sir.2669    Just so you know, I will be submitting some questions into2670the record about caps. I have a question associated with if it2671is Congress or if it is the FCC that can change those caps on2672consolidation.2673    I have questions about USF. I was proud back in May 20232674with Leader Thune to introduce the framework around the2675bipartisan bicameral working group and I certainly hope that2676the word that was given to Senator Fischer to work together2677that we just commit to do this one together and that we all2678work together to get this done. It is too important not to get2679right.2680    So I appreciate the time today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2681    The Chairman. Thank you.2682    Senator Young.26832684                 STATEMENT OF HON. TODD YOUNG,2685                   U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA26862687    Senator Young. Chairman Carr, earlier this month during a2688telecommunications subcommittee hearing I raised the growing2689challenge of the illegal cutting of subsea cables and the2690danger that it poses to our many critical infrastructures.2691    In response, we were told the best way to ensure our subsea2692cable infrastructure is more resilient is by creating more2693cables. Makes sense to me, but more redundancy in the system.2694    That would foster a more diverse ecosystem of cables,2695increasing the number of American-owned cables, expanding the2696capacity of American ships to fix and repair any damages, which2697without deviating too much that is the focus of my SHIPS for2698America Act and, last, by sending a message to our adversaries2699that such cuttings, again, of our undersea cables will be2700treated as an attack on our critical infrastructure.2701    So in line with this can you speak, Mr. Chairman, to why2702accelerating and streamlining subsea cable deployment is2703important to U.S. economic and national security and how the2704rule that you adopted earlier this year helps move the process2705toward clear, timely decisions?2706    Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator, and thanks for your work on2707all those important legislative efforts that you are working2708on.2709    Undersea cables are sort of the unsung hero of global2710communications. They carry, roughly, 99 percent of all Internet2711traffic. They can be vulnerable to disruption.2712    One of things that we have taken as part of our ``Build2713America'' agenda is put new policies in place to invest in2714additional buildout of undersea cables as we do so, making sure2715that they are secure as well including looking at foreign2716ownership issues related to undersea cables to make sure we are2717not introducing risks.2718    And, again, if we are going to lead the world in AI and2719many other vectors we have to have that infrastructure to carry2720it and so I think we are heading in a good direction now.2721    Senator Young. Thank you, Chairman.2722    Commissioner Trusty, do you have any thoughts on this?2723    Ms. Trusty. Absolutely, Senator. Thank you for your2724leadership on undersea cables.2725    I do think that streamlining permitting processes can help2726with redundancy, resiliency, and efficiency, and I think that2727goes to support economic growth, our technological leadership,2728and secure communication.2729    So I think we are all headed in the right direction on this2730regard.2731    Senator Young. Thank you. I wish Congress could learn from2732the leadership of the Commission in streamlining the permitting2733process of critical infrastructure. Perhaps we will in coming2734months.2735    Commissioner Trusty, in that same rule the FCC established2736requirements for applicants and licensees to create a2737cybersecurity and physical security risk management plan.2738    How can that create a more resilient subsea cable network2739and what else should we as Congress be doing to secure this2740infrastructure?2741    Ms. Trusty. Senator, thank you for the question.2742    I think with respect to these risk management plans we can2743identify threats, we can help reduce vulnerabilities, and to2744the extent there is sabotage or some kind of compromise we will2745have ready-made response plans in place to address these types2746of issues.2747    In terms of what more Congress can do, I think Congress can2748promote more U.S.-led cable projects. I think that will be2749helpful to get foreign adversaries out of these types of2750networks.2751    I also think we should look to diversify traffic patterns2752so we do not have a single point of failure in the event there2753is compromise or sabotage, and I think we can strengthen2754emergency response plans and disaster recovery initiatives so2755that we can have more secure critical infrastructure.2756    Senator Young. Thank you. Good answer.2757    Chairman Carr, the media marketplace has evolved2758drastically since its early days in the 20th century and, as a2759result, we have seen legislative and regulatory reforms advance2760to keep pace with the market.2761    Over the past year, I have heard from many different2762stakeholders, including small and local broadcasters in2763Indiana, regarding potential action by the FCC to modify the2764current broadcast ownership cap.2765    Can you explain to the Committee what the impact to local2766broadcasters will be should the broadcast ownership cap be2767expanded?2768    Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator.2769    We are looking at these issues and have not made a decision2770but, you know, there is a couple of potential guide stars here.2771    One, if you look at local newspapers, they have been2772shutting by the thousands all across the country, and so if we2773care as a public interest matter about local news and local2774reporting, I think we have to start to look at policies that2775can create more incentives for investment there.2776    And so one of the concerns that I have in media policy as a2777general matter is you have got the national programmers--2778Comcast, Disney, and others--that are increasingly dominating2779with respect to those local broadcasters.2780    So we want to make sure that they do have the ability to2781invest in local news gathering because it is also more trusted.2782Local news is more trusted than the national media that is out2783there, and so we are balancing a couple of different policies2784there and, you know, we will see where we land.2785    Senator Young. I completely agree with you. It is not just2786a matter of trust, however. It is also a matter of content. I2787think you would--most everyone would agree.2788    When seemingly every issue gets nationalized, when national2789issues get far more play than local issues, and when we have an2790electorate--a citizenry--who have absolutely no idea what is2791happening in the local council meetings and in school boards2792and all the rest because the information is not being2793circulated for whatever reason, you have to question whether2794some of the fundamental predicates for, like, having a2795democracy--a functioning democracy--and voting for local2796officials are being laid.2797    I could not tell you in little Bargersville, Indiana, where2798I live--and I am probably more active than most in terms of my2799citizenry and my attentiveness to the news--but I could not2800tell you what is happening at the local school board and all2801the rest.2802    Yet, I still show up to vote for these local offices. My2803own approach is to skip those that I know nothing about but it2804is, I think, an indictment on our news ecosystem and it may2805take some intentionality to fix it.2806    Mr. Carr. Senator, this is one issue we are looking at,2807too. As you look--turn of the TV, you know, in the evening2808hours, again, a huge percentage of that time now is programmed2809by the national program, again, out of New York and Hollywood.2810    And so one idea that we are looking at is how we empower2811those local TV stations to reclaim more of that nightly news2812time for actual local news and programming, and we are looking2813at ideas for that.2814    Senator Young. Count me interested. Thank you, Chairman,2815for indulging me well over my time.2816    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Young, and I will say I am2817glad the Senate does not follow your philosophy on voting. If2818senators did not vote on things we know nothing about there2819might be a number of votes without a single yea or nay cast.2820    Senator Kim.28212822                  STATEMENT OF HON. ANDY KIM,2823                  U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY28242825    Senator Kim. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you to the three of2826you for coming out here.2827    Chairman Carr, I guess I just wanted to start with you. I2828was confused after hearing your response to one of my2829colleagues about the status of the FCC. I want to read you a2830quote here and see if you agree with it.2831    Congress long ago determined that the FCC is an independent2832expert agency. Is that correct or not?2833    Mr. Carr. Senator, there has been sort of a sea change in2834sort of the law and the approach since I think I wrote that2835sentence, I am assuming, because you gave it to me.2836    Senator Kim. Yes, you did. You said it in front of2837Congress.2838    Mr. Carr. Right. The view has been that the Communications2839Act was passed in 1934, one year before Humphrey's Executor,2840and so Congress did not include in the Communications Act ``for2841cause removal of FCC commissioners, so I can be fired by the2842President for no reason or any reason at all''.2843    The theory had been that courts would read for cause2844removal into the statute and that was the basis for that2845viewpoint. I think now it is clear that that is not the case2846and so, formally speaking, the FCC is not independent because2847we do not have that key piece, which is for cause removal2848protection.2849    Senator Kim. So when you are talking about all power vested2850in the President, I mean, I just want to read this a little2851more because you are saying not just that it is an independent2852agency but you are saying that Congress did not want these2853technical decisions to be made in a haphazard manner or based2854on misinformation or short-term political interests.2855    You specifically said it placed the authority outside of2856the Executive Branch for a reason. So you were not just stating2857what was the law at the time; you were stating the benefit that2858comes with the independence.2859    So I guess I am just trying to get a sense from you, if you2860do not think that the FCC is independent then is President2861Trump your boss?2862    Mr. Carr. President Trump has designated me as Chairman of2863the FCC. I think it comes as no surprise that I am aligned with2864President Trump on policy. I think that is why he designated me2865as Chairman. But ultimately----2866    Senator Kim. Do you consider him your boss?2867    Mr. Carr. Ultimately, the President designated me as2868Chairman. I can be fired by the President. The President is the2869head of the Executive Branch. The decisions of the Commission--2870--2871    Senator Kim. So he is your boss?2872    Mr. Carr. Look, the decisions of the Commission are going2873to be based on a vote of the three of us right here. So there2874are some things that are different about that, and our2875decisions are based on the facts and the law in the record.2876    Senator Kim. You swore an oath when you came into your job,2877right? Does the oath have the word president in it?2878    Mr. Carr. Senator, again, I am not tracking this line. What2879I am saying is every decision----2880    Senator Kim. Do you remember the oath that you took?2881    Mr. Carr. Yes. Every----2882    Senator Kim. You swore an oath to protect what?2883    Mr. Carr. Sir, every single decision I made----2884    Senator Kim. What is it that you are protecting?2885    Mr. Carr.--in this job was based on the facts, the law, and2886the record consistent with the Constitution.2887    Senator Kim. The Constitution of the United States. I am2888just--look, this is not a test here. I am just trying to get a2889sense of how you are trying to operate here. So I guess I would2890just like to be a little bit more direct here.2891    Have you ever had a conversation with the President or2892senior administration officials about using the FCC to go after2893critics?2894    Mr. Carr. Well, first of all, Senator, I do not get into2895the specifics of conversations that I have with the President.2896    Senator Kim. OK. Well, let me reframe it then. Would it be2897appropriate for the President or senior administration2898officials to give you direction to pressure media companies?2899    Mr. Carr. Look, Senator, I am not going to get into2900hypotheticals. What I can tell you is, again, the decisions by2901the Commission----2902    Senator Kim. Well, look, the easy answer is no.2903    Mr. Carr. The decision of the----2904    Senator Kim. It is not a hypothetical. It is literally just2905trying to determine whether or not you are understanding your2906job being--belonging to the American people. Trump is not your2907boss. The American people are your boss.2908    Mr. Carr. The basis for the Commission----2909    Senator Kim. And here is just one example I want to give on2910this. This is one----2911    Mr. Carr. The basis for the Commission decisions are going2912to be based on a vote of the three of us.2913    Senator Kim. Let me finish--let me finish my comment here,2914OK?2915    The reason I raise this is because whether or not you had2916that conversation in the Oval Office or on a phone call, what2917we do is we see it all out in front.2918    On August 24, Trump wrote, ``ABC and NBC fake news. They2919are simply an arm of the Democratic Party and should,2920accordingly to many, have their licenses revoked by the FCC. I2921would be totally in favor of that because they are so biased2922and untruthful and an actual threat to our democracy.''2923    So this is not hypothetical, like you said. He did2924intentionally try to pressure you and direct you to be able to2925use your power in the FCC against media companies that he2926thought were biased against him.2927    So that is why I just want to say this is not hypothetical.2928This is not theoretical. This is real, and I was trying to get2929a sense of whether or not you thought this behavior was2930appropriate or not, and your failure to be able to directly2931dictate a line and show that there is integrity in this process2932concerns me because these--before the FCC comes all of these2933decisions. All of these decisions.2934    And when you cannot tell me directly that Trump is not your2935boss, that the American people are your boss, I do not trust2936you that you can make these decisions with the independent mind2937that is needed and directed by Congress.2938    And with that, I will yield back, Chairman.2939    Mr. Carr. When we take--when we make decisions at the2940Commission it is a vote among the three of us. It is a product2941of the three of our votes, and we all can suggest edits and2942change items and you can see for yourself the basis in2943reasoning for it----2944    Senator Kim. So would it be appropriate then for the2945President to try and remove and replace any Commissioner2946because he disagrees with the decisions made by that2947Commission?2948    Mr. Carr. The President can remove any member of the2949Commission for any reason or no reason at all.2950    Senator Kim. I know that but do you think that is2951appropriate?2952    Mr. Carr. It is up to the President to decide.2953    Senator Kim. OK. Well, then we got your answer. With that,2954I yield back.2955    The Chairman. Thank you. I would note Senator Kim asked2956multiple questions about whether it is appropriate for2957politicians to try to pressure the FCC to silence their2958critics.2959    My answer to that is unequivocally no, but that happens to2960be my answer whether those politicians are Republicans or2961Democrats, and I would like to now enter into the record a2962letter dated April 11, 2018, and it was directed to the then-2963Chairman of the FCC Ajit Pai and it says, ``We write to express2964our grave concerns regarding Sinclair Broadcasting Group's2965conduct. This conduct affects its fitness to hold its existing2966broadcast licenses and its fitness to acquire even more2967broadcast licenses through the proposed merger with Tribune2968Media Company.''2969    And what the signatories of this letter was concerned about2970is that Sinclair had their local anchors warn the populace of2971the dangers of, quote, ``one-sided news stories plaguing our2972country.''2973    In other words, Sinclair spoke out against bias in2974journalism. Apparently, our Democrat colleagues did not like2975that and in writing they urged the FCC to strip the licenses2976and block the merger, and this letter is signed by Maria2977Cantwell, by Patty Murray, by Ron Wyden, by Richard Blumenthal,2978by Bernie Sanders, by Tammy Baldwin, by Tom Udall, by Elizabeth2979Warren, by Ed Markey, by Tina Smith, by Jeff Merkley, and by2980Cory Booker.2981    And so I am going to enter this letter into the record.2982Without objection, it is so entered.2983    [The information referred to follows:]29842985[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]29862987    The Chairman. And I would point out the principles ought to2988apply to both sides evenly.2989    Senator Kim. I appreciate your comments. Can I say a quick2990rebuttal here?2991    The Chairman. Sure.2992    Senator Kim. I just want to say this is another attempt to2993muddy the waters. Chairman Carr's threats to companies he2994directly regulates are not the same thing as a letter from2995Congress requesting an agency examine a matter of public2996concern.2997    Members on both sides of the aisle frequently write similar2998letters. That is the proper oversight role of Congress.2999    As one example now, Secretary of State Rubio and other3000Republican senators wrote to the FCC in 2022 urging the agency3001to thoroughly scrutinize a proposed sale of Spanish-language3002radio stations concerned it would, quote, ``silence political3003viewpoints.''3004    So I hope my colleagues, we stop trying to distract from3005the clear and present attacks right now upon our First3006Amendment. Chairman Carr has targeted threats against the3007licensees he directly regulates and we can hear from Chairman3008Carr without further delay.3009    The Chairman. So, Senator Kim is factually incorrect. This3010letter is calling for the FCC to block the licenses, to block3011the merger, because the Democrats who signed this disagreed3012with the content on that station.3013    And the difference--I was on that committee then. When this3014happened I spoke out against it at the time and you know what?3015Not a single Democrat on this committee had a word to say about3016it.3017    I was also on this committee at the time that Democrats3018tried to go after Fox and deny a routine license renewal,3019again, because Democrats did not like what Fox News says.3020    You know what? I do not like what MSNBC says but I am not3021urging the Commission to take away MSNBC's license. And so3022suddenly when the current administration and FCC makes comments3023about Jimmy Kimmel, comments that, as you know, I disagreed3024with and spoke out against--suddenly Democrats have discovered3025the First Amendment and my request would be maybe remember it3026when Democrats are in power, that the First Amendment is not3027simply a one-way license for one team to abuse the power and3028the other not. Instead, we should respect the free speech of3029all Americans regardless of party.3030    Senator Kim. I agree with that statement you made, a lot of3031what you just said. I was not on the Committee at that time and3032I hope, going forward, as I am on this committee with you that3033we can work together to show that we do this regardless of who3034is violating, that we try to show that integrity to the3035process.3036    The Chairman. That would be a wonderful development. I hope3037so as well.3038    Senator Curtis, I believe.30393040                STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN CURTIS,3041                     U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH30423043    Senator Curtis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am sure3044everybody will be disappointed. I am actually going to change3045subjects.3046    Chairman, you were good enough to come to my office a few3047days ago and we talked about Section 230, and in that meeting I3048tried to bifurcate. I know a lot of people when you hear 2303049think of censorship, and for a minute just set that aside. I am3050not going to try to solve that. That is a very complex issue.3051    But you and I talked about algorithms, and for those who3052were not there, the analogy that kind of comes to mind is the3053digital billboard. Originally, social media companies were to3054provide the venue for a digital billboard.3055    Somewhere along the line that model changed. We compared it3056to the Post Office. If the Post Office is delivering a letter3057from you to me we, obviously, do not hold them responsible for3058that content.3059    But if the Post Office opened that letter, read it, and3060then said, ``We are actually going to send this to a hundred3061million people,'' that is a different conversation.3062    So my question for you is, from your perspective are we3063underestimating the dangers of algorithm-driven content?3064    Mr. Carr. Senator, thank you for the question. I have gone3065back since our meeting and taken a look at your legislation3066again and I am happy to continue to meet and discuss with you3067on that.3068    I do think I have expressed concerns over the years about3069how courts have sort of misinterpreted and given expansive new3070readings to Section 230 that are not in the statutory text, and3071I think there are some of those issues in your legislation as3072well that are worth looking at.3073    Senator Curtis. Thank you. And to kind of, here again,3074bring everybody else up to speed that has not had the chance to3075do that, the question is should Section 230 protections apply3076to social media companies that employ harmful recommendations3077or cause harm by their recommendations, going beyond just the3078digital billboard but actually taking those now and sending3079them out to hundreds of millions of people?3080    Mr. Carr. Yes, Senator, there is a debate to some extent in3081the courts as well about part of Section 230 that talks about3082platforms being liable if they have contributed even in part to3083the development and it is sort of a live issue--how does3084algorithms play into the contributed in part portion of that3085analysis.3086    Senator Curtis. Yes, and as everybody here knows, Section3087230 goes decades and decades back and I do not think--I think3088it is clear to say we did not really see the world that we are3089in today, and so I just introduce that to you and to others as3090something that we need to start thinking about.3091    Also, when you were in my office we talked about permitting3092reform and would love to ask you--you have had a chance to3093think about this--what is the role of Congress in assisting you3094in your permitting reform goals and what can we be doing on our3095side to make sure that we can actually complete these projects3096in a responsible way that are so important to you to complete?3097    Mr. Carr. Well, thank you, Senator.3098    Look, I think it is--there is no question that it costs too3099much and it takes too long to build out not just broadband3100infrastructure but almost any infrastructure in this country3101and I think that is probably one of the most significant3102economic development efforts that this Congress can do is to3103continue to codify and streamline permitting regulations.3104    We have a proceeding underway at the FCC. We are looking at3105NEPA, the environmental regulations, and how perhaps they have3106been misapplied in onerous ways over the years.3107    We are looking at state and local requirements where3108potentially their fees and permitting structure might not align3109with the cost-based approach that we have used before. But we3110have to get back to turning dirt--and this is going to be an3111important work stream for us.3112    Senator Curtis. Commissioner Trusty, how do you see3113permitting reform and how important is it that we figure this3114out?3115    Ms. Trusty. It is essential. It is essential to meeting our3116universal connectivity goals. You know, as the Chairman3117mentioned, we have been working on simplifying rules, reducing3118regulatory burdens on businesses, and streamlining licensing3119and permitting processes to better advance broadband providers'3120buildout efforts.3121    So we are looking at pole attachments, making those3122processes more cost effective and transparent. He mentioned3123environmental and historic reviews, making sure that those3124reviews are more predictable and efficient.3125    And we are also looking at opening up access to rights of3126way, another barrier to employing broadband, deploying3127broadband and connecting homes and businesses across the3128country.3129    Senator Curtis. Commissioner Gomez, do you agree with your3130colleagues?3131    Ms. Gomez. Senator, I think getting access to affordable3132broadband as quickly as possible is very important.3133    Senator Curtis. I am pleased that on our side this seems to3134be a bipartisan issue. There are still some hurdles, moving3135forward, but figuring out here again how to do it responsibly.3136Nobody is suggesting we should be irresponsible.3137    Chairman Carr, in the few seconds I have left can you maybe3138educate us on what happens if we do not figure out permitting3139reform?3140    Mr. Carr. Well, communities that have been stuck on the3141wrong side of the digital divide are going to remain there. The3142cost of building is going to be higher.3143    That could raise prices, and it will slow down the buildout3144of these BEAD infrastructure projects that I think are going to3145be really important to the country. So we have got to get3146going.3147    Senator Curtis. I would agree. I think we all agree. I3148would also point out this is not just in your world. In the3149energy sector, we have the same problem and we are really3150struggling as a country figuring out how to be able to allow3151things to move forward in a responsible way and I hope that3152here in the Senate we can figure out a path forward for3153everybody that needs this.3154    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield my time.3155    Senator Budd [presiding]. Thank you.3156    Senator Blunt Rochester.31573158            STATEMENT OF HON. LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER,3159                   U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE31603161    Senator Blunt Rochester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank3162you to the witnesses.3163    I come from the state of Delaware. We are--like many of my3164colleagues we are urban, we are suburban, we are rural, and we3165are also coastal.3166    For me and a lot of members here, we have been working on3167the digital divide for a very long time and that is everything3168from investing in connectivity to looking at modernizing our3169maps.3170    We have places in Delaware where you will drive and your3171call will drop. You know exactly where that spot is going to3172be.3173    But the bottom line is if you have access but you cannot3174afford the services then you really do not have it, and so we3175are in the midst of an affordability crisis. Everything from3176rent to groceries to broadband Internet has gone up and it is3177clear that we have to be laser focused on affordability.3178    So my first question is for you, Commissioner Gomez.3179    Commissioner Gomez, Democratic leadership at the FCC in the3180past has emphasized affordability, competition, transparency,3181and closing the digital divide.3182    Commissioner, from your perspective how do affordability3183policies under the previous Democratic-led FCC compare to the3184current administration's affordability policies and how3185specifically it relates to consumer outcomes?3186    Ms. Gomez. Thank you, Senator, for that question.3187    This administration has really lost its focus on consumer3188issues and particularly on affordability. We have not seen any3189action to address affordability.3190    When we lost the Affordable Connectivity program millions3191of consumers lost their service--lost their support for their3192service. We are spending billions of dollars to deploy3193networks, but we are not going to have sustainable networks if3194people cannot afford to actually subscribe to the service.3195    We need seniors to have access so that they can get health3196care services. We need students to have access to broadband so3197that they can prepare themselves for this AI economy that is3198coming. We need people to be able to access the Internet for3199jobs.3200    I was just listening this morning to the head of the3201National Economic Council who said we are not going to have a3202problem with finding jobs because they can be found on the3203internet.3204    And my thought at the moment was if you have access to the3205Internet schools and libraries need to have access to the3206internet.3207    Instead, this Commission took back the ability to provide3208hotspots through libraries so that people could have Internet3209at home and so that students could have hotspots through their3210schools.3211    Same thing with WiFi on school buses. We are not ensuring3212that people who cannot afford to be connected can get access to3213the internet.3214    Senator Blunt Rochester. So not only will people not be3215able to afford the services and the tools that they need, but3216more people will be left behind?3217    Ms. Gomez. Correct.3218    Senator Blunt Rochester. Commissioner, as connectivity3219expands through the Internet of Things, AI, the future 6G3220networks, cybersecurity risks to consumers grow significantly.3221    Do you believe the FCC has taken the appropriate steps to3222future proof the cybersecurity of everyday Americans in an3223increasingly complex telecommunications ecosystem and why?3224    And, Commissioner Trusty, I am going to ask you a similar3225question.3226    Ms. Gomez. So this Commission has had a lot of focus on3227security, but at the same time it also has taken away the3228regulatory backstop to ensure that the companies actually have3229cybersecurity policies.3230    This just happened with regard to the response to Salt3231Typhoon. This administration has been very concerned about3232Chinese equipment and it has looked for every opportunity in3233order to make sure that we do not have Chinese equipment and3234insecure equipment in our network.3235    But when China actually hacks our networks this3236administration took away the rulemaking that would have3237actually required carriers to make cybersecurity front of mind.3238    I am also concerned that we have put a pause on the cyber3239trust mark which is a way--a market-driven mechanism which I3240would think my Republican colleagues would actually really3241appreciate, a market-driven mechanism in order for consumers to3242have information about whether the devices they are using come3243from businesses that use good cyber hygiene.3244    So I am hopeful that we will be able to get that going3245again because that is a really important public-private3246partnership in order to ensure security.3247    Senator Blunt Rochester. I have very limited time.3248    Commissioner Trusty, I am going to ask you this question3249for the record, which is you spoke about the need for the U.S.3250to keep pace with international telecommunications trends3251including cybersecurity and I was going to ask if you agree3252with Commissioner Gomez on her assessment and what else you3253would like to add? So I will follow up with you on that.3254    But I do, in the interest of time, want to spend a moment3255because I am very, very concerned about, Chairman Carr, your3256focus on ending the----3257    Was that you, Mr. Chairman?3258    Senator Budd. It was.3259    Senator Blunt Rochester. Mr. Chairman, if you will give me3260a point of personal privilege because every single member3261before me went over time--like, every single member.3262    Senator Budd. Briefly, please, and then you will submit3263that for the record.3264    Senator Blunt Rochester. Thank you. And so I want to make3265sure that I say this on the record because I think when3266Commissioner Gomez talked about private companies doing3267employment matters, these are employment matters and your focus3268on diversity, equity, inclusion, and celebrating the real3269withdrawal of that I think has had an impact on women,3270veterans, people with disabilities, religious minorities.3271    And I will ask of the record for Commissioner Gomez to3272explain how conditioning FCC approvals on the elimination of3273DEI programs undermines job opportunities, weakens our economy,3274and our competitiveness.3275    With that, I will yield back.3276    Senator Budd. Thank you.3277    Senator Schmitt.32783279                STATEMENT OF HON. ERIC SCHMITT,3280                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSOURI32813282    Senator Schmitt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.3283    I have to say, every so often in this place it almost feels3284like you are having an out-of-body experience where you are,3285like, watching something happen and you cannot believe it is3286happening.3287    So the idea that my Democrat colleagues are so offended3288that the First Amendment may be or may not be violated by some3289comment you made I think is just extraordinary given the last3290four years that we lived through.3291    I happen to know something about it. I filed the Missouri3292versus Biden lawsuit that a Federal judge--a Federal judge--3293ruled was the most massive attack against free speech in U.S.3294history where entire agencies--and we sat through the3295depositions--were weaponized against the American people on the3296instruction of the Federal Government, and not just one agency3297but a leviathan of agencies that had words and phrases that you3298shall not utter in the United States of America or you were3299censored.3300    So you do not get to censor speech. You do not get to3301outsource that censorship to universities or social media3302companies, which is exactly what was happening, and go so far3303as to actually create--and I would challenge anybody in this3304committee if they raise the objection to this--literally a3305disinformation governance board in the United States of3306America.3307    You remember the Mary Poppins character who was singing?3308That is what I am--in the United States of America, not like in33091898, not in 1799, like, three years ago.3310    And so to sit here and listen to all this stuff about, you3311know, wearing the white hat on free speech is laughable.3312Laughable.3313    So anyway, that is not--I just--I cannot help myself3314sometimes. I just--I wanted to get to these questions first but3315just listening to this is incredible.3316    So anyway, Mr. Carr, I do want to ask you about something3317that is--I do not think has been asked about. Currently, there3318is a draft piece of legislation currently being considered by3319the European Commission, the European Union Space Act, which as3320currently drafted would impose a regulatory framework that3321would apply not just to EU firms but also U.S. satellite3322operators providing services to European customers.3323    It appears specifically targeted at U.S. companies due3324solely to their size and their success that they have had. From3325the FCC's perspective, what concrete impacts would these3326proposed requirements have on U.S. licensed systems operating3327globally, particularly where the EU rules may duplicate or3328conflict with current U.S. requirements?3329    Mr. Carr. Senator, thanks for the question.3330    You know, we all know that for years Europe has been3331engaged in protectionist conduct. They have been going after3332U.S. technology companies simply for being successful U.S.3333technology companies. What we are now seeing is the specific3334application of that same approach into the satellite sector.3335    European regulators are using the rubric of European3336satellite sovereignty to suggest that you effectively have to3337be a European satellite company to do business in Europe.3338    Unlike the technology space, there actually are national3339champion satellite providers in Europe that do business in3340America, and so if Europe continues to go down this3341protectionist path we are going to have to make sure that there3342is reciprocal and fair treatment.3343    But it ultimately is holding back Europe itself and it is3344harmful to these U.S. businesses that are trying to have global3345operations. So there is significant pushback right now on this3346sovereignty effort taking place in Europe.3347    Senator Schmitt. Well, and it is I think part and parcel of3348something much broader that is happening in Europe right now,3349which is under the NATO flag the United States is supposed to3350have sort of unconditional support no matter what.3351    We are partners and this is an alliance. But when the EU3352flag goes up all of a sudden it is a very, very different3353story.3354    And I hope you do sort of push back on this idea. Very I3355think ill-timed and likely illegal but we have levers in the3356toolbox, too. It should not be the case. But if they are going3357to go down this road, hopefully you all will make it clear to3358our European friends that this is not appreciated.3359    I do want to briefly in the time I have left, Mr. Carr, the3360U.S. already has a--before that licensing framework that we3361currently have in the U.S. what is the status of securing a3362kind of equivalence decision if equivalency is not granted?3363    Staying on the European track here, how would overlapping3364EU requirements affect FCC licensed systems operating globally?3365    Mr. Carr. Well, for one, we are always going to look out3366for the interests of America and our consumers. So, for3367instance, we are looking at power level issues where perhaps3368Europe is in a different position than America.3369    Europe may hold back on power levels in Europe but we can3370authorize them here in America so that our consumers at least3371continue to get better, faster satellite services including3372high-speed internet.3373    We are also working inside the building to go much faster3374on processing satellite applications. When I took over as3375Chairman we had a massive backlog.3376    We have already cut through about half of that backlog and3377we are changing our approach inside the building to be much3378more assembly line, like, clear, bright line rules.3379    If you hit those you are going to get a green light from3380the FCC pretty quickly and, again, I think that is going to set3381us up to lead the world in these next-generation satellite3382technologies.3383    Senator Schmitt. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.3384    Senator Budd. Thank you.3385    Senator Peters, you are recognized.33863387                STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS,3388                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN33893390    Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to our3391witnesses today, thank you, all three of you, for being here3392today.3393    Chair Carr, in 2019 you tweeted--I am just going to quote3394your words directly from the tweet. You said, quote, ``Should3395the government censor speech it does not like? Of course not.3396The FCC does not have a roving mandate to police speech in the3397name of the public interest,'' end of quote.3398    That was your tweet in 2019, and I will say I agree with3399that. I think that was a good tweet in 2019. I think government3400censorship is absolutely dangerous to our democracy.3401    In fact, according to a book which you may have read, ``How3402Democracies Die,'' written by two eminent political scientists,3403historically, one of the key markers of a slide toward3404authoritarianism is attacks on freedom of the press. Part of3405the playbook.3406    We have seen it over and over again, and that is why I was3407concerned about your actions this year. This fall alone you3408have suggested that the FCC go after broadcasters that do not3409punish comedians--we have heard that here in the hearing--do3410not punish comedians who make comments that the President does3411not like.3412    In one case, you specifically mentioned the broadcaster's3413public interest obligation. You said, quote--in this instance,3414quote, ``We can do this the easy way or we can do this the hard3415way,'' unquote.3416    That may have been a line I saw in ``The Godfather.'' I am3417not sure, but that is--it is pretty similar to that when you3418threatened to use the FCC to do the very thing you said in 20193419that the FCC should not ever do via a roving censor.3420    So I hate to say this but ensuring broadcasters are3421operating, quote, ``in the public interest'' I do not believe3422that means ensuring that no one on TV is ever mean to the3423President or says something the President may not like.3424    To act otherwise is to basically take a leaf out of the3425authoritarian playbooks that we have seen around the world.3426Vladimir Putin comes to mind as someone who openly intimidates3427and threatens folks in a similar matter, and this cannot3428happen, not in our democracy.3429    So I am just going to ask you just a simple yes or no3430question. Will you commit here today that you will not move to3431revoke any media license for broadcasters or retaliate in any3432way against broadcast companies merely for choosing to host3433content that is critical of the President or says something3434that he may not like? Yes or no, very simple.3435    Mr. Carr. Senator, any broadcaster that complies with the3436public interest standard is not in any risk at all. If a3437broadcaster is engaging in broadcast hoax or violation of news3438distortion policy or political equal opportunity there is going3439to work for the FCC potentially there.3440    Senator Peters. So this should be a pretty easy question.3441Do you think the FCC should protect free speech?3442    Mr. Carr. Yes.3443    Senator Peters. OK. So you will not revoke licenses? So we3444can go back that you will do it? You will not revoke licenses3445or retaliate if they are simply engaging in free speech?3446    Mr. Carr. Senator, first of all, the Supreme Court has3447expressly said there is no First Amendment right to an FCC3448license and the Supreme Court has said that the FCC enforcing3449the public interest standard on licensees is not a violation of3450the First Amendment or censorship.3451    Senator Peters. And you get to determine what is the public3452interest. So if the President is offended you think, wow, that3453is the public interest. No one should ever offend a president.3454    That seems to be counter to our whole history in this3455country. People are always critical. I do not care who the3456president is--a Democrat or a Republican, we should be able to3457make fun of them.3458    That is what a healthy democracy is, you can make fun of3459your leaders--and speak truth to power so I do not understand3460that. This should be fairly easy, sir.3461    Mr. Carr. When you say make fun of the President are you3462talking about the Kimmel issue? Make fun of----3463    Senator Peters. I am talking about any president. If you3464have somebody as a comedian--you can use his example.3465    Mr. Carr. Kimmel was not making fun of the President. What3466Kimmel said is we hit some new lows over the weekend with the3467MAGA gang trying to characterize this kid who killed Charlie3468Kirk as anything other than one of them.3469    It appeared to be an effort to mischaracterize the3470motivations of one of the most significant political3471assassinations, it is not.3472    Senator Peters. We also know that the President does not3473like that kind of--and I do not want to make just the issue of3474the comedian because it is broader than that.3475    Mr. Carr. That had nothing to do with the President.3476    Senator Peters. The public interest is a lot broader than3477that and it should not be you that determines that. That is3478called the--in a democracy people are free to----3479    Mr. Carr. But, Senator, Congress----3480    Senator Peters. They are free to say things that you may3481not like, I may not like----3482    Mr. Carr. But, Senator, Congress----3483    Senator Peters.--but that is why we always defend that. I3484am running out of time.3485    Commissioner Gomez--I am running out of time. Commissioner3486Gomez, it is in----3487    Mr. Carr. Congress passed a law--Congress passed a law3488charging with the FCC with the enforcing of the public interest3489standard. If they want something different then they need to3490change the law.3491    Senator Peters. Mr. Carr, I have got limited time here.3492    Senator Budd. The Senator's time has expired.3493    Senator Peters. Commissioner Gomez--could I have a few3494moments, Chair, given the filibuster here?3495    Commissioner Gomez, it is true that the FCC has not3496actually followed through on threats to revoke broadcasters'3497licenses over content that the Trump administration disagrees3498with despite the Chairman's threats to do so.3499    Could you discuss how public comments and actions taken so3500far by the FCC related to major broadcaster editorial choices3501have been received by the media and do you think the FCC3502actually needs to revoke licenses in order to have a chilling3503effect?3504    Ms. Gomez. Thank you for that question, Senator.3505    This administration has been on a campaign to censor3506content and to control the media and others, any critics of3507this administration, and it is weaponizing whatever levers it3508has in order to control that media.3509    That includes using the FCC to threaten licensees and3510broadcasters are being chilled. We are hearing from3511broadcasters that they are afraid to air programming that is3512critical of this administration because they are afraid of3513being dragged before the FCC in an investigation. It will be3514costly.3515    It is still unconstitutional to revoke licenses based3516solely on content that the FCC does not like. And let us be3517clear, we need to define what we mean by operating in the3518public interest if we are just going to use it as a means to go3519after any content we do not like.3520    Broadcast hoaxes, that rule was put in place because of3521Orson Welles and the ``War of the Worlds,'' and our news3522distortion policy does not mean any content we do not like. It3523requires a very specific circumstance in order to be used,3524which is why it is really never used.3525    The First Amendment governs what we do as does the3526Communications Act prohibition on censorship and this3527Commission is abusing that.3528    Senator Budd. Thank you, Senator.3529    Mr. Carr. Senator, look, if broadcasters are hesitating3530today before running broadcast hoaxes or news distortions or3531the news I think that is a good thing.3532    Senator Rosen. It is my time.3533    Senator Peters. I did not address a question to you.3534    Senator Budd. Thank you. I am going to recognize myself.3535Thank you.3536    Senator Rosen. Wait.35373538                  STATEMENT OF HON. TED BUDD,3539                U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA35403541    Senator Budd. Thank you. Let us talk about robocalls. I do3542not think you have talked about that today.3543    You know, your testimony mentioned the work that you and3544the FCC are doing to protect the integrity of the robocall3545mitigation database, Chairman, and at nearly every telephone3546town hall that I do and including one last week the folks3547always bring up robocalls.3548    They feel overwhelmed by them. They feel that they3549perpetrate real harm. They give examples. As I am around the3550state people talk about robocalls, huge concerns, especially as3551we have things like AI-generated personalized voices and the3552scams become more and more sophisticated and easier to carry3553out.3554    So, Chairman, again, thank you all for being here.3555Chairman, what can the FCC do to proactively protect folks and3556how can you stay ahead of the curve with these changing3557criminal tactics?3558    Mr. Carr. This is the number-one consumer complaint we get3559at the FCC. Historically, it felt like a game of whack-a-mole.3560We would put a technology solution in place. We would go after3561a single bad actor. But this would just pop up in another way.3562    What we are doing right now is we are taking an approach3563where we are tackling illegal robocalls at every single portion3564of the call lifecycle. We are making it harder to get access to3565telephone numbers.3566    We are making it more difficult for foreign robocalls to3567enter the U.S. We are looking at potential loopholes, including3568ones for non-IP networks, and one issue we have recently teed3569up is taking a look at any robocall, legal or otherwise, that3570originates from a call center overseas.3571    Right now, when that comes up to your phone it can show up3572with a U.S. area code to fool you into thinking the call center3573or the call is here in America. And so we are looking at3574changing that so it would accurately display that it is a3575foreign call center.3576    If United or any other business wants to put a call center3577abroad then they should be able to disclose that to the3578consumer, and if this helps with onshoring then that might be a3579good thing as well.3580    But we are taking a real new approach including kicking out3581over 1,200 providers from our robocall mitigation database,3582which effectively cuts them off from the systems. We are trying3583to really tackle this at every portion of the call.3584    Senator Budd. Thank you for that. I think you are talking3585about the SIM farms that we have seen recently. A lot of that3586is foreign originated. But is there any specific limitations3587that prevent your agency from doing more in this area?3588    Mr. Carr. As of right now, we have a fair amount of legal3589authority in this area. It is simply about, you know, tracking3590down every single loophole that folks are exploring.3591    We are working increasingly with state AGs on this. We are3592deepening our partnership and collaboration with FTC, the3593Nation's premier consumer protection agency, and we are going3594to keep at this issue.3595    Senator Budd. Thank you.3596    Shift gears a little bit, Chairman. You know, one of your3597first stops when you were confirmed was to western North3598Carolina after the devastating Hurricane Helene about 14 months3599ago and it devastated communications infrastructure.3600    So one of the most difficult aspects of the immediate3601response was that folks they could not get a signal out to3602reach loved ones. They could not reach emergency services when3603they need.3604    Can you highlight some of the work that you and the FCC are3605doing to enhance communication resiliency during and after3606natural disasters, please?3607    Mr. Carr. Well, thank you, Senator.3608    As you noted, my first trip as Chairman was to western3609North Carolina which was still hit hard and engaged in3610recovery. Went to Chimney Rock and that portion where it was3611total devastation.3612    We are doing a couple of things. One, we have put into3613place before a new mechanism where carriers can more easily3614roam on each other's networks so if one provider does have3615service more people can connect that way.3616    We are also looking at recovery efforts. What you see is3617oftentimes the telecom networks will survive the initial storm3618but as power and road crews come in to clear the way they can3619cut lines.3620    And so we have been working to make sure that those3621different portions of recovery crews are collaborating better3622and communicating so they do not step on each other as much.3623There is a range of additional actions we are taking, too, to3624harden the networks.3625    Senator Budd. Commissioner Trusty, how will the FCC's3626``Build America'' agenda increase network resiliency? I think3627we talked about that in the office a little bit. If you would3628like to elaborate, please.3629    Ms. Trusty. Sure. Thank you for the question, Senator.3630    We are doing a lot through the ``Build America'' agenda to3631enhance network resiliency. We are embracing new technologies3632like satellite connectivity.3633    So we are doing a lot to overhaul our earth and space3634station licensing framework to expand access to satellite3635connectivity, which can help enhance redundancy and resiliency.3636    We are also pushing forward the IP transition. So we are3637streamlining copper retirement processes and legacy service3638discontinuance requirements to make room for IP-based networks3639that are more reliable and more resilient.3640    We are also doing a top to bottom review of our emergency3641alert systems to make sure we can get Americans the information3642they need that is potentially life-saving in emergencies and3643disasters.3644    I think all of that is covered under the ``Build America''3645agenda.3646    Senator Budd. Great work. Is there any way that Congress3647can be a better partner in that mission that you are working on3648so diligently right now?3649    Ms. Trusty. Sure. I think it all goes back to permitting3650reform.3651    You know, when networks are destroyed or when they are3652compromised, not having to work through permitting delays and3653other bureaucratic issues is really helpful when trying to3654restore these communication services for Americans.3655    Senator Budd. Thank you, all.3656    Senator Rosen, you are recognized.36573658                STATEMENT OF HON. JACKY ROSEN,3659                    U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA36603661    Senator Rosen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.3662    I want to remind the witnesses here today that the3663Constitution stands. The Constitution overrides regulatory3664bodies. The First Amendment is what we base our communications3665on. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights stands above all.3666    I am going to build a little bit upon what Senator Peters3667talked about and others did, too, because I am worried about a3668threatening environment for our media and so I will say3669following Jimmy Kimmel's monologue on September 16, Chairman3670Carr, you publicly said this, ``We can do it the easy way or3671the hard way.''3672    Now, maybe you like movies. Maybe you do not. Maybe you3673have never seen ``The Godfather'' but we all have. So I am3674going to just ask an additional question and I want you to3675clarify yes or no, please, because my time is limited here.3676    Was this an implicit threat to ABC and its affiliates to3677take Jimmy Kimmel off the air or ABC and its affiliates face3678consequences such as losing broadcasting license or having3679proposed mergers blocked? Is this how government works now, the3680threat of losing your license? Yes or no, please, because I3681have more questions.3682    Mr. Carr. Senator, thank you for the question. I was very3683clear there was no threat in there to revoke a license.3684    Senator Rosen. Yes or no, please. Was it a threat to revoke3685the license? Was it an implied threat to invoke?3686    Mr. Carr. There was no threat to revoke a license there.3687What I have been talking about was the FCC's news distortion3688policy.3689    Senator Rosen. I will take that as a no, please. Thank you.3690Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate that. I am going to move on3691to another question about edited interviews.3692    Earlier this year, you reinstated a closed FCC inquiry into3693CBS News for alleged edits of an interview with Kamala Harris3694that Donald Trump claimed was done to help her. Many interviews3695are edited to fit in a time-frame of the news program.3696    This is nothing new. CBS News ended up paying Donald Trump3697millions in the settlement over his dispute. Earlier this year,3698it came to light that Fox News also edited an interview that3699Donald Trump did last year in the middle of a Presidential3700campaign in which he was asked if he would release the Epstein3701files. The edited interview ends after Trump says, ``Yes, I3702would.''3703    But the unedited version shows Trump hedging his support3704for releasing the files.3705    So Chairman Carr, yes or no, please, given that this edit3706by Fox News was clearly meant to make Donald Trump look good3707right in the middle of a Presidential campaign. Will you commit3708to opening an investigation into Fox News for its deceptive3709editing of this clip?3710    Again, yes or no, please, because I have questions for the3711other witnesses.3712    Mr. Carr. No.3713    Senator Rosen. No. So you are an elected bureaucrat. You3714are deciding that some investigations should go on and others3715should not, and are you basing this solely on the target or are3716you basing this--what are you basing this on?3717    Can you answer that question? This was clearly edited. Why3718is one edit fine and one edit not in the middle of a3719Presidential campaign?3720    Mr. Carr. Senator, it is based on the law. The Fox News3721interview was on cable. There is no public interest standard.3722There is no broadcast hoax rule. There is no news distortion.3723There is no role for the FCC there.3724    Senator Rosen. Well, I think there is a rule for fairness3725and the American public understand what is fair and just and3726the same rules apply.3727    Mr. Carr. Do you think there is a broad fairness rule that3728we should apply at the FCC to cable companies?3729    Senator Rosen. So I am going to go on to mergers. I am3730going to go on to merger threats then, Chairman Carr.3731    Is there a law that directs the FCC to consider editorial3732conduct when reviewing mergers? Yes or no because I have a3733follow-up question there?3734    Mr. Carr. The FCC's job under the Communications Act for3735reviewing mergers is to make sure that they are in the public3736interest and that is the standard that we apply.3737    Senator Rosen. And so can you clarify for us the lens3738through which you review public interest? Is there a set of3739principles? Is there a set of something that is applied the3740same equally and to every single merger that you look at?3741    Are you using the same template? Because if you are not,3742then I have concerns with that. So can you share with us how3743you consider editorial conduct when you are looking to approve3744the mergers that--well, maybe they will get them, maybe they3745will not based on what? Your personal opinion?3746    Mr. Carr. Well, again, the standard is the public interest3747standard and the FCC's decisional document approving mergers3748walks through all of the standards.3749    It applies them and it is right there in black and white3750for everyone to do when we apply normal precedent.3751    So, for instance, we have accepted commitments on----3752    Senator Rosen. Well, I want to ask Commissioner Gomez,3753though, if Congress passed a law--so if we passed a law based3754on this directing the FCC to consider editorial conduct in a3755merger review, would that law violate the First Amendment and3756be considered unconstitutional?3757    Ms. Gomez. In all likelihood, yes, the law would violate3758the First Amendment because the First Amendment protects3759against government interference with editorial decisions.3760    Senator Rosen. Do you think that Nexstar made decisions3761regarding its editorial comment because it was concerned that3762the FCC might not approve its merger with Tegna--excuse me, if3763it aired content that the Trump administration opposed?3764    Ms. Gomez. I think that the--that it was trying to curry3765favor with the administration by preempting Jimmy Kimmel when3766it did.3767    Senator Rosen. Do you think the FCC used merger approval?3768They used merger approval as a lever to exert pressure on media3769corporations to threaten free speech in our democracy?3770    Ms. Gomez. Without a doubt the FCC is leveraging its3771authority over mergers and enforcement proceedings in order to3772influence content.3773    Senator Rosen. Thank you.3774    Mr. Carr. If I could just add real quick to that answer.3775    Senator Rosen. You are our witness here, sir. We ask the3776questions. Thank you.3777    My time is up. I think it is on to Senator Hickenlooper.3778    The Chairman [presiding]. Thank you.3779    Senator Hickenlooper.37803781             STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN HICKENLOOPER,3782                   U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO37833784    Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you all3785for your time and your service.3786    The United States is remaining a global leader in3787innovation including AI. I think that is a goal that is broadly3788bipartisan.3789    As a former Governor in Colorado, I recognize that states3790are, rightfully, the laboratories of democracy. The President's3791recent executive order on AI directs the FCC to consider3792withholding funds to states that have AI laws that could be in3793conflict with stated goals.3794    Obviously, I think the FCC does have a role in how AI is3795involved in managing communication networks or blocking3796robocalls. I think it is questionable at best whether the FCC3797can regulate how AI models are used or developed.3798    So let me start with Commissioner Gomez. Does the FCC have3799explicit jurisdiction under the Communications Act to preempt3800state AI laws? Why or why not?3801    Ms. Gomez. The Communications Act does not grant explicit3802authority to the FCC to preempt AI laws. I am dubious of our3803authority simply that to be able to preempt AI laws simply3804because telecommunications carriers use AI in their networks.3805    I think that what we would need in order for the FCC to3806have preemption authority is for there to be a comprehensive3807Federal framework of AI regulation that grants that authority3808to the FCC.3809    Senator Hickenlooper. Exactly.3810    Chairman Carr, do you state or perceive AI laws that have3811been enacted in states like Texas or Utah do these raise3812concerns for you?3813    Mr. Carr. Thank you for the question, Senator.3814    I agree with you that I think we want the United States to3815continue to be the global leader when it comes to AI.3816    In terms of the FCC, there is an executive order that asks3817us to initiate a proceeding to determine whether or not to3818adopt Federal reporting in disclosure standards for AI models3819and whether that would preempt conflicting, and we will start3820that proceeding and we will take comment on all sides of the3821issue.3822    Senator Hickenlooper. Would that mean that the FCC could3823withhold Universal Service Fund funds from states that are--3824these are the funds that are meant to help low-income consumers3825and rural hospitals, schools, with their connectivity. Could3826those funds be interrupted as a consequence of this?3827    Mr. Carr. Well, the issue I have heard raised there is with3828BEAD funds, which are going to be administered by Commerce. I3829have not heard that with respect to FCC USF funds at this3830point.3831    Senator Hickenlooper. OK. This year we have seen a wave of3832tariffs on various imports in the United States and while trade3833negotiations may continue to reduce tariffs, that does not3834necessarily mean that the economic uncertainty that they create3835does not continue to impact manufacturers including those who3836manufacture electronics and communications equipment.3837    So, Chairman Carr, is the FCC in the process or have they3838evaluated whether escalating tariffs on information and3839communications technology hardware has either lengthened time3840lines to build modern communication networks or raised3841operating costs for providers or consumers in rural areas?3842    Mr. Carr. I think, Senator, in terms of hardwares, BLS CPI3843data shows that prices for smart phones themselves are down 73844percent. I am sorry--are down over 7 percent year over year.3845    And so we are not seeing a negative impact in that sector3846at this point.3847    Senator Hickenlooper. So I was thinking more of building3848out the networks, the towers and the other communications3849equipment.3850    Mr. Carr. I think if we see it there we potentially would3851have seen it in all forms of equipment. That is the data set3852that I have seen. But, look, generally, we are trying to find3853ways to drive down the prices for these services.3854    Senator Hickenlooper. Good. I am glad to hear that.3855    And then the last question for you, Chairman Carr. In 2021,3856the Marshall fire really devastated Boulder, Colorado, and3857forced countless number of families to evacuate their homes.3858    The Marshall fire and numerous other disasters across the3859country has really shown a bright light on the key role that3860the Federal Government and first responders play in3861distributing key information during these types of emergencies.3862    Oftentimes, that information saves lives. A lot of this3863includes or should include, has included, the National Weather3864Service and the FCC.3865    The Marshall fire spurred action at the FCC, which we3866appreciate, to improve the location accuracy for how wireless3867emergency alerts--WEAs--are delivered to Americans and I think3868that action is welcomed. More work needs to be done.3869    But just to make sure our communities receive timely3870information during disasters, what message would you share,3871Chairman Carr, with Americans on the FCC's work to improve3872these wireless emergency alerts?3873    Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator.3874    This is important and we are pushing hard to always3875increase location accuracy, and one related issue to this3876actually has to do with GPS and this is an issue where, you3877know, Chairman Cruz has been leading for a long time.3878    A lot of the location data some of it is cell site but some3879of it is GPS. And it is a great system but it is vulnerable and3880so we have been taking actions at the FCC to look up standing3881up either complementary or alternatives or secondary ways of3882getting that precision navigation and timing information that3883today is displayed by GPS.3884    And so we are going to look at potentially next steps in3885trying to invigorate that work.3886    Senator Hickenlooper. I appreciate that. Thanks to all3887three of you again for your service. I yield back to the Chair.3888    The Chairman. Thank you very much.3889    Thank you to all the Commissioners for your testimony here3890today. Senators will have until the close of business on3891December 19 to submit questions for the record. The witnesses3892will have until the close of business on January 7 to respond3893to those questions.3894    This concludes today's hearing. The Committee stands3895adjourned.3896    [Whereupon, at 12:48 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]38973898                            A P P E N D I X38993900        The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights3901                                  Washington, DC, December 17, 202539023903Hon. Ted Cruz,3904Chair,3905Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,3906U.S. Senate,3907Washington, DC.39083909Hon. Maria Cantwell,3910Ranking Member,3911Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,3912U.S. Senate,3913Washington, DC.39143915Dear Chair Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell,39163917    On behalf of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a3918coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 240 national3919organizations to promote and protect the rights of all persons in the3920United States, and the undersigned organizations, we express our deep3921concern with the operations of the Federal Communications Commission3922and urge the Committee to conduct vigorous oversight.3923    We also ask for this letter to be entered into the record of the3924December 17, 2025, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and3925Transportation hearing conducting oversight of the Federal3926Communications Commission.3927    Federal Communications Commissioner (FCC) Chair Brendan Carr has3928weaponized the Commission to fight a culture war for the administration3929instead of carrying out the Commission's true mission: to serve the3930people of the United States. As a chief author of the anti-democratic3931Project 2025, Chair Carr is committed to a vision of a nation that3932serves the interests of the powerful few. As civil rights advocates, we3933are deeply alarmed by his attacks on our values and our communities and3934urge this committee to take seriously its charge to conduct oversight3935of the FCC.3936    Censoring the Press and Dissenting Voices: FCC Chair Brendan Carr's3937pressured American Broadcasting Company (ABC) affiliates to not carry3938Jimmy Kimmel Live. The FCC has significant influence over the3939broadcasting licenses of the affiliates, influence that should not be3940abused to silence dissenting voices for political gain.\1\ First3941amendment experts pointed to Carr's rhetoric and the subsequent3942(temporary) removal of Kimmel's show as a textbook example of an undue3943and violative form of pressure,\2\ and highlighted the many ways in3944which the FCC has attempted to police speech (both in the issuance of3945broadcast licenses and the approval of mergers).\3\ Carr did not learn3946his lesson to avoid pressuring broadcasters, and shared President3947Trump's post asking for Seth Myers to be fired on his own X account.\4\3948---------------------------------------------------------------------------3949    \1\ Press Release, ACLU, ACLU Responds to Trump Administration Move3950Censoring Jimmy Kimmel (Sept. 17, 2025), https://www.aclu.org/press-3951releases/aclu-responds-to-trump-administration-move-censoring-jimmy-3952kimmel.3953    \2\ Anna Branigin, ``How Cancel Culture Came for Everyone,''3954Washington Post (Oct. 1, 2025), https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/3955power/2025/10/01/cancel-culture-kimmel/.3956    \3\ Ted Johnson, ``Brendan Carr's Threats On Networks May Be3957``Jawboning,'' And Courts Don't Like It, Legal Experts Say'' Deadline3958(Sept. 19, 2025), https://deadline.com/2025/09/fcc-brendan-carr-3959jawboning-jimmy-kimmel-1236549243/; Tom Wheeler, ``Trump's CBS Lawsuit3960Ties Media Freedom to FCC's Regulatory Power,'' Brookings (Feb. 19,39612025), https://www.brookings.edu/articles/trumps-cbs-lawsuit-ties-media3962-freedom-to-fccs-regulatory-power/.3963    \4\ Brendan Morrow, Trump calls for NBC to fire Seth Meyers, FCC3964Chair Brendan Carr weighs in. USA TODAY (Nov. 17, 2025), https://3965www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2025/11/17/trump-seth-meyers-3966fcc-chair-brendan-carr/87315926007/#.3967---------------------------------------------------------------------------3968    Gutting Media Diversity Rules: The FCC's media ownership rules play3969an important role in preventing individual companies from dominating3970national or local markets and fulfilling the FCC's obligation to3971promote media diversity. Eliminating the media ownership rules3972abdicates the FCC's statutory obligation, continuing to exclude people3973of color from broadcast ownership.\5\ Further, relaxing media ownership3974limits will exacerbate already-low competition, localism, and viewpoint3975diversity while also harming workers. Several pending mergers,3976including Nexstar's $6.2 billion deal to take over TEGNA would blast3977through existing ownership rules.\6\ We urge the Committee to ensure3978that the Commission will follow regular process and consider this3979transaction, and the media ownership rules, with a vote of the FCC3980Commissioners, a request consistent with prior positions of Chairman3981Cruz.\7\3982---------------------------------------------------------------------------3983    \5\ George Winslow, ``Unions, Civil Rights Groups Argue Localism3984Will Be Hurt, Not Helped by Eliminating Ownership Caps,'' TV Tech (Aug.398528, 2025), https://www.tvtechnology.com/news/unions-civil-rights-3986groups-argue-localism-will-be-hurt-not-helped-by-eliminating-ownership-3987caps.3988    \6\ Keith Collins and Raj Saha, ``How a TV Merger Raised the3989Pressure on ABC to Suspend Kimmel,'' New York Times (Sept. 19, 2025),3990https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/09/19/business/media/abc-3991nexstar-kimmel.html.3992    \7\ Press Release, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and3993Transportation, At Nominations Hearing, Sen. Cruz Blasts FCC Actions on3994Standard-General-TEGNA Deal, Calls Out Fraud-Risk in Affordable3995Connectivity Program (June 22, 23), https://www.commerce.senate.gov3996/2023/6/at-nominations-hearing-sen-cruz-blasts-fcc-actions-on-3997standard-general-tegna-deal-calls-out-fraud-risk-in-affordable-3998connectivity-program (``It is incumbent on this committee to only3999confirm nominees who will stand for procedural fairness, respect4000taxpayer dollars, and exercise regulatory humility'').4001---------------------------------------------------------------------------4002    Coercing Companies to Pull Back on Diversity and Equity: We also4003have serious concerns about the ways in which FCC leadership has4004weaponized the Commission's merger authority to pressure media and4005telecommunications companies into abandoning their diversity, equity,4006and inclusion (DEI) programs.\8\ Earlier this year, Chair Carr publicly4007stated he does not see ``a path forward'' to approve transactions for4008companies that maintain DEI programs, encouraging businesses seeking4009FCC merger approval to ``get busy ending'' their diversity4010initiatives.\9\ FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez has condemned this as4011government overreach that stifles free expression, noting that ``there4012is a freedom of speech component to diversity, equity, and inclusion''4013and stating that this approach represents ``control of a private4014company's employment practices'' that ``has nothing to do with what we4015do at the FCC.'' \10\ Despite plain civil rights mandates and an abject4016failure to meet them, the FCC has threatened or coerced many companies4017to eliminate their programs that aimed to ensure fair treatment of and4018equal opportunity for women, people of color, people with disabilities,4019and the LGBTQ community in order for their mergers to be approved.\11\4020The Leadership Conference made clear earlier this year that our4021Nation's civil rights laws remain in place and the Chairman's efforts4022to circumvent them is an affront to the Nation's commitment to4023fairness.\12\4024---------------------------------------------------------------------------4025    \8\ Commissioner Anna Gomez, Remarks at U.S. Hispanic Chamber of4026Commerce Summit, (March 25, 2025), https://www.fcc.gov/document/4027commissioner-gomezs-remarks-us-hispanic-chamber-commerce-summit.4028    \9\ Cameron Coats, Carr: Broadcasters With DEI Programs Could Get4029Deals Blocked, Radio Ink, (March 24, 2025), https://radioink.com/2025/403003/24/carr-broadcasters-with-dei-programs-could-get-deals-blocked/.4031    \10\ Cameron Coats, Gomez: DEI Attacks Part of `Censorship and4032Control' Under Trump, Radio Ink (April 8, 2025), https://radioink.com/40332025/04/08/gomez-dei-attacks-part-of-censorship-and-control-under-4034trump/.4035    \11\ Inside Radio, Commissioner Urges Private Companies to Fight4036FCC Efforts to End DEI, (March 26, 2025), https://www.insideradio.com/4037free/commissioner-urges-private-companies-to-fight-fcc-efforts-to-end-4038dei/article_4be2f10e-9b92-46b7-9b0f-e70f019c54ed.html.4039    \12\ Open Letter from the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human4040Rights to Leaders in Business, Philanthropy, Education, Law, Non-4041Profits, and Health Care (May 16, 2025), https://civilrights.org/4042resource/your-civil-rights-obligations-remain-in-force/.4043---------------------------------------------------------------------------4044    Increasing costs and endangering communities by increasing phone4045and video prices: The Commission recently adopted higher prices for4046consumers which will likely lead to increased recidivism for4047incarcerated people. The Senate unanimously adopted the Martha Wright4048Reed Act in 2022 to lower rates and the Commission implemented that law4049in 2024. When the FCC proposed the changes in October, members of this4050committee denounced Chair Carr's rolling back the implementation of the4051Martha Wright Act.\13\ The law passed out of Congress on a bipartisan4052basis, and the FCC's 2024 Final Rule (2024 Rule) was adopted on a 5-04053vote. Recent analysis of the FCC's changes found that they would lead4054to a 66 percent drop in call minutes, and the rates people would pay4055will increase by as much as 83 percent--costing consumers hundreds of4056millions of dollars annually.\14\ We urge Chair Carr to roll back the4057changes made and enforce the 2024 Rule as originally adopted by the4058Commission.4059---------------------------------------------------------------------------4060    \13\ Press Release, Senator Tammy Duckworth, Duckworth Leads4061Colleagues in Denouncing FCC Chair Brendan Carr's Unlawful Plan to4062Increase Costs for Law Abiding Americans with Incarcerated Loved Ones4063(Oct. 28, 2025), https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/news/press-releases/4064duckworth-leads-colleagues-in-denouncing-fcc-chair-brendan-carrs-4065unlawful-plan-to-increase-costs-for-law-abiding-americans-with-4066incarcerated-loved-ones.4067    \14\ Press Release, Worth Rises, Worth Rises Releases Impact4068Analysis of the FCC's Proposed Revisions to Its 2024 Regulations on4069Incarcerated People's Communications Services and Rebukes the Revisions4070as Overly Broad and Misguided (Oct. 15, 2025), https://worthrises.org/4071pressreleases/2025/10/15/worth-rises-releases-impact-analysis-of-the-4072fccs-proposed-revisions.4073---------------------------------------------------------------------------4074    Aiding Ban on State and Local AI Laws: Chair Carr previously stated4075that he would be taking a look at how ``the FCC may be able to play a4076role in helping'' block state laws regulating artificial4077intelligence,\15\ and the FCC has followed up the Chair's comments by4078issuing two notices seeking to ban enforcement of state laws regulating4079AI.\16\ While the Chair may be eager to assist the White House in these4080efforts, the Communications Act does not grant the FCC authority over4081artificial intelligence, and it does not have the power to preempt4082state AI law.\17\ Further, public polling has made clear that the4083public wants more regulation of AI, not less.\18\4084---------------------------------------------------------------------------4085    \15\ Chris Teale, ``FCC Chair Floats Preempting State AI Laws,''4086Route Fifty (Sept 30, 2025), https://www.route-fifty.com/artificial-4087intelligence/2025/09/fcc-chair-floats-preempting-state-ai-laws/408472/.4088    \16\ Austin Bonner and Alex Tate, ``FCC Kicks Off AI Action Plan4089Efforts,'' HWG (Oct. 1, 2025), https://hwglaw.com/2025/10/01/fcc-kicks-4090off-ai-action-plan/.4091    \17\ Harold Feld, ``Can the FCC Preempt State Laws on AI? No--4092Especially Not With Broadband As Title I,'' Public Knowledge (Sept. 19,40932025), https://publicknowledge.org/can-the-fcc-preempt-state-laws-on-4094ai-no/.4095    \18\ Benedict Vigers and Justin Lall, ``Americans Prioritize AI4096Safety and Data Security,'' Gallup (Sept. 16, 2025), https://4097news.gallup.com/poll/694685/americans-prioritize-safety-data-4098security.aspx.4099---------------------------------------------------------------------------4100    We stand ready to work with Congress on policies that will protect4101civil rights, prevent unlawful discrimination, and advance equal4102opportunity. Should you require further information or have any4103questions regarding this issue, please feel free to contact Jonathan4104Walter, senior policy counsel, at walter@civilrights.org.4105            Sincerely,41064107The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights4108Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law4109UnidosUS4110United Church of Christ Media Justice Ministry4111Asian Americans Advancing Justice--AAJC4112Common Cause4113Communications Workers of America4114Hispanic Federation4115League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)4116National Action Network4117National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicians (NABET-CWA)4118National Consumer Law Center, on behalf of its low-income clients4119National Hispanic Media Coalition4120National Urban League4121                                 ______41224123      Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ted Cruz to4124                           Hon. Brendan Carr4125    Question 1. Last month, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)4126rescinded Chairwoman Rosenworcel's January 2025 Salt Typhoon4127Declaratory Ruling, which relied on a 1994 wiretap law to impose cyber4128requirements. That legal authority was, at best, creative, and the4129rules were issued outside the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)4130process and after my pencils-down letter. The FCC is not a4131cybersecurity agency--it lacks real-time threat intelligence. It does4132not directly respond to network intrusions, as agencies like4133Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), National4134Security Agency (NSA), and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI)4135do.41364137    a. Given these limitations, along with the growing cyber threats4138from nation-state actors and criminal groups, do you agree that the FCC4139should not take the lead in developing cybersecurity regulations when4140it lacks both the operational expertise and statutory authority to do4141so? If you agree, please feel free to elaborate.4142    Answer. Yes, I agree. National security agencies tasked with4143cybersecurity should take the lead in establishing cybersecurity4144standards. Instead of creating another set of standards that would4145potentially undermine and contradict the efforts of national security4146agencies, the FCC should work closely with carriers to ensure they can4147respond collaboratively and in real time when attacks occur.41484149    b. What risks could emerge from granting the FCC--an agency that4150wields broad regulatory powers over communications carriers--with new4151powers in cybersecurity?4152    Answer. Instead of providing full transparency to Federal partners,4153carriers may try to obfuscate real problems to avoid adverse regulatory4154actions.41554156    c. What would be necessary for the FCC to instantly gain the4157technical threat intelligence necessary to provide effective guidance4158to telecom carriers?4159    Answer. The FCC should be encouraging carrier to continue and4160deepen their collaboration with expert cybersecurity agencies.41614162    Question 2. The last few years have seen incredible growth in space4163commerce and satellite business cases. It is vital that the United4164States be the world leader in space commerce and innovation. The FCC4165regulates commercial satellite systems, and these systems frequently4166have to coordinate their spectrum use with government entities through4167an interagency process when applying for FCC authorizations.41684169    a. How would you assess the current state of coordination between4170FCC and other Federal agencies on spectrum usage, and how are you4171working to improve interagency coordination?4172    Answer. The FCC works closely and collaboratively with NTIA and4173other Federal agencies to provide the maximum regulatory certainty in4174the most efficient manner. But there is room for improvement. Too much4175interagency review can lead to unnecessary delays. The FCC will4176continue to work with our Federal partners to streamline the4177interagency coordination process.41784179    b. How would you assess current efforts to improve the review and4180processing of space station license applications?4181    Answer. When I became Chairman there was a major backlog of4182satellite applications, but we have since cut that backlog in half. We4183are reducing the time from filing to approval--the FCC recently4184approved a SpaceX application for a Next-Gen satellite constellation in4185less than half the time it took for the FCC to push through SpaceX's4186previous authorization for their Gen2 system. We recently launched a4187proceeding to look at ways to modernize the Commission's space and4188earth station licensing rules to meet the needs of the space economy4189for today and tomorrow.4190                                 ______41914192     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. John Thune to4193                           Hon. Brendan Carr4194    Question 1. The Universal Service Fund's high cost program is the4195lifeblood for many of South Dakota's telecom providers. What steps is4196the FCC taking to strengthen the high cost program and ensure that4197local telecom providers who are investing in their home states have the4198certainty they need from the program to connect unserved areas in rural4199America?4200    Answer. The FCC's Universal Service Fund plays a key role in4201bridging the digital divide. Over the next couple of years, several of4202the FCC's legacy high cost programs will expire. So the FCC should be4203thinking about a future for the programs so that the agency continues4204to deliver on its statutory responsibilities to rural America.42054206    Question 2. Will you commit to working with Congress on legislative4207reforms to the Universal Service fund and ensure this critical program4208continues?4209    Answer. Yes. The FCC is looking forward to briefing the bipartisan,4210bicameral USF working group at the end of January.42114212    Question 3. What steps have the FCC already taken or can take to4213address waste, fraud, and abuse and improve efficiency across Universal4214Service Fund programs?4215    Answer. Over the last year, the FCC has been aggressively pursuing4216bad actors that are defrauding the FCC's USF programs. Furthermore, we4217have been undertaking a review of the programs to determine ways to4218address waste and abuse. First, we recently revoked California's4219ability to opt-out of the National Lifeline Accountability Database4220(NLAD) for the Federal Lifeline program. California passed a state law4221that prohibits the state from requiring the collection of social4222security numbers, which could be used to ensure that program recipients4223are legal residents, and from sharing relevant information with Federal4224agencies. Revoking California's opt-out status ensures that Federal4225dollars aren't paying for the state to abuse the Federal Lifeline4226Program. We are also teeing up a comprehensive review of the Lifeline4227Program to ensure that Lifeline dollars go to eligible Americans.42284229    Question 4. As Chairman, will you commit to opening Notice of4230Public and Comment Rulemaking proceedings to explore the efficiency and4231future needs of each of the four programs, including Lifeline, E-Rate,4232High Cost, and Rural Health Care.4233    Answer. The FCC commits to conducting a comprehensive review of its4234USF programs to explore how each can be made more efficient. And some4235of these reviews are already underway. Separately, I am aware of the4236Congressional Working Group that is looking to put the four programs on4237sustainable footing from both the distribution and contribution4238perspective. I know they are receiving input from industry, and I trust4239they will find ways to make the four programs efficient and address the4240future needs of the program.42414242    Question 5. In July 2025, you unveiled your ``Build America4243Agenda'' in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Can you further detail the steps4244you have taken as Chairman to reduce regulatory burdens and strengthen4245the workforce for telecom infrastructure companies?4246    Answer. With respect to reducing regulatory burdens, we have:42474248   Streamlined the process for retiring decades-old copper4249        networks so that providers can transition consumers to new,4250        high-speed networks on a faster timeline.42514252   Proposed a systematic overhaul of the FCC's outdated4253        environmental and historic permitting rules that slow down4254        wireless and space infrastructure builds.42554256   Updated pole attachment rules to make broadband deployment4257        faster and more efficient. The new rules promote collaboration4258        between broadband providers and utility pole owners, reduce4259        delays, and help accelerate high-speed Internet access4260        nationwide.42614262    With respect to strengthening the workforce, we have:42634264   Worked with communications providers, and America's tower4265        and telecom crews on facilitating workforce reforms that will4266        result in a more sustainable environment.42674268   Through merger approval process, secured valuable4269        commitments by three major U.S. wireless carriers, Verizon, T-4270        Mobile, and AT&T, to America's tower and telecom crews,4271        including faster payment cycles and fairer pricing metrics.42724273   Secured new provider commitments to minimize layers of4274        subcontracting, which will allow for greater oversight of4275        crews, stronger safety protections, and closing loopholes that4276        allowed foreign, fly-by-night groups to swoop in and undercut4277        U.S. crews.42784279    Question 6. The historic Working Families Tax Cuts Act mandated the4280auction of 800 megahertz of spectrum. What steps has the Federal4281Communications Commission taken to meet this mandate? Additionally,4282please outline the benefits of bringing this spectrum into commercial4283use, particularly how those living in rural areas may benefit.4284    Answer. The Working Families Tax Cuts Act specifically directed the4285Commission to grant licenses through systems of competitive bidding,4286before the expiration of the general auction authority for not less4287than 300 megahertz, including by completing a system of competitive4288bidding not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act4289for not less than 100 megahertz in the band between 3.98 gigahertz and42904.2 gigahertz, which is known as the Upper C-Band. In light of this4291directive, the FCC has moved fast to execute, and in November we4292adopted the Upper C-Band NPRM to begin the auction.4293    This auction will bring prices down, boost speeds, and bring4294expanded access to advanced wireless services, including 5G and,4295eventually 6G, to the American people, particularly those in rural4296areas.4297                                 ______42984299    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roger Wicker to4300                           Hon. Brendan Carr4301    Continuity of the Global Positioning System (GPS) depends on4302protecting its spectrum from interference. GPS interference may result4303from radio emissions in adjacent bands, intentional or unintentional4304jamming, or naturally occurring space weather. In 2020, President Trump4305issued an Executive Order directing Federal agencies to pursue4306complementary positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) capabilities to4307improve resilience in the event of GPS disruptions. The Federal4308Communications Commission (FCC) has recognized the significance of this4309issue, including in a March 2025 Notice of Inquiry.43104311    Chairman Carr, you have noted that the Commission is seeking to4312improve GPS and location data that support first responders, and you4313have acknowledged the GPS system's vulnerability to jamming, spoofing,4314and other disruptions. I believe this effort is important and will4315require a cross-agency approach. Can you provide details on how the FCC4316plans to move forward to address these issues while avoiding unintended4317consequences? Additionally, how would you engage industry, public4318safety, and civil stakeholders in this process?4319    Answer. As you referenced, the FCC issued a Notice of Inquiry in4320March 2025 to start building the record to understand what alternatives4321are out there and weigh the various pros and cons, as well as4322anticipate any of the consequences. Each of the various GPS4323alternatives will require different levels of coordination with unique4324groups of stakeholders. The NOI has given potentially impacted parties4325the opportunity to weigh in on how to work together to mitigate4326unintended consequences.43274328    The FCC is conducting its required four-year review of broadcast4329ownership rules under Section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act of43301996 through a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). Federal law limits4331a single entity from owning stations nationwide that reach more than 394332percent of U.S. television households. This limit is known as the4333national audience reach cap. The NPRM does not propose any conclusions;4334rather, it examines whether the rules governing local television, local4335radio, and network ownership should be retained, modified, or repealed.43364337    Chairman Carr, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004 (P.L.4338108-199) set the national ownership cap at 39 percent. Do you believe4339the FCC has the authority to change the cap? If so, could you detail4340the statutory or FCC rulemaking basis that grants the Commission this4341authority?4342    Answer. The FCC has a number of proceedings underway where we have4343sought public feedback on both the FCC's legal authority and the4344relevant policy considerations.43454346    One of the primary functions of the FCC is to manage spectrum4347assignments and protect spectrum rights in the United States. This4348includes monitoring the unlawful use of, and interference with,4349exclusive-use spectrum.43504351    Chairman Carr, is the FCC working to resolve any Notices of4352Violation regarding carriers unlawfully using a third party's4353exclusive-use spectrum? Do you agree that if a company continues to4354ignore such violations, it could negatively impact the value of4355exclusive-use spectrum and revenues from future spectrum auctions?4356    Answer. Exclusive-use spectrum is important because it provides4357licensees with the certainty to build and invest in networks that won't4358encounter interference from others. The FCC is periodically made aware4359of allegations regarding RF interference or unlawful use of spectrum.4360The FCC's Enforcement Bureau investigates those allegations in the4361normal course.4362                                 ______43634364    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Deb Fischer to4365                           Hon. Brendan Carr4366    Question 1. In January 2025, the Commission withdrew its Notice of4367Proposed Rulemaking that considered a possible ban on bulk billing4368agreements for broadband services in multi-dwelling housing. Would you4369please explain how the Commission arrived at this decision, including4370any evidence found in support of bulk billing models?4371    Answer. In March 2024, prior FCC leadership circulated a bulk4372billing NPRM that would have banned bulk billing agreements. The FCC4373has previously determined that these bulk billing arrangements benefit4374families living in apartments, condos, public housing, and other multi-4375tenant buildings because they allow them to take advantage of lower4376cost broadband services by enabling building owners to leverage their4377purchasing power. If these agreements had been banned, at least one4378study showed, Americans living in apartments could have seen their4379bills go up by as much as 50 percent.43804381    Question 2. Many NTIA BEAD subgrantees providing fixed wireless4382Internet services will rely on the Citizens Broadband Radio Service4383(CBRS) spectrum band, particularly the General Authorized Access tier,4384as part of their long-term network plans. Is the Commission examining4385any changes to the existing CBRS framework that could interfere with4386these plans and impact the ability of BEAD subgrantees to meet their4387buildout requirements?4388    Answer. Back in 2024, the FCC sought comment on potential changes4389in the CBRS band that would allow for higher power operations. Any4390issues raised in that proceeding remain pending at the agency.43914392    Question 3. I appreciate the Commission's work to ensure the U.S.4393leads in satellite communications innovation globally. Within this4394effort, preserving the robustness of satellite operations for systems4395essential to our military and national security remains a crucial4396responsibility. What assessments so far has the Commission made to4397understand and recognize impacts on the mission readiness of the U.S.4398government users that depend on commercial satellite resources--4399including any changes to equivalent power flux density limits?4400    Answer. The FCC has an active rulemaking proceeding to consider how4401complimentary technologies can be leveraged to improve operational4402resilience. In April 2025, the FCC sought comment on whether to modify4403the EPFD limits for NGSOs in light of the tremendous technical advances4404since the current rules were established in the 1990s.4405                                 ______44064407    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to4408                           Hon. Brendan Carr4409    Question 1. On November 20, the Commission adopted a Notice of4410Proposed Rulemaking proposing to make as much as 180 megahertz of the4411Upper C-band (3.98-4.2 GHz) available for terrestrial wireless flexible4412use via auction toward compliance with provisions of PL 119--214413requiring the FCC to auction 800 MHz of spectrum. In that NPRM, the4414Commission notes the time constraints imposed by PL 119--21 will4415require ``broad-based and proactive engagement from relevant industry4416stakeholders as well as our Federal partners.'' As the NPRM goes on to4417communicate, those stakeholders include Upper C-band incumbents and4418adjacent band equities, particularly in the 4.2-4.4 GHz band, which is4419used by aviation stakeholders for operating radio altimeters. Please4420describe the Commission's engagement with industry and Federal aviation4421stakeholders, including the Federal Aviation Administration, to support4422continuity of operations for radio altimeters that currently use the44234.2-4.4 GHz band.4424    Answer. Completing an auction of the upper C-band on schedule4425requires seamless interagency coordination. The FCC is coordinating4426directly with stakeholders like the FAA. The FCC is also addressing4427other Federal equities through NTIA. President Trump has made it clear4428that getting results on these issues is a top priority. The FCC will4429continue to focus on efficiency and execution, including accommodating4430relevant incumbent users within a reasonable budget and completing a4431generational upgrade of radio altimeters through new standards that are4432fully resilient to 5G services for years to come.44334434    Question 2. Earlier this year, the Commission withdrew a Notice of4435Proposed Rulemaking that proposed banning bulk billing agreements,4436which are arrangements between Internet service providers and rental4437housing providers to enable bulk purchasing of Internet services for4438residents of multiple dwelling units (MDUs). How did the Commission4439arrive at this decision, and what are the Commission's plans with4440respect to bulk billing going forward?4441    Answer. In March 2024, prior FCC leadership circulated a bulk4442billing NPRM that would have banned bulk billing agreements. The FCC4443has previously determined that these bulk billing arrangements benefit4444families living in apartments, condos, public housing, and other multi-4445tenant buildings because they allow them to take advantage of lower4446cost broadband services by enabling building owners to leverage their4447purchasing power. If these agreements had been banned, at least one4448study showed, Americans living in apartments could have seen their4449bills go up by as much as 50 percent.4450                                 ______44514452    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to4453                           Hon. Brendan Carr4454    Question 1. Maintaining our country's leadership in the race to 5G4455and then 6G is critical for both our economic and national security.4456That is why this committee pursued such a robust spectrum agenda in the4457One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The spectrum mandates are purposely bold,4458and we need to ensure that they are implemented swiftly. One portion of4459the legislation provided funds for NTIA to study the 200 megahertz4460between 2.7 and 2.9 GHz. I understand that good progress is already4461being made in determining how and when to convert that band. Based on4462the work already being done, I'm hopeful that NTIA and the FCC can move4463even more quickly on that band than the One Big Beautiful Bill Act4464requires. The faster that this spectrum is made available, the quicker4465industry can begin using it to continue the United States' path to 6G4466leadership. If NTIA and the FCC act quickly on analyzing this band,4467will the FCC be ready to auction the 2.7--2.9 band, even if you are4468conducting auctions of other spectrum during that time period?4469    Answer. If NTIA determines that Federal incumbents are able to4470relocate out of the 2.7-2.9 band, the FCC will move quickly to take the4471necessary steps to auction that spectrum.44724473    Question 2. The Upper C-Band proceeding involves a wide range of4474stakeholders and important technical considerations, including aviation4475safety. Can you describe how the FCC is coordinating with the FAA and4476other agencies to ensure those considerations are fully addressed as4477the proceeding moves forward? In addition, the Commission has received4478requests from some stakeholders regarding the current comment4479deadlines. How is the FCC evaluating whether the existing timeline4480provides sufficient opportunity for a complete and well-informed4481record, given the goal of finalizing the auction by July 2027?4482    Answer. The FCC is coordinating directly with stakeholders like the4483FAA, as well as the aviation industry. The FCC is also addressing other4484Federal equities through NTIA. President Trump has made it clear that4485getting results on these issues is a top priority. The FCC will4486continue to focus on efficiency and execution to meet the statutory4487deadline of July 2027.44884489    Question 3. In the past you've talked about the changed media4490marketplace and the inequities that exist right now for local4491broadcasters in that larger ecosystem. It's incredibly important for my4492constituents across Alaska that our local, community-based broadcasters4493are able to thrive. You've critiqued prior FCC leadership for not4494upholding Congress' deregulatory mandate when it comes to media4495ownership. How is the FCC evaluating whether existing national and4496local broadcast ownership rules are keeping pace with changes in the4497media marketplace, while still protecting localism, competition, and4498diverse viewpoints--particularly in rural and remote states like4499Alaska?4500    Answer. We have pending proceedings to evaluate these rules. My4501guiding principle when it comes to media policy is promoting localism4502and empowering local broadcasters.45034504    Question 4. What is the FCC doing to make sure that non-trusted4505PRC-made devices that could pose cybersecurity or data transfer risks4506are vetted before they receive equipment authorization?4507    Answer. We've taken a series of actions to ensure non-trusted PRC-4508made devices do not receive equipment authorizations. First, the FCC4509has cracked down on ``Bad Labs,'' which are labs that review and4510approve electronics for use in the United States, but are owned or4511controlled by foreign adversary governments. The FCC also maintains the4512Covered List of communications equipment that is prohibited from4513receiving equipment authorization, because they threaten national4514security. The FCC rigorously enforces this prohibition.4515    Additionally, late last year, the FCC took steps to close loopholes4516in the Covered List by prohibiting authorization of devices containing4517certain ``covered'' components and allowing the FCC to prohibit the4518import or sale or already-authorized devices.4519    Beyond that, the FCC has also taken action to crack down on devices4520that try to enter the U.S. without equipment authorization. We also4521executed `Operation Clean Carts', in which the FCC worked with4522ecommerce platforms to take down millions of listings of devices on the4523FCC's Covered List or otherwise prohibited for sale in the United4524States.4525                                 ______45264527     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Todd Young to4528                           Hon. Brendan Carr4529    Question 1. Chairman Carr, I have heard about the growing incidents4530of, and attempts, at GPS spoofing and jamming. In the past, the4531Department of Transportation published a request for information4532seeking ``technology capable of providing critical infrastructure users4533and operators positioning and/or timing information that is derived4534independently from Global Navigation Satellite Systems.'' Has the FCC4535contemplated alternatives to GPS, and if so, has the FCC conducted any4536work to examine the feasibility of the technology?4537    Answer. The FCC issued a Notice of Inquiry in March 2025 to start4538building the record to understand what alternatives are out there and4539weigh the various pros and cons, as well as anticipate any of the4540consequences. Each of the various GPS alternatives will require4541different levels of coordination with unique groups of stakeholders.4542The NOI gives impacted parties the opportunity to weigh in on how to4543work together to mitigate unintended consequences.45444545    Question 2. Chairman Carr, In Indiana, Fort Wayne station WODP-LD4546recently completed a year of experimental 5G Broadcast operations,4547demonstrating that 5G Broadcast can coexist with existing TV stations4548while delivering services to Hoosiers. As the FCC moves forward with4549implementing the spectrum auction authorities provided under the One4550Big Beautiful Bill Act, can you explain how local broadcasters can4551currently use existing spectrum allocations for their 5G broadcast4552operations like WODP-LD has done with their Low Power TV broadcasts and4553has the FCC contemplated any actions with respect to 5G LPTV4554broadcasts?4555    Answer. I'm interested in examining the benefits of new4556technologies and giving licensees the ability to deploy their spectrum4557in innovative ways. In July, we sought comment on a petition from HC24558Broadcasting Holdings Inc. to allow low-power television stations on a4559voluntary basis to use the 5G Broadcast transmission standard as an4560alternative to the currently authorized ATSC 1.0 and ATSC 3.04561transmission standards. We are considering the record in that4562proceeding.4563                                 ______45644565    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Eric Schmitt to4566                           Hon. Brendan Carr4567    Question 1. Mr. Carr, as you know, I led an effort of 24 Members of4568the Senate and House to file a brief in the Sixth Circuit supporting4569parties seeking to overturn the Biden-era FCC's data breach rules. I4570was pleased to learn that your administration has committed to review4571and repeal those rules. Can you elaborate on your position regarding4572whether the breach reporting rules violate the Congressional Review Act4573(CRA), confirm that the FCC plans to roll back these rules that flout4574congressional intent, and provide a sense of when the FCC will address4575this important issue?4576    Answer. I dissented on the Biden-era data breach rules because they4577violated both the CRA and the APA. The Biden FCC made no real attempt4578to explain how the data breach rule it adopted was not the same or4579substantially similar to the one nullified by the House, the Senate,4580and President Trump in the 2017 CRA. On October 7, 2025, the Sixth4581Circuit agreed to hold a case challenging the data breach rules in4582abeyance while the FCC considers how best to revise its rules.45834584    Question 2. Mr. Carr, thank you for your continued leadership in4585protecting American consumers from harmful foreign actors. Some threats4586are easy to identify--Huawei and ZTE, for example--but we are4587increasingly seeing foreign Communications Platform as a Service4588(CPaaS) providers and (Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNOs) acquire4589U.S. entities in ways that let them present themselves as domestic4590companies. These acquisitions carry real risks: they can raise costs4591for legitimate U.S. businesses, and some of these foreign-owned4592entities appear to be contributing to the very problems you've been a4593national leader in combating--illegal robocalls and robotexts. Mr.4594Chairman, will you commit to examining whether certain foreign4595companies, operating under the guise of U.S. ownership, are exploiting4596the U.S. market, and whether their continued authorization to operate4597remains in the public interest?4598    Answer. Yes, the FCC will continue to examine foreign-owned actors4599operating in U.S. communications networks. In fact, just this month the4600FCC will vote to adopt rules on Foreign Adversary Control, requiring4601all FCC licensees to certify whether they are owned by, controlled by,4602or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of a foreign adversary--4603allowing the Commission to expose actors with opaque ties to foreign4604adversaries.4605                                 ______46064607Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Shelley Moore Capito to46084609                           Hon. Brendan Carr4610    Question 1. Having the most accurate understanding of where there4611is and is not broadband service in is imperative, especially in West4612Virginia. This is particularly true for mobile service, where measuring4613mobile service can be complicated by terrain and topography. Incorrect4614data affects everything from Federal funding for future deployments to4615real-time emergency services capabilities. Will you commit to requiring4616and using established mobile data for Federal programs that support4617mobile deployment? And how are you ensuring that coverage areas are4618accurate and not overexaggerated by providers, particularly by use of4619stationary data which currently qualifies under mobile metrics?4620    Answer. Consistent with the requirements of the Broadband DATA Act4621(see 47 U.S.C. Sec. 642(c)(2)(B)), the FCC will rely upon mobile data4622submitted in the Broadband Data Collection (BDC) when making decisions4623for funding programs that support mobile broadband deployment.4624    To ensure the mobile availability data providers are reporting in4625the BDC are accurate the FCC has relied on the mobile challenge,4626verification, and audit processes that Congress instructed the4627Commission to develop. Since the National Broadband Map launched in46282023, consumers and other entities have successfully created over 4004629cognizable challenges against providers' reported coverage, which4630require the challenged provider to either submit on-the-ground evidence4631to rebut the challenge or to concede the challenge and remove its4632claimed coverage from the map. In addition to challenges submitted by4633consumers and other stakeholders, the Commission can also initiate a4634verification where there is a credible basis to believe the reported4635coverage may be in accurate. Recently, challenge speed test data4636collected by an entity in Alaska provided staff with a credible basis4637to initiate a verification against a provider in Alaska, which remains4638ongoing. Crowdsourced speed test data, even those not submitted for4639purposes of challenging coverage, have also resulted in FCC-initiated4640verifications.4641    FCC staff also proactively review provider-reported mobile coverage4642from each filing round to identify significant changes in coverage and4643other potential anomalies in the data. In one case where staff4644identified large increases in a nationwide provider's 5G coverage, we4645initiated multiple verification requests to validate the accuracy of4646the newly claimed coverage. The provider collected and submitted4647substantial on-the-ground speed test data in accordance with our4648sampling instructions and successfully verified its new 5G coverage.4649    Additionally, we have used the mobile audit process to randomly4650audit mobile coverage in counties across the United States. To ensure4651that coverage is not overstated, during an audit FCC staff and4652contractors review provider infrastructure data and conduct an4653engineering analysis of the providers' mobile coverage maps.46544655    Question 2. We spoke a little bit on the issues related to the4656challenge process, and I appreciate the willingness of the Commission4657to look at this issue. To get a better understanding of the current4658state of mapping, I had a few questions as it relates to the current4659status of challenges. Does the FCC still accept visual evidence of4660location fabric challenges?4661    Answer. The Broadband DATA Act requires that the Commission ensure4662the BDC challenge processes are ``user-friendly'' and designed to4663mitigate ``the administrative burdens placed'' on challengers, 474664U.S.C. Sec. 642(b)(5)(A), (b)(5)(B)(i)(III). In accordance with these4665statutory requirements, FCC staff periodically the efficacy of the4666challenge processes and the associated burdens imposed on challengers.4667    Since the launch of the Fabric, or location, challenge process,4668every request to add or remove a location has undergone a visual4669verification that involves images of the location in question being4670shown to multiple reviewers to determine if the location is a broadband4671serviceable location. Visual verification remains part of the FCC's4672challenge review process.4673    To reduce the burden on bulk Fabric challenge process participants,4674the FCC decided in December 2024 to stop accepting evidence file4675submissions from bulk challengers. This change is not limited to visual4676evidence. Concurrent with this change, the FCC also began working4677closely with the FCC's Fabric vendor to identify internal process4678improvement opportunities, such as building in capacity for heightened4679staff review of challenge outcomes.4680    We continue to review and refine our processes with the goal of4681balancing the burden and ensuring that Fabric challenge results are4682accurate.46834684    Question 3. Are you able to detail the total number of location4685challenges, as well as percentage of successful challenges, that have4686been made by reporting cycle and by state?4687    Answer. Please refer to the attached ``Fabric Challenge Counts''4688(attached) spreadsheet for the requested metrics. We also make the data4689on particular location challenge outcomes publicly available each month4690on the data downloads page of the Broadband Map (https://4691broadbandmap.fcc.gov/data-download/challenge-data).46924693    Question 4. How does the FCC and any relevant contractor provide4694feedback to challenges to the National Broadband Maps, and how are you4695ensuring that providers receive the proper feedback they need to fix4696their challenges moving forward?4697    Answer. When resolving location challenges, each challenge is4698assigned a ``response code'' that corresponds with a particular reason4699why the challenge was accepted or rejected. For bulk challenges, each4700unique request to add or remove a location, or to update the address,4701unit count or other information associated with the location receives4702its own response code. For more details, please refer to the following4703BDC Help Center article here: https://help.bdc.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/4704articles/17077103993371-Fabric-Challenge-Response-Codes.4705    Similarly, when resolving mobile or fixed availability challenges,4706the FCC assigns an adjudication code with the reasoning behind the4707adjudication decision. These outcomes are made available directly to4708the user submitting the challenges either within the BDC system's Filer4709or Broadband Map interfaces for users that have logged in, and we also4710send information via e-mail when the challenge is closed out. Lastly,4711the outcome of each challenge is made available in a publicly-4712accessible data download generated at the beginning of each month.4713    The FCC provides technical assistance, support, and feedback to4714challengers and providers the BDC Help Center. The BDC Help Center4715staff is available to answer any questions or address concerns4716regarding submitting challenges or understanding challenge outcomes,4717and more complicated questions are escalated to and addressed by FCC4718staff with relevant BDC subject matter expertise.4719    FCC staff have also met with a variety of providers and industry4720groups to discuss the challenge processes and how to improve location4721challenge process outcomes in particular. Feedback from those4722interactions has been used to inform the challenge process improvements4723discussed in our previous (above) response.4724    The FCC remains committed to providing support to entities4725interested in filing challenges and those that have questions about4726previous challenge results. Please have anyone seeking assistance4727contact our Broadband Data team.4728                                 ______47294730   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Cynthia Lummis to4731                           Hon. Brendan Carr4732    Question 1. How would you assess the current state of coordination4733between the FCC and other Federal agencies on spectrum policy, and how4734are you working to improve interagency coordination, particularly when4735it comes to satellite permitting?4736    Answer. The FCC works closely and collaboratively with NTIA and4737other Federal agencies to provide the maximum regulatory certainty in4738the most efficient manner. In order to meet the ambitious spectrum4739auction timelines of the Working Families Tax Cut Act, the FCC will4740need to be in lockstep with our partners across the Federal government.4741At the beginning of 2025, the FCC began engaging and coordinating with4742our partners at NTIA, FAA, Department of Transportation, the Pentagon,4743and elsewhere to ensure we are in lock stop as we begin the auction4744process. The FCC continues to work with our Federal partners to improve4745the interagency coordination process.47464747    Question 2. What steps is the FCC taking to ensure the U.S.4748maintains leadership in ITU forums including WRC-27?4749    Answer. The FCC, in coordination with NTIA and the State4750Department, is already preparing for WRC-27. It is expected that space4751issues will dominate WRC-27. The leadership and clear vision of the4752Trump Administration will allow the U.S. to reestablish our leadership4753at WRC-27.47544755    Question 3. How will we ensure that U.S. delegates and sector4756members are able to attend WRC-27 safely?4757    Answer. The FCC, along with other components of the Executive4758Branch, are actively working on plans to make sure that the U.S.4759delegation will be able to participate safely and securely at the WRC-476027 in Shanghai.47614762    Question 4. Rip and Replace is a critical effort to secure American4763infrastructure. Due to permitting, workforce access constraints, and4764other factors, carriers not only in Wyoming but across the United4765States may require extensions to complete the work required. How does4766the FCC intend to ensure successful completion of the Rip and Replace4767program, and what actions might be considered to enable that success?4768    Answer. When the Wireline Competition Bureau approved applications4769to participate in the Rip and Replace Program in 2022, demand exceeded4770available funding, which resulted in a significant funding shortfall.4771Between 2022 and 2024, recipients indicated that the funding shortfall4772was a significant impediment to their ability to timely complete their4773removal, replacement, and disposal projects. Congress authorized4774additional funding at the end of 2024. In May 2025, the Bureau issued4775an initial disbursement of the additional funds and gave recipients in4776Priority 1 until May 2025 to complete their projects. When allocating4777the additional funding, the Bureau encouraged recipients to move4778swiftly to complete their work under the Rip and Replace Program.4779    Pursuant to the Secure Networks Act, a recipient may request an4780extension of time for ``up to'' or ``not more'' than six months if a4781recipient can show that it is unable to meet the deadline due to no4782fault of its own. In light of the additional funding, we expect the4783need for such extensions will lessen. However, recipients may request4784an extension if circumstances beyond its control impede its ability to4785finish the work. The Commission will closely scrutinize extensions on a4786case-by-case basis. The facts and circumstances supporting an extension4787request must include the specific obstacles faced by the recipient, how4788those obstacles, through no fault of the recipient, affected the4789recipient's ability to meet its term deadline, steps taken by the4790recipient to mitigate the impacts of the obstacles, and whether the4791recipient expects to meet a future deadline, if an extension is4792granted.47934794    Question 5. The Commission has emphasized that securing U.S.4795communications networks is both a national security and consumer4796privacy imperative. What concrete steps have you taken to harden4797infrastructure and better coordinate across the Commission on national4798security, and how have you improved supply chain transparency so4799providers, customers, and the public can understand and manage4800adversary exposure?4801    Answer. The Commission has taken a range of actions to harden U.S.4802networks and coordinate on national security across the FCC's work. One4803of my first acts as Chairman was to set up a new Council on National4804Security within the FCC to leverage all of the agency's authorities,4805expertise, and relevant workstreams to counter the threats posed by4806foreign adversaries, including the government of China. With regard to4807transparency, just this month, the FCC will vote to adopt rules on4808Foreign Adversary Control, requiring all FCC licensees to certify4809whether they are owned by, controlled by, or subject to the4810jurisdiction or direction of a foreign adversary--allowing the4811Commission to expose actors with opaque ties to foreign adversaries.4812    The FCC has also taken a variety of other national security4813actions:48144815   Cracked down on ``Bad Labs''--labs that review and approve4816        electronics for use in the United States, but are owned or4817        controlled by foreign adversary governments.48184819   Executed `Operation Clean Carts', in which the FCC worked4820        with ecommerce platforms to take down millions of listings of4821        devices on the FCC's Covered List or otherwise prohibited for4822        sale in the United States.48234824   Adopted new rules on undersea cable security, following4825        President Trump's America First Investment Policy Memorandum to4826        accelerate the buildout of undersea cables, while protecting4827        them from foreign adversaries.48284829   Closed two loopholes that provided no check on old models of4830        covered equipment--potential spy gear--to be imported or sold,4831        as well as allowed devices to be approved that contain covered4832        equipment as module components.48334834   Banned authorizations for new models of foreign-produced4835        Uncrewed Aerial Systems (UAS) and their components to protect4836        American Airspace Sovereignty.48374838   Worked directly with carriers to ensure that they are4839        adapting their cybersecurity practices and hardening their4840        networks against future attacks, in the wake of Salt Typhoon.48414842    Question 6. Chairman Carr, you have promoted ``Delete, Delete,4843Delete'' initiative to remove regulations that are outdated or4844unnecessary. How and in what ways has the public benefited so far from4845the initiative, and how do you expect it to in the future?4846    Answer. Eliminating unnecessary regulation has facilitated and4847encouraged American companies' investment in modernizing their4848networks, developing infrastructure, and offering innovative and4849advanced capabilities.4850                                 ______48514852   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to4853                           Hon. Brendan Carr4854    Affordability. Chairman Carr, the question I keep coming back to is4855simple: what are you doing to drive down costs for consumers? This4856week, I released a report showing how costs are going up across the4857board--broadband, wireless, cable, streaming--and you're not doing a4858thing about it.4859    In the last year alone, streaming bills have increased by 134860percent. Basic cable bills have more than doubled over the last ten4861years. Americans pay more for wireless service than almost every other4862peer country. And 23 million low-income households lost support on4863their broadband bills, and you've proposed nothing to replace it.4864    In wireless, you called Dish/EchoStar's spectrum licenses into4865question, forcing EchoStar to sell them off and shut down its network,4866which was the fourth largest in the country. Your colleague, former4867Republican FCC Commissioner Nathan Simington, said, ``As a true fourth4868national network, EchoStar protects consumer choice and lower consumer4869prices. The FCC threatens such severe sanctions that they put4870EchoStar's financial viability in question and threaten to kill the4871company. This places every holder of a spectrum license in a riskier4872position and will raise consumer prices by forcing every licensee, not4873just EchoStar, to charge higher risk premiums.''48744875    Question 1. Yes or no, do you agree that when there is less4876competition in a marketplace, and companies have more market power,4877consumers pay higher prices?4878    Answer. The FCC is advancing policies to increase competition and4879drive down prices for consumers.48804881    Question 2. Chairman Carr, since you took over, the fourth national4882wireless carrier has been eliminated. You've also proposed eliminating4883broadband labeling requirements that make it easier for consumers to4884spot hidden fees. And you're moving to approve more media4885consolidation. Which of those actions helps consumers pay less?4886    Answer. The FCC is working on several fronts to increase4887competition and drive down prices for consumers.48884889    Broadband Affordability. In August, the Commission began its annual4890review of the pace and cadence of broadband deployment to assess4891whether broadband ``is being deployed to Americans in a reasonable and4892timely fashion,'' as required by Section 706 of the Telecommunications4893Act of 1996. As part of that review, you proposed to ignore the4894importance of affordability. For many Americans, the cost of broadband4895services is a greater barrier to closing the digital divide than the4896lack of availability.48974898    Question 1. After the demise of the Affordable Connectivity Program4899(ACP) and in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis, why did the FCC4900exclude affordability from this year's review of broadband deployment4901in the United States?4902    Answer. The FCC's 706 Report will comply with the relevant4903statutory provisions.49044905    Broadband Labels. Congress passed bipartisan legislation to ensure4906transparency in billing. Chairman Carr, despite having previously voted4907in favor of the FCC's rules to implement that legislation, you have4908proposed to punch holes in the rules to implement that law, making it4909easier for big corporations to tack on hidden fees to Internet bills.4910In defending your actions, at the December 17, 2025, FCC Oversight4911hearing, in response to questions from Senator Lujan, you stated ``[w]e4912want clarity'' in the labels.49134914    Question 1. Chairman Carr, as costs are rising across the board,4915how does reducing the amount of information required in broadband4916labels and making them harder to access provide greater ``clarity'' for4917consumers?4918    Answer. The FCC has sought comment on potential changes to the4919existing regulations but has not made any final decisions.49204921    Merger Authority. Chairman Carr, you infamously said, ``We can do4922this the easy way or the hard way,'' which led to Nexstar and Sinclair,4923the two largest broadcast ownership groups, preempting Jimmy Kimmel's4924late-night show for over a week, including on KOMO in Seattle.4925    At that time, Nexstar had announced a $6 billion merger with Tegna,4926and Sinclair had also shown interest in acquiring another station4927group--deals that would require FCC sign-off to complete. Weeks4928earlier, you had held up the Paramount-Skydance merger until Paramount4929paid $16 million to settle a frivolous lawsuit filed by the President4930and appointed an ombudsman to oversee its news coverage.4931    These broadcasters recognized that you control their fates and that4932they needed to fall in line, and that failure to comply risked you4933killing their deals.49344935    Question 1. Chairman Carr, yes or no, do you believe it's4936appropriate for a regulator to threaten a regulated entity, to threaten4937to take away their licenses, and to threaten to reject a merger--4938because of a joke?4939    Answer. I don't think that we agree on what took place. Please see4940my letter for additional information: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/4941attachments/DOC-415483A6.pdf49424943    Question 2. Yes or no, is it appropriate for a regulator to force a4944regulated entity to pay the president millions of dollars in order to4945get a merger approved?4946    Answer. No and to the extent that your question suggests that4947something like that took place here recently, please see my answer4948above.4949    You've cited the 2011 Comcast-NBCUniversal deal as precedent for4950requiring a ``bias ombudsman'' as a condition of the Paramount-Skydance4951merger. But in 2011, the FCC simply preserved an ombudsman that the4952company had already created as an internal firewall between the owners4953and the newsroom. In Paramount-Skydance, Paramount created a new4954position explicitly tasked with evaluating ``bias'' in news content and4955policing speech.49564957    Question 3. How are these comparable uses of the FCC's merger4958authority?4959    Answer. In both cases, the FCC approved a transaction after the4960parties committed to establishing an ombudsman.49614962    Question 4. Have you spoken with the Paramount ombudsman?4963    Answer. Despite some social media posts to the contrary, the4964ombudsman does not report to me or the President of the United States.49654966    Question 5. Do you expect to receive regular updates from the4967Paramount ombudsman about CBS's news coverage?4968    Answer. As noted above, the ombudsman does not report to me or the4969President of the United States.49704971    Merger Commitments. Traditionally, FCC merger conditions relate4972directly to the company's ability to serve the public--such as4973requiring expanded coverage, infrastructure investments, or service4974obligations. But you have used merger review to extract concessions and4975leverage companies to change their internal hiring policies.49764977    Question 1. What specific language in the Communications Act4978authorizes the FCC to regulate a company's human resources or hiring4979practices through merger conditions?4980    Answer. In 2021, the Biden FCC accepted as a merger commitment the4981extension of DEI practices.49824983    FCC Independence. Chairman Carr, you previously testified to4984Congress that the FCC was ``an independent, expert agency.'' You also4985testified that Congress placed the FCC's ``authority outside of the4986Executive Branch for a reason,'' such as not wanting technical4987decisions ``to be made in a haphazard manner or based on misinformation4988and short-term, political interests.''49894990    Question 1. Do you stand by your congressional testimony that4991Congress placed FCC authority outside of the Executive Branch to avoid4992being based on short-term political interests?4993    Answer. As I have testified, Congress passed the Communications Act4994before the Supreme Court's decision in Humphrey's Executor. And4995Congress chose not to include ``for cause'' removal protections for FCC4996Commissioners.49974998    Question 2. Do you believe it is appropriate for the FCC's4999technical decisions to be based on the political interests of the5000Executive Branch?5001    Answer. The FCC's decisions are based on the facts, the law, and5002the agency's record.50035004    In 2021, you issued a public statement calling on your FCC5005colleagues to reject an ``attempt to inject partisan politics into our5006licensing process'' and called it a ``deeply troubling transgression of5007free speech and the FCC's status as an independent agency.''50085009    Question 3. Do you still agree with your public statement, and if5010not, why did you change your mind?5011    Answer. It was wrong for Democrats in Congress to pressure the FCC5012to block the sale of a broadcast station license on the grounds that5013Democrats thought the sale would hurt them in the midterm elections.50145015    During the December 17, 2025, FCC Oversight hearing, Senator Kim5016asked you if you've ever had a conversation with President Trump or5017senior administration officials about using the FCC to go after his5018critics, and you declined to answer because you ``don't get into the5019specifics of conversations that I have.'' Setting aside whether the5020substantive deliberative content of your conversations with President5021Trump is privileged, factual information such as the existence of such5022a conversation and the identities of its participants is not5023privileged.50245025    Question 4. Consistent with the above, have you ever had a5026conversation with President Trump or senior White House officials5027relating to the FCC penalizing or taking any adverse action against one5028of President Trump's critics? If so, how many conversations were there,5029and for each conversation, who participated in them, when, and where5030did they occur?5031    Answer. Consistent with longstanding practice, I do not discuss5032conversations vel non with the President.50335034    Question 5. Consistent with the above, have you ever had a5035conversation with President Trump or senior White House officials5036relating to the FCC potentially revoking the station licenses for the5037owned-and-operated stations of any major news network, including but5038not limited to ABC, NBC, or CBS? If so, how many conversations were5039there, and for each conversation, who participated in them, when, and5040where did they occur?5041    Answer. See answer above.50425043    Question 6. President Trump has made multiple public statements5044about FCC matters, such as license revocation and other directives. If5045the President is not satisfied with your performance implementing his5046direction or suggestion, does he have the right to fire you?5047    Answer. A President can fire any Commissioner at any time.50485049    Question 7. Are you concerned that not implementing the President's5050directions or suggestions on FCC matters to target his political5051critics could result in your termination or dismissal?5052    Answer. The FCC is focused on delivering great results for the5053American people.50545055    C-Band Spectrum. Chairman Carr, the FCC is planning to commence an5056auction of the Upper C-Band. Under current law, the auction is supposed5057to conclude with licenses awarded by 2027.5058    I'm deeply concerned that this auction could literally cause planes5059to fall out of the sky. Former FAA officials and NTIA, in its comments5060to the FCC, have warned that new civilian and military altimeters need5061to be installed on likely all aircraft before cell companies can start5062using this band. Those new altimeters are still under development, and5063the standards are not even slated to be finished by 2027--the year this5064process is supposed to conclude. Given the previous C-Band auction5065nearly grounded air travel in the United States to a halt, I'm deeply5066concerned that we are about to see the same story unfold--but with far5067more dire consequences.50685069    Question 1. Has the FCC coordinated with the Department of Defense5070on the NPRM that the FCC released?5071    Answer. Yes, the FCC has been running the appropriate interagency5072process.50735074    Question 2. How much will it cost to retrofit military and other5075government aircraft with new altimeters?5076    Answer. The FCC's proceeding is ongoing and asks about a range of5077different issues.50785079    Question 3. Who is going to pay for those upgrades, and how long5080will that process take? Answer. The FCC's proceeding is ongoing and5081seeks comment on a range of issues.50825083    Question 4. Are you concerned that this process will negatively5084impact military readiness, given that the Chinese are anticipated to5085attack Taiwan in 2027?5086    Answer. The FCC's proceeding is ongoing and seeks comment on a5087range of issues.50885089    Question 5. As military and civilian aircraft radio altimeters must5090be upgraded to address interference from any expansion of wireless5091service, do you commit to providing the aviation and defense industry5092the necessary time and space to safely retrofit the fleet operating5093within the United States?5094    Answer. The FCC's proceeding is ongoing and seeks comment on a5095range of issues.50965097    AI. The Trump Administration won't take no for an answer on a5098moratorium on state AI laws without a Federal standard. First, they5099tried to put it in the reconciliation bill, and we stripped it out by a510099-1 vote. Then they tried to attach it to the NDAA. Now they're5101directing agencies like the FCC to attempt to preempt state laws5102through an Executive Order.5103    Instead of trying to preempt laws that protect against AI fraud or5104theft, we need to be protecting consumers. Chairman Carr, you have been5105skeptical of the FCC's authority over new technologies in the past. In51062024, you said that ``Congress does not operate like a sieve--5107inadvertently spilling grants of new authorities. Congress's delegation5108of authority in these types of cases can no longer be implicit, it must5109be explicit.''51105111    Question 1. Yes or no, does the FCC have the authority to preempt5112state AI laws under Title I of the Communications Act?5113    Answer. The Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial5114Intelligence Executive Order calls on the FCC to commence a proceeding5115to determine whether to adopt a Federal reporting and disclosure5116standard for AI models that preempts conflicting State laws.51175118    Question 2. Is that what Congress intended when it rewrote a5119portion of the Communications Act in 1996, 25 years before ChatGPT was5120released?5121    Answer. The Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial5122Intelligence Executive Order calls on the FCC to commence a proceeding5123to determine whether to adopt a Federal reporting and disclosure5124standard for AI models that preempts conflicting State laws.51255126    Question 3. Chairman Carr, given your prior statements regarding5127your skepticism of the FCC's authority over the Internet as a Title I5128service, where specifically in the text of the Communications Act do5129you find the authority for the FCC to preempt state AI laws,5130particularly post-Chevron deference?5131    Answer. The Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial5132Intelligence Executive Order calls on the FCC to commence a proceeding5133to determine whether to adopt a Federal reporting and disclosure5134standard for AI models that preempts conflicting State laws.51355136    Question 4. Yes or no, does the FCC have the authority to adopt a5137Federal reporting and disclosure standard for AI models?5138    Answer. The Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial5139Intelligence Executive Order calls on the FCC to commence a proceeding5140to determine whether to adopt a Federal reporting and disclosure5141standard for AI models that preempts conflicting State laws.51425143    Question 5. How many technical AI experts does the FCC have on5144staff?5145    Answer. The FCC has a range of different professionals on staff.51465147    Investigations. Chairman Carr, you have opened and reopened5148investigations into several broadcast networks for the content of their5149programming.51505151    Question 1. How many investigations have you opened or reopened5152because of the content of a news program or other program?5153    Answer. Any ongoing FCC investigations are based on the relevant5154portions of the Communications Act as well as FCC rules and precedent.51555156    Question 2. What is the status of these investigations?5157    Answer. The FCC's open investigations remain pending.51585159    Question 3. How much staff time has been devoted to these5160investigations?5161    Answer. The FCC's open investigations remain pending.51625163    Question 4. Have you updated the other Commissioners on the status5164of these investigations? If so, provide the dates of each status update5165and the individuals involved.5166    Answer. I meet regularly with my Commission colleagues, and we5167discuss a range of FCC matters.51685169    Local News. Harvard's Shorenstein Center found that broadcast5170stations owned by large ownership groups produced more news at the5171regional or national level rather than locally. On the other hand,5172independent stations produced more news content locally. I am concerned5173that further consolidation could lead to more news production outside5174of the station's community and result in the closure of local5175newsrooms.51765177    Question 1. What is the FCC doing to ensure that local newsrooms5178stay open?5179    Answer. The FCC is working to empower local broadcasters to meet5180their public interest obligations, including serving the needs of their5181local communities.51825183    Net Neutrality. Because the FCC refuses to protect consumers5184against unfair practices by broadband providers, my own state of5185Washington and other states have acted to protect their consumers with5186net neutrality laws. These laws protect consumers from harmful5187practices such as blocking and throttling of legal content and paid5188prioritization.51895190    Question 1. Chairman Carr, is the FCC planning to try to preempt5191state-level net neutrality laws?5192    Answer. The FCC generally announces the agenda for any Commission-5193level, open meeting votes three weeks before any such vote.51945195    Question 2. Does the FCC have any authority to do so?5196    Answer. The FCC has the authorities that have been delegated to it5197by Congress.51985199    Question 3. If the FCC has no authority to impose net neutrality5200conditions under Title I, as you have argued, where specifically in the5201text of the Communications Act do you find the authority for the FCC to5202stop Washington from doing so, particularly in a world without Chevron5203deference?5204    Answer. The FCC has the authorities that have been delegated to it5205by Congress.52065207    Section 230. In your Project 2025 chapter, you wrote that the FCC5208should issue an order that interprets Section 230.52095210    Question 1. Do you still believe the FCC has authority to5211reinterpret the scope of Section 230 immunity under current law?5212    Answer. I wrote that chapter in my personal capacity, consistent5213with guidance from FCC ethics staff. So, I have to be careful about5214discussing questions about it when I am responding in my official5215capacity.52165217    Question 2. If so, please identify the specific statutory provision5218you believe gives the FCC that power.5219    Answer. Please see my answer above.52205221    Public Interest Standard. Chairman Carr, in your letters and5222tweets, you've identified several kinds of reporting that you see as5223not in the public interest, but you haven't explained what kind of5224reporting is in the public interest.52255226    Question 1. How do you define the ``public interest'' standard?5227    Answer. The FCC has defined the public interest standard on5228numerous occasions.52295230    Question 2. Will you commit to completing a Commission-level5231rulemaking specifying the contours of the ``public interest'' standard5232for broadcasters?5233    Answer. The FCC has defined the public interest standard on5234numerous occasions.52355236    DOGE Staff at FCC. Chairman Carr, on April 30, 2025, wrote in a5237letter responding to my March 31, 2025, letter that you had ``invited5238the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) into the building to get5239fresh eyes on the way we operate'' and ``two people from DOGE5240officially joined the FCC.'' However, recent reporting by The Verge5241based on 1,000 pages of FCC FOIA documents indicates three DOGE5242employees--Tarak Makecha, Jordan Wick, and Jacob Altik--were still5243listed in the FCC's public directory as of December 16, 2025.52445245    Question 1. How many DOGE employees did you invite into FCC's5246building and officially hire, and if it was not just two people, what5247explains the discrepancy with what you wrote in April 2025?5248    Answer. As stated in my earlier letter, two people from DOGE5249officially joined the FCC and complied with applicable ethics rules.5250The FOIA documents reflect the fact that there was discussion early on5251about a third person joining the FCC, but only two people joined the5252FCC as previously stated.52535254    IPCS. At a time when the country is reeling from an affordability5255crisis, the FCC's own analysis shows that your recent order on5256implementation of the Martha Wright-Reed Act would cost families5257approximately $50 million in higher phone rates.52585259    Question 1. Doesn't this decision put company profits above making5260it affordable for children to speak with their parents?5261    Answer. No.52625263    Salt Typhoon. Last month, you rolled back an FCC declaratory ruling5264and rulemaking adopted earlier this year in response to the Salt5265Typhoon attacks, the worst cyberattack on U.S. telecom networks in5266history. I requested the following documents and information from you5267no later than November 25, 2025:52685269  1.  A copy of any cybersecurity assessment the FCC conducted before5270        moving to repeal its prior ruling. Please provide any5271        documents.52725273  2.  Any documents the telecommunications companies shared with you5274        that support their claims that they removed Salt Typhoon5275        hackers from their networks, including, but not limited to,5276        Mandiant digital forensic reports.52775278  3.  Documents and information sufficient to demonstrate the FCC's5279        collaborative approach to cybersecurity with telecommunications5280        providers ``continues to be effective.''52815282    As of December 18, 2025, you have not responded to my request.52835284    Question 1. When do you intend to respond to the request, and when5285do you intend to provide documents?5286    Answer. I provided a written response to your letter on January 21.52875288    Question 2. Do you believe you have a duty to respond to5289congressional oversight requests, especially on topics critical to our5290national security and public safety?5291    Answer. I believe that I or the FCC have already responded to every5292or nearly every congressional inquiry that we have received.52935294    Shutdown Operations. According to the FCC's September 2025 plan for5295orderly shutdown prior to a lapse in Federal appropriations, you5296anticipated that ``1,044 employees, or approximately 81 percent of5297[staff] on board before the plan was implemented, will have been5298furloughed and sent home.'' The 244 employees, or approximately 195299percent of staff, retained under the plan were limited to specific5300tasks or exemptions, including protection of life and property, staff5301in the Office of Inspector General, auction staff whose salaries are5302not provided through appropriations, and certification of Universal5303Service Fund and Telecommunications Relay Service disbursements.5304However, on October 28, 2025, the FCC held an open meeting, at which it5305considered nine items ranging from nearly every Bureau in the agency.5306From the tentative agenda announcement on October 7 to the public5307release of the items following adoption at the October 28th meeting,5308each item required an opportunity for public comment, input from5309stakeholders, and staff to review and implement any necessary changes5310before the Commission's vote.53115312    Question 1. Did the FCC comply with the September 2025 shutdown5313plan?5314    Answer. The FCC continued to perform and carry out limited5315functions during the shutdown consistent with the law and FCC guidance.53165317    Question 2. Please provide a breakdown of how many staff,5318regardless of furlough status, worked between October 1, 2025, and5319November 13, 2025; how many hours that staff worked; what the source of5320funds was to pay that staff; and how much funding was used to pay that5321staff.5322    Answer. The FCC continued to perform and carry out limited5323functions during the shutdown consistent with the law and FCC guidance.5324    In prior lapses of appropriations, such as in 2018-2019, the FCC5325utilized holdover funds to keep the whole agency open until those funds5326were expended. Yet during the Fall 2025 shutdown, you apparently chose5327when and how to utilize holdover funds to maintain certain operations5328funded through appropriations while allowing other operations to cease5329until an additional appropriation was provided.53305331    Question 3. What legal authority do you, as the FCC Chair, have to5332determine which FCC directives or authorizations from Congress remain5333operational during the lapse in appropriations? Please cite the5334specific provision(s) of law.5335    Answer. The FCC has those authorities that have been delegated to5336it by Congress.5337    The lapse in appropriations also appeared to impact the operations5338of and public access to FCC online databases, such as the Universal5339Licensing System, Equipment Authorization System, and functionality of5340the broadband map.53415342    Question 4. Please list which of the FCC's online databases were5343reduced in operations between October 1 and November 13, 2025,5344including any reduction in maintenance or public access, and which5345databases were fully operating.5346    Answer. The FCC continued to perform and carry out limited5347functions during the shutdown consistent with the law and FCC guidance.53485349    Question 5. Please also explain your rationale for determining5350which databases were at full operations and which were at reduced5351operations, if applicable.5352    Answer. The FCC continued to perform and carry out limited5353functions during the shutdown consistent with the law and FCC guidance.53545355    Question 6. What were the factors you considered in making the5356decision to close FCC online databases, while you used carryover funds5357to continue to work on other appropriation-supported activities,5358including Commission-level votes to increase the rates paid by5359incarcerated people and their families, and opening a proceeding to5360repeal broadband consumer protections required by Congress?5361    Answer. The FCC continued to perform and carry out limited5362functions during the shutdown consistent with the law and FCC guidance.5363                                 ______53645365   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to5366                           Hon. Brendan Carr5367    Question 1. In October the Commission voted to move forward with a5368rulemaking on eliminating broadband labeling requirements. How will5369eliminating requirements that Internet Service Providers tell consumers5370exactly how much they are being charged, including by providing an5371itemized list of fees, increase transparency efforts and bring prices5372down for consumers?5373    Answer. The FCC has sought comment on potential changes to the5374existing regulations but has not made any final decisions.53755376    Question 2. Do you agree that transitioning to Next Gen 911 is a5377national security imperative that should remain a top priority for both5378the FCC and Congress?5379    Answer. Completing the transition to NG911 will enable significant5380public safety benefits. The FCC has been taking actions to help promote5381the transition.53825383    Question 3. Would you support putting the proceeds from the Federal5384Communications Commission's spectrum auctions towards modernizing our53859-1-1 infrastructure?5386    Answer. I defer to Congress on any changes in the law regarding the5387spending of auction proceeds received by the FCC or the Federal5388government.5389                                 ______53905391    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to5392                           Hon. Brendan Carr5393FCC Public Interest Authority5394    Question 1. What is the FCC's standard for evaluating programming5395under the public interest standard and news distortion policy?5396    Answer. The FCC has defined the public interest standard and the5397news distortion policy on numerous occasions.53985399    Question 2. What conditions would trigger the FCC to investigate or5400take action against the speech of comedians, satirists, or commentators5401under the public interest standard or news distortion policy?5402    Answer. The FCC's public interest regulations apply to licensed5403broadcasters.54045405    Question 3. Following the preemption of the Jimmy Kimmel Live! show5406in September, you said we are ``. . . in the midst of a massive shift5407in dynamics in the media ecosystem for lots of reasons, again,5408including the permission structure that President Trump's election has5409provided. And I would simply say we're not done yet with seeing the5410consequences of that.'' Please elaborate on what you meant by ``the5411massive shift in dynamics in the media ecosystem.'' Does this include5412future decisions pertaining to programming?5413    Answer. The FCC is working to empower local broadcasters to meet5414their public interest obligations.54155416    Question 4. In your testimony, you indicated that you consider5417Jimmy Kimmel's September comments to be in violation of the news5418distortion policy. Given that in that case there was no extrinsic5419evidence of an intent to mislead, is the FCC now adopting a standard5420that an opinion or mistake on broadcast television can constitute news5421distortion, even without malintent?5422    Answer. The FCC has provided definitions and decisions regarding5423the contours of the agency's news distortion policy.54245425    Question 5. If there is evidence that FCC action, or the threat of5426FCC action, towards broadcast television impacts programming decisions5427on non-broadcast media through financial ties between companies, would5428you consider this to be censorship?5429    Answer. The Supreme Court determined that the FCC's enforcement of5430the public interest standard does not violate the First Amendment.54315432    Question 6. Please describe whether the FCC would consider the5433following scenarios on broadcast television as being in violation of5434the public interest standard or news distortion policy. If you cannot5435comment on these scenarios, please explain how programs can receive5436clarity about how to abide by the FCC's public interest standard and5437news distortion policy:54385439    a. A comedian, commentator, or satirist insults the President in a5440manner that is not obscene, profane, or indecent.5441    Answer. The FCC has provided definitions and decisions regarding5442the contours of the agency's public interest standard and news5443distortion policy, which apply to licensed broadcasters.54445445    b. A comedian, commentator, or satirist makes offensive statements5446pertaining to violence or assault.5447    Answer. The FCC has provided definitions and decisions regarding5448the contours of the agency's public interest standard and news5449distortion policy, which apply to licensed broadcasters.54505451    c. An artist has a performance that could be considered an insult5452to the President's policies or political positions.5453    Answer. The FCC has provided definitions and decisions regarding5454the contours of the agency's public interest standard and news5455distortion policy, which apply to licensed broadcasters.54565457    d. A politician states that a murder victim ``deserved'' their5458death because of their hatred for said politician.5459    Answer. The FCC has provided definitions and decisions regarding5460the contours of the agency's public interest standard and news5461distortion policy, which apply to licensed broadcasters.54625463    Question 7. Do you endorse President Trump's calls to NBC to fire5464Seth Meyers?5465    Answer. NBC makes its own decisions about its employees.5466FCC Independence5467    Question 8. If the President determines that broadcast programming5468content does not abide by the public interest standard or the news5469distortion policy, will you defer to the President's opinion? What if5470the President's opinion departs from FCC's precedent of interpretation?5471    Answer. The FCC bases its decisions on the law, the facts, and the5472record.54735474    Question 9. If, as you stated, the President can fire you for ``any5475reason,'' how can companies and broadcasters trust that your judgement5476will be fair, and not merely serve as a reflection of the President's5477opinions?5478    Answer. The FCC bases its decisions on the law, the facts, and the5479record.5480Tribal Spectrum Windows5481    Question 10. Will the FCC commit to continuing to hold Tribal5482priority windows in future spectrum auctions?5483    Answer. Commission decisions are determined through a vote by the5484members of the Commission.54855486    Question 11. Please provide 1) the number of locations associated5487with individual Tribal areas; and 2) an aggregated rollup of the number5488of Tribal locations and Tribal broadband availability nationwide within5489the National Broadband Map, or to incorporate this information into a5490separate Tribal National Broadband Map that includes data on Tribal5491areas only?5492    Answer. The requested data is published as data downloads on the5493National Broadband Map. Specifically, the data downloads page on the5494National Broadband Map provides summary information about fixed or5495mobile broadband in Tribal areas, specifically in the Fixed Broadband5496Summary by Geography Type and Mobile Broadband Summary by Geography5497Type downloads: https://broadbandmap.fcc.gov5498/data-download/nationwide-data54995500    Question 12. Will you direct ONAP to provide educational outreach5501and technical assistance to Tribes to assist them with submitting5502challenges to the National Broadband Map, especially for those Tribes5503that have not submitted challenges?5504    Answer. ONAP plans and leads the Commission's outreach to Tribal5505governments and organizations, with the objective of increasing their5506awareness of, and participation in, Commission programs and5507proceedings.5508Local Programming Carriage5509    Question 13. Does the FCC plan to review any issues pertaining to5510the pricing of carriage for local broadcast stations by streaming5511services?5512    Answer. The FCC publicly discloses Commission meeting items5513approximately three weeks before any such votes.5514Upper C-Band Auctions5515    Question 14. Will the FCC extend the public comment period for the5516Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding the implementation of the Upper5517C-Band rules for 2027 auction?5518    Answer. On December 19th, the FCC granted a 15 day extension of the5519comment and reply comment dates in the Upper C-Band proceeding.5520                                 ______55215522   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to5523                           Hon. Brendan Carr5524    In one of your first acts as FCC Chairman, you reinstated a5525complaint alleging that WCBS violated the FCC's news distortion policy5526in airing a CBS interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris on 605527Minutes. The previous FCC dismissed this complaint, rightfully5528concluding that the agency had no role in policing WCBS's editorial5529decision-making. Moreover, for the FCC to find a violation of this5530policy, it must find evidence that the broadcast station ``deliberately5531distorted a factual news report.'' In addition, in its Hunger in5532America proceeding, the FCC further required a complainant to provide5533``extrinsic evidence'' demonstrating an intent to distort the news.55345535    Question 1. Have you identified any extrinsic evidence of an5536intentional news distortion to justify this investigation?5537    Answer. The relevant complaint remains pending at the FCC.55385539    Question 2. When does the FCC intend to make a determination about5540whether to proceed with or close this proceeding?5541    Answer. The relevant complaint remains pending at the FCC.55425543    Question 3. Have FCC career staff provided any internal opinions or5544other materials on the validity of the complaint in this proceeding? If5545so, what was their determination?5546    Answer. The relevant complaint remains pending at the FCC.55475548    Question 4. Have you had any private communication with President5549Donald Trump about this investigation? If so, has President Trump5550instructed you to take any specific action with respect to this5551investigation?5552    Answer. Consistent with longstanding practice, I do not discuss5553conversations vel non with the President.55545555    In February, the FCC opened an investigation into KCBS's coverage5556of a Federal immigration raid. In an interview on Fox News at the time,5557you suggested that the radio station could have been in violation of5558its public interest standard obligation.55595560    Question 1. What is the status of this investigation?5561    Answer. I do not have any new information to provide you at this5562time beyond what has been previously disclosed.55635564    Question 2. What evidence was the grounds for opening this5565investigation?5566    Answer. See answer above.55675568    Question 3. Please describe how KCBS may have violated its public5569interest standard obligation. In particular, what aspects of its news5570programming may not have been in the public interest?5571    Answer. See answer above.55725573    Question 4. In your Fox News interview, you appeared to suggest5574that KCBS may have violated its public interest obligation because it5575was reporting on the car models and location of immigration officers.5576There is no evidence that this reporting was inaccurate or a hoax. Has5577the FCC ever instituted an investigation or penalized a broadcast5578station for accurately reporting the news? If so, please provide5579examples.5580    Answer. The FCC enforces the public interest standard.55815582    Question 5. If your concern with KCBS's coverage was that it may5583have interfered with immigration enforcement operations or endangered5584the life of Federal officers, has the FCC ever launched an5585investigation or penalized a broadcast station for such purposes? If5586so, please provide examples.5587    Answer. The FCC enforces the public interest standard.55885589    Chairman Carr, before President Trump's second term, you were a5590vocal supporter of the TikTok ban, also known as the Protecting5591Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. For5592example, in 2022, you stated, ``I do not see a path forward for5593anything other than a ban. So, it is time for the Administration to act5594with the urgency that this national security threat demands.'' In fact,5595in March 2024, you wrote a letter to the House Energy and Commerce5596Committee in support of the legislation. Although the Federal5597Communications Commission is not charged with implementing the law, you5598remain an important advisor to President Trump on technology and5599telecommunications policy. Your views on the Trump Administration's5600implementation of the TikTok ban remain important.56015602    Question 1. Over the past year, President Trump has signed five5603executive orders directing the Department of Justice (DOJ) to not5604enforce the TikTok ban against service providers (such as Apple,5605Google, Oracle, and others) who continue providing services to TikTok5606in violation of the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary5607Controlled Applications Act. Do you believe that the DOJ has the5608authority to explicitly instruct companies that it will not enforce a5609law enacted by Congress?5610    Answer. I would refer you to the DOJ for questions about the DOJ's5611authority.56125613    Question 2. You previously said the Biden administration should5614``act with the urgency that this national security threat demands'' by5615banning TikTok. Would you classify President Trump's actions on TikTok5616as him ``acting with urgency''?5617    Answer. President Trump has acted with urgency on many matters.5618Public Interested Standard5619    Question 1. Please define your interpretation of the public5620interest standard.5621    Answer. The FCC has provided definitions and decisions regarding5622the contours of the agency's public interest standard.56235624    Question 2. Does the public interest standard include any test or5625rule around ideological or political bias?5626    Answer. The FCC has provided definitions and decisions regarding5627the contours of the agency's public interest standard and related5628policies.5629Pole Attachments5630    Question 1. The FCC has made progress streamlining the pole5631attachment process. What additional reforms is the FCC pursuing to5632ensure that broadband and telecommunications providers can obtain5633timely and cost-effective access to poles?5634    Answer. Thank you for your support of these important efforts. The5635FCC is pursuing a range of actions to accelerate and streamline the5636cost-effective build out of infrastructure.5637AM Radio5638    Question 1. Chairman Cruz and I have been working to pass our AM5639Radio for Every Vehicle Act, which would require vehicles to have5640broadcast AM radio. Our legislation has nearly four hundred cosponsors5641in the Senate and House. Does AM radio continue to play an important5642role in delivering emergency alerts across the country?5643    Answer. Thank you for your leadership on this important matter. I5644support your legislation and agree that AM radio continues to play an5645important role in communities across the country.5646                                 ______56475648    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Gary Peters to5649                           Hon. Brendan Carr5650    Question 1. Last month you chose to withdraw a Notice of Proposed5651Rulemaking established in response to Salt Typhoon--one of the largest5652and most damaging cyberattacks in U.S. history. The proposed5653regulations held covered companies responsible for basic cybersecurity5654practices, but you voted to roll back these protections, stating this5655was because providers have already ``demonstrated a strengthened5656cybersecurity posture.'' What, if any, do you think the FCC and5657Congress should be doing more to help prevent future lapses that allow5658our adversaries to infiltrate our networks?5659    Answer. The decision that the FCC reversed was neither a lawful nor5660effective response. While I defer to Congress on the nature of any5661legislation, it is important that the private sector continue to take5662actions that harden and strengthen networks based on the evolving5663nature of cybersecurity threats.56645665    Question 2. Earlier this year, the FCC requested comments on the5666Bureau of Industry and Security's rule related to connected vehicles5667and connected vehicle technologies, specifically whether and how to add5668certain technologies to the FCC's covered entities list. I strongly5669support the Bureau of Industry and Security's rule and believe we must5670keep Chinese connected and autonomous vehicles and vehicle components5671from entering our market. I believe the FCC must work closely with the5672automotive supply chain to ensure any action it takes in this space5673does not conflict with the BIS rule and achieves our goals of5674protecting our national and economic security.5675    Will you commit to working with my office and the automotive supply5676chain industry as you decide what actions to take on this issue?5677    Answer. I would be happy to work with you on these issues.5678                                 ______56795680   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Baldwin to5681                           Hon. Brendan Carr5682    Question 1. Tribal communities face some of the most severe5683challenges in accessing reliable and affordable broadband internet. In5684Wisconsin, we host the Tribal Libraries, Archives, and Museums (TLAM)5685Project at the University of Wisconsin, and libraries are an important5686connector for communities when home without sufficient broadband. In5687the last few years, the FCC has taken steps to improve tribal library5688participation in E-Rate, updating the definition of library and5689creating a program--called T-LEAP, or the Tribal Library E-Rate5690Advocacy Program--to support Tribal applications for E-Rate. The5691Commission concluded it would issue data about the status of tribal E-5692Rate applications, yet we have not yet seen this data. A preliminary5693analysis of the E-Rate data available shows that while 79 percent of5694libraries in Wisconsin applied for E-Rate, only 1 of eight tribal5695libraries in Wisconsin applied for E-Rate. What is the current progress5696of this program?5697    Answer. T-LEAP is in its third year of providing support throughout5698the E-Rate application and invoicing processes to Tribal libraries that5699have opted to participate. Tribal libraries are able to join any time5700during the year and receive individualized support. In funding year57012024, 294 Tribal libraries participated in the E-Rate program, and they5702received over $13.7 million in funding (disbursements).57035704    Question 2. Robocalls and ever increasingly sophisticated scams5705pose a serious threat to millions of Americans, especially to our5706seniors. These scams can lead to significant financial losses including5707people losing their life's retirement savings, breach of sensitive5708personal information, and loss of peace of mind as people are bombarded5709by these spam communications. What is the FCC doing to support victims5710of these scams and prevent these calls in the first place?5711    Answer. The FCC has been reinvigorating its work to crack down on5712illegal robocalls. We are now looking at every portion of the lifecycle5713of a call and taking actions that make it harder for bad actors to5714place illegal robocalls.57155716    Question 3. How would you define illegal Diversity, Equity, and5717Inclusion (DEI)? How have you determined which companies to investigate5718for potential illegal DEI programs?5719    Answer. In the very first section of the Communications Act,5720Congress stated that it created the FCC for the purpose of regulating5721interstate and foreign commerce in communication ``without5722discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin,5723or sex,'' 47 U.S.C. Sec. 151. Promoting invidious forms of5724discrimination runs contrary to the Communications Act and deprives5725Americans of their rights to fair and equal treatment under the law.57265727    Question 4. Will you investigate companies that do not have a5728formal DEI program, but the make-up of the company appears that they5729have a de facto discrimination in hiring or promotion decisions based5730on race or gender--for example if it were all-white or all-male? If5731not, what is your justification for not considering it but launching5732investigations into DEI programs?5733    Answer. The FCC will apply its regulations in a fair and even-5734handed manner.5735                                 ______57365737    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jacky Rosen to5738                           Hon. Brendan Carr5739    Question 1. Please clarify how you determine what the FCC deems the5740public interest with regard to broadcast programming.5741    Answer. The FCC has defined the public interest standard on5742numerous occasions.57435744    Question 2. How do you determine alignment with the public interest5745when considering mergers? Is there a standard applied the same to every5746single merger that the FCC reviews?5747    Answer. The FCC has articulated the standard of review and public5748interest framework that applies to transactions pursuant to Section5749310(d) of the Communications Act.57505751    Question 3. Is it your view, as you seemed to express during the5752hearing regarding KCBS, that local reporting on ICE operations does not5753align with the FCC's public interest standard? Please elaborate on what5754specific statute or public FCC guidance related to the public interest5755standard that KCBS potentially violated which prompted the FCC to open5756an investigation.5757    Answer. The FCC has defined the public interest standard on5758numerous occasions.57595760    Question 4. If you think KCBS' coverage of ICE crossed the line,5761how should local news outlets cover ICE operations in their5762communities?5763    Answer. The FCC has defined the public interest standard on5764numerous occasions.57655766    Question 5. Please clarify to those who want to avoid violating the5767public interest standard--reporters, journalists, editors--how does one5768report in the public interest under this FCC? Do you plan to issue5769clear guidelines to specifically define what actions align or violate5770the public interest standard?5771    Answer. The FCC has defined the public interest standard on5772numerous occasions.57735774    Question 6. The FCC has an open proceeding on SIP Interconnection.5775IP interconnection is a critical component in modernizing our5776telecommunications networks and realizing some of the innovations that5777can improve everything from public safety to combatting robo- and spam5778calls from fraudsters who prey on vulnerable Americans. As the FCC5779considers this proceeding, will you commit to addressing some of the5780causes of continued delays by carriers who have resisted this5781modernization?5782    Answer. Yes.57835784    Question 7. Will you consider incorporating policies to maintain5785competition in rural areas, prevent anticompetitive conduct even while5786the proceeding is pending, and setting reasonable protections for IP to5787IP interconnection to maximize the benefits to consumers?5788    Answer. The FCC is examining all of the relevant issues.5789                                 ______57905791   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ben Ray Lujan to5792                           Hon. Brendan Carr5793FCC Independence5794    (1) On the morning of December 17, 2025, I printed out and quoted5795the Federal Communication Commission's page ``About the FCC'' which5796stated that the Federal Communications Commission is ``[a]n independent5797U.S. government agency overseen by Congress.'' As of the afternoon on5798December 17, 2025 the same webpage states the Commission is a ``U.S.5799government agency overseen by Congress'' removing the word5800``independent'' after you stated at the hearing that, ``the FCC is not5801formally an independent agency.''58025803   When was the decision made to change the FCC's website?5804    Answer. The FCC's website is almost constantly changing.58055806   Who directed FCC staff to change the website while you were5807        testifying? Was the decision made at your direction during the5808        hearing? If not, who made that determination?5809    Answer. As I noted above, the FCC's website is almost constantly5810changing and getting updated.58115812   How many individual web pages and/or documents did the FCC5813        change to remove the word ``independent'' before, during, and5814        after the December 17, 2025 hearing?5815    Answer. See answer above.58165817   Please provide an archival screenshot of the page(s) before5818        and after the change(s).5819    Answer. The FCC's website is publicly available for review and5820viewing.58215822   How many staff members and staff hours were used to change5823        the website page(s)?5824    Answer. See answers above.58255826    (1) Please provide a list with citations and hyperlinks to all5827testimony, statements, speeches, opinion pieces, and law review5828articles that you authored or co-authored that state, mention, or in5829any way describe the Federal Communications Commission as an5830independent agency.5831    Answer. Please see this page for links to my posted statements, op-5832eds, speeches, and related materials: https://www.fcc.gov/about/5833leadership/brendan-carr5834National Ownership Cap5835    In the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004 Congress set the5836national audience reach cap to 39 percent. Congress set this limit, not5837the Federal Communications Commission, yet recently you sought comment5838on whether to modify the national ownership cap. In November, President5839Trump posted on Truth Social and said he ``would not be happy'' if the5840FCC lifted the national ownership cap to ``allow the Radical Left5841Networks to `enlarge' ''. Please explain why the FCC is seeking comment5842on modifying the national ownership cap. Does the FCC or Congress have5843the power to raise the national ownership cap?5844    Answer. The FCC's proceeding has sought comment on a range of5845different issues. The FCC has not reached a final decision.5846Broadcast Licenses5847    President Trump has called upon the FCC to revoke licenses of ABC5848(Disney) and NBC for news reporting he deems unacceptable. In 2021--you5849said, ``a newsroom's decision about what stories to cover and how to5850frame them should be beyond the reach of any government official.'' Can5851you explain what statutory authority the FCC has to revoke licenses5852based on disagreement with editorial choices?5853    Answer. The FCC has those authorities that have been delegated to5854it by Congress.58555856    In January 2025, the FCC dismissed complaints against CBS, ABC, and5857FOX stations. As Chairman, you unilaterally reopened the complaints5858against CBS and ABC but left the FOX complaint closed, even though the5859FOX matter involved proven falsehoods about the 2020 election. What5860objective criteria justified reopening only the complaints involving5861coverage unfavorable to President Trump?5862    Answer. Please see the letter available at this link for detailed5863information that responds to your question and sets the record5864straight: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-410581A2.pdf5865Public Interest Standard5866    On ``The FCC and Speech'' page of the FCC's website it states:5867``The limitations on the FCC's power to restrict or ban speech begin5868with the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which decrees that5869the Federal government `shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom5870of speech, or of the press.' Accordingly, Congress through Section 3265871of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. Sec. 326, explicitly declared that5872nothing in the statute `shall be understood or construed to give the5873Commission the power of censorship over the [broadcast] communications5874or signals transmitted by any [broadcast] station, and no regulation or5875condition shall be promulgated or fixed by the Commission which shall5876interfere with the right of free speech by means of [over-the-air]5877broadcast communication.' Pursuant to these legal mandates, the FCC has5878long held that `the public interest is best served by permitting free5879expression of views.' ''58805881    You have frequently cited the public interest standard as the law5882you are enforcing, but never fully defined what it means. Please state5883how you define ``the public interest standard.''5884    Answer. The FCC has defined the public interest standard on5885numerous occasions.5886U.S. Cyber Trust Mark5887    In March 2024, the FCC adopted rules establishing the framework for5888the U.S. Cyber Trust Mark program. On June 13, 2025, UL Solutions5889submitted recommendations on Technical Standards and Testing5890Procedures, Label Design, and Post-Market Surveillance for the U.S.5891Cyber Trust Mark. What is the current implementation status of the U.S.5892Cyber Trust Mark? Please provide an updated timeline for implementation5893detailing the next steps.5894    Answer. On December 19, UL Solutions filed a Notice of Withdrawal5895as Lead Administrator for the U.S. Cyber Trust Mark Program. In early5896January, the FCC opened an application window so parties interested in5897being the new administrator can apply.5898Broadband Labels5899    The FCC recently adopted a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking5900during the October 2025 Open Meeting that would seek to roll back key5901requirements for the broadband labels. In that FNPRM you sought comment5902on a proposal to eliminate the requirement that providers display the5903label in the languages in which they market their services.59045905    (f) Do consumers benefit from seeing the full price they will pay5906at the end of the month, with no hidden fees?5907    Answer. The FCC has not made any final decision in this proceeding.59085909    (f) Will you commit to keeping the rules that require broadband5910providers to publish the broadband label in the languages in which they5911market their services?5912    Answer. The FCC has not made any final decision in this proceeding.59135914    (f) How is the FCC monitoring providers compliance with the current5915broadband label rules? Please provide details and how many staff hours5916have been used to monitor compliance.5917    Answer. The FCC has not made any final decision in this proceeding.59185919    (f) Did the FCC do any studies of the broadband labels prior to its5920most recent proposals to modify or remove key price transparency5921requirements from the labels?5922    Answer. The FCC has not made any final decision in this proceeding.59235924    (f) How many consumer complaints has the FCC received regarding the5925broadband labels since the labels went into effect in 2024? Are the5926consumers complaining that broadband labels are hard to find? Are5927providers hiding the labels behind icons and/or links?5928    Answer. The FCC has not made any final decision in this proceeding.59295930    (f) Please summarize all consumer complaints received to date on5931the broadband labels, organize them into categories, and provide5932samples of each.5933    Answer. There is an open data platform for consumer complaints:5934https://open5935data.fcc.gov/Consumer/CGB-Consumer-Complaints-Data/3xyp-aqkj/about_data5936Cybersecurity5937    In January 2025, the Commission adopted a Declaratory Ruling that5938affirmatively required telecommunications carriers to secure their5939networks from unlawful access or interception of communications. The5940FCC also proposed rules to require covered communications service5941providers to submit an annual certification attesting that they have5942created, updated, and implemented cybersecurity and supply chain risk5943management plans. You have since reversed that ruling and withdrawn the5944proposed rules.59455946    (3) What are the Commission's plans to ensure that our networks5947remain secure from foreign threats?5948    Answer. The FCC is taking action on several fronts to protect our5949networks from foreign threats.59505951    (3) Is it possible to win the AI race against China if providers5952are constantly leaking our IP to them through hacks in our telecom5953networks?5954    Answer. The FCC is taking action on several fronts to protect our5955networks from foreign threats.59565957    (3) Does the Commission need additional authority to ensure the5958security of our communications networks?5959    Answer. I want to thank you again for your leadership on5960legislation like the FACT Act. Legislation like that includes forward-5961thinking ideas that can promote the security of our networks.5962Public Safety5963    (3) Emergency alerts are critical tools for protecting the public5964during disasters, but their effectiveness depends on reaching the right5965people at the right time, with clear, actionable information. Last5966month, the FCC concluded the comment period on a Notice of Proposed5967Rulemaking to comprehensively review the alerting framework and5968expressed an intent to modernize alerting systems from the ground up.5969Do you believe the FCC has sufficient authority under current law to5970adopt and implement the reforms it has proposed?5971    Answer. I agree with you on the value and importance of emergency5972alerting. As the FCC continues to review the record in this proceeding,5973I will be mindful of areas where additional legislation would be5974helpful.59755976    (3) When an outage affects the public's ability to reach 9-1-1,5977emergency communications centers need timely, actionable information5978about the nature, scope, and location of the outage. Yet 9-1-15979professionals often lack the detailed information necessary to respond5980effectively. This is why I supported the Enhancing First Response Act,5981which unanimously passed the Senate in September and included a5982provision directing the FCC to review the current outage notifications5983rules. In 2022, the Commission directed the Public Safety and Homeland5984Security Bureau to collect information on 9-1-1 outages, including the5985volume of 9-1-1 outages that go unreported and possible alternative5986outage reporting thresholds.59875988    (b) What is the status of the Bureau's efforts to collect this5989information, and will the FCC be putting forth any public analysis or5990recommendations based on the information collected?5991    Answer. The Bureau is continuing to consider this issue, and the5992agency has issued detailed reports on major 911 outages, including5993here: https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-issues-report-nationwide-att-5994mobility-outage59955996    (b) How will you ensure that 9-1-1 call centers receive useful5997information about the status of 9-1-1 outages, and what measures will5998the FCC take to prioritize these needed reforms?5999    Answer. The FCC is consistently working to ensure that 911 call6000centers have the actionable information they need.60016002    (3) At the beginning of the year, the Association of Public-Safety6003Communications Officials International, the National Emergency Number6004Association, and the National Association of State 9-1-1 Administrators6005jointly submitted a proposal outlining ways to improve outage6006notifications to 9-1-1 centers by incorporating visual representations6007of the outages and real-time information from service providers. They6008also requested additional rule changes to strengthen the outage6009notification framework. Can you provide an update on the status of the6010FCC's consideration of this proposal and the related rulemaking6011requests.6012    Answer. The FCC is continuing to review a range of ideas for6013improving outage notifications.6014Multilingual Wireless Emergency Alerts6015    In a recent Federal Register publication, the Federal6016Communications Commission set the compliance date for multilingual6017Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA) as June 12, 2028. However, that same6018Federal Register publication states that ``47 CFR 10.480 (amendatory6019instruction 2) and 47 CFR 10.500(e) (amendatory instruction 3) are6020delayed indefinitely.'' Please explain why these rules are ``delayed6021indefinitely'' and what steps the FCC will take to secure a compliance6022deadline for those rules.6023    Answer. The compliance date for the multilingual WEA template6024requirement is June 12, 2028. The rules that are ``pending6025indefinitely'' are minor rule changes adopted in the January 20256026order, but because of the long lead time to compliance in 2028, the6027pending rules should be approved in the normal course well before6028compliance is required.6029Universal Service Fund6030    On December 17, 2025, I sent a letter with Senator Fischer and6031Representatives Matsui and Hudson requesting a briefing from your staff6032to help inform our bipartisan, bicameral Universal Service Fund Working6033Group. I look forward to that briefing taking place no later than6034January 30, 2026. Ahead of that briefing, please provide a list of any6035current or future rulemakings/reforms to the USF programs under6036consideration by the Commission.6037    Answer. The FCC is looking forward to this briefing.6038Tribal Connectivity6039    The Affordable Connectivity Program delivered tremendous benefits6040to tribal members in my state and across the country during the6041pandemic, increasing access to telehealth, education, and other6042opportunities. Many tribal households cannot afford two telecom6043subscriptions and their only connection to the Internet is through a6044mobile device. So, even if BEAD investments eventually get improved6045broadband out to these remote lands, affordability remains a tremendous6046challenge. And it is not just in my state of New Mexico. There are6047remote tribal lands with tremendous demographic challenges in Arizona,6048Washington, Montana, Oklahoma, North and South Dakota, and others as6049well. Should the FCC invest its universal service support funding to6050support Tribal areas?6051    Answer. Yes.6052Independent Programmers6053    As consolidation continues across Big Tech, the telecommunications6054and entertainment industries, these large players gain even stronger6055leverage to negotiate with smaller and independent players. Nowhere is6056this more apparent than in the Pay TV market, where carriage in both6057the linear and streaming sectors continues to be difficult to negotiate6058for the smaller, independent programmers that are often more diverse in6059content and ownership. Would you consider taking a new look at the6060market and current negotiating practices to explore if there is a6061viable approach to address this issue?6062    Answer. One step the FCC has recently taken on this front is6063opening a proceeding that asks about the relationship between licensed6064local broadcasters and national programmers.6065vMVPDs6066    Last Congress, I led a letter, joined by 19 other senators6067requesting that the FCC examine the growth of streaming and the impact6068on local stations, given that these stations do not control pricing of6069the payments paid by the streaming services for carrying their6070stations. I remain concerned about this issue. Can the FCC examine the6071video marketplace and establish policies that address this vMVPD issue6072to ensure the viability of local broadcast stations?6073    Answer. As noted above, the FCC recently asked for comment on the6074dynamics that are relevant to the relationship between licensed local6075broadcasters and the national programmers.6076Robocalls6077    (1) We continue to see large volumes of robocalls and fraudulent6078activity originating from outside the United States. Many of these6079calls use U.S. communications networks and SIM farms to reach American6080consumers.6081    (b) What steps is the FCC taking to prevent foreign-originated6082fraud and scams from reaching U.S. consumers?6083    Answer. The FCC has proposed and is pursuing a number of actions6084that would focus specifically on the problem of foreign-originated6085illegal robocalls.60866087    (b) Are there specific limitations that prevent the FCC from doing6088more in this area? If so, can the FCC explain these constraints?6089    Answer. The FCC is continuing to review the record regarding these6090proposals and will examine whether additional legislation would aid in6091the agency's efforts.60926093    (1) The Commission recently removed a large number of voice service6094providers from the Robocall Mitigation Database.6095    (b) Since this purge, has the FCC observed a measurable decrease in6096fraudulent robocalls targeting American consumers? If so, can you6097quantify the results?6098    Answer. The FCC is taking a number of actions that aim to reduce6099the number of illegal robocalls that Americans would otherwise have6100faced.61016102    (b) If not, what further enforcement actions does the FCC plan to6103take to achieve meaningful results for American consumers?6104    Answer. The FCC is pursuing a number of additional actions aimed at6105cracking down on illegal robocalls.61066107    (1) Some international gateway providers continue to transmit high6108volumes of illegal foreign-originated traffic onto U.S. networks, often6109with inadequate know your customer (KYC) practices.6110    (b) What steps is the FCC taking to identify providers that6111repeatedly allow this type of traffic into the US, and what enforcement6112measures are being used to hold these providers accountable?6113    Answer. The FCC should continue to enhance and strengthen its KYC6114regulations.61156116    (b) What limitations prevent the FCC from imposing foreign6117ownership limits on, or even prohibiting foreign ownership of,6118international gateway providers?6119    Answer. The FCC is looking at a number of ideas for cracking down6120on illegal robocalls from abroad.61216122    (1) All-IP networks enable more effective use of tools like STIR/6123SHAKEN and caller ID authentication, both of which are critical in6124identifying and blocking foreign-originated fraud and scams. What6125additional actions can the FCC take to accelerate the transition to6126all-IP networks and ensure these protections are implemented quickly6127and at scale across all providers?6128    Answer. The FCC is pursuing a number of steps to accelerate the6129transition to all IP networks, including through our actions on copper6130retirement.6131                                 ______61326133 Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. John Hickenlooper to6134                           Hon. Brendan Carr6135Low-Power Television (LPTV)6136    5G innovation continues to unfold as expansive uses of 5G come to6137market. These solutions provide enhanced programming, datacasting, and6138connectivity for those who are often left out of cutting-edge6139technologies. One of these solutions is 5G LPTV Broadcast. Colorado is6140home to 38 LPTV stations, all of which represent opportunities to bring6141enhanced programming and new 5G connectivity options directly to6142Coloradans through new broadcast technologies. Allowing LPTV stations6143to pursue this technological step requires only permission from the6144FCC, with no mandates or impacts on other technologies.61456146    Question 1. How is the FCC ensuring that its regulatory processes6147are not delaying or discouraging innovative uses of spectrum, including61485G LPTV broadcast technologies that could improve spectrum efficiency?6149    Answer. The FCC has been working to empower local broadcasters to6150find innovative uses of their spectrum.6151Privacy6152    As cyberattacks and data breach threats continue to evolve, we have6153seen repeated breaches of communications providers. With each breach,6154sensitive consumer proprietary network information (CPNI) could be6155exposed. These instances shine a spotlight over how the FCC exercises6156strong enforcement over data security and privacy rules versus securing6157quick settlements and voluntary commitments through consent decrees.61586159    Question 2. Why has the FCC relied on consent decrees in response6160to data-privacy violations--including those involving geolocation6161data--instead of imposing stronger penalties to deter repeat offenses?6162    Answer. The FCC has issued CPNI penalties and has a range of6163enforcement actions it can take.61646165    Question 3. What incentives is the FCC creating to better promote6166data security, minimize unauthorized breaches, and better protect CPNI?6167    Answer. The FCC has specific regulations that govern CPNI.6168Artificial Intelligence6169    During your testimony, we discussed the President's recent6170Executive Order entitled, ``Ensuring A National Policy Framework for6171Artificial Intelligence'' (Executive Order on AI). We specifically6172discussed the Executive Order's directive in Section 6 requiring the6173FCC to ``initiate a proceeding to determine whether to adopt a Federal6174reporting and disclosure standard for AI models that preempts6175conflicting State laws.'' Additionally, Section 5(b) requires6176``Executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall assess their6177discretionary grant programs in consultation with the Special Advisor6178for AI and Crypto and determine whether agencies may condition such6179grants on States either not enacting an AI law that conflicts with the6180policy of this order.''61816182    Question 4. Does the FCC have explicit statutory authorization to6183adopt a Federal reporting and disclosure standard that specifically6184applies to AI models, in accordance with the Executive Order on AI? If6185yes, provide statutory justification.6186    Answer. The FCC will be initiating a proceeding to explore the6187issues raised by the Executive Order.61886189    Question 5. During your testimony, you specifically stated the FCC6190is not an independent agency. As such, would the requirements for6191Executive Departments and Agencies within Section 5(b) of the Executive6192Order on AI apply to the FCC? Yes or no?6193    Answer. I stated in the hearing that the FCC is not an independent6194agency, formally speaking.61956196    Question 6. Will the FCC consider withholding any amounts from the6197Universal Service Fund (USF) from eligible recipients in states with AI6198laws implicated by Section 5(b) of the Executive Order on AI? Yes or6199no? Please explain.6200    Answer. The FCC has no relevant withholdings under consideration.6201Spectrum Relocation Fund (SRF)6202    The FCC has a coordination role with the Department of Commerce6203when Federal spectrum bands are transitioned to be available for6204commercial users. The Spectrum Relocation Fund (SRF) only allows a6205Federal department or agency to recover costs related to modifying6206systems using spectrum up to a ``comparable capability.'' The FCC plays6207a contributing role in overseeing the SRF as a member of the Technical6208Panel, along with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the6209National Telecommunications & Information Administration (NTIA).62106211    Question 7. If the SRF were amended by Congress so Federal agencies6212were able to recover additional relocation costs beyond a ``comparable6213capability'' in order to best fulfil their Federal mission, would the6214FCC continue to have successful commercial auctions of spectrum?6215    Answer. There are a lot of considerations that go into whether a6216particular FCC auction will be successful.6217                                 ______62186219     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. John Thune to6220                             Olivia Trusty6221    Question 1. Will you commit to working with Congress on legislative6222reforms to the Universal Service fund and ensure this critical program6223continues?6224    Answer. Yes.62256226    Question 2. What steps have the FCC already taken or can take to6227address waste, fraud, and abuse and improve efficiency across Universal6228Service Fund programs?6229    Answer. In my time at the FCC, the agency has taken action at both6230the full Commission level and on delegated authority to ensure6231universal service support only is provided in accordance with program6232rules and requirements. These Commission actions include: coordination6233with other Federal agencies to eliminate duplicative spending, denying6234unlawful support requests, and requiring reimbursements for6235overpayments.6236                                 ______62376238    Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Roger Wicker to6239                             Olivia Trusty6240    Question 1. The FCC collects data from broadband providers and from6241state, local, and Tribal governments, as well as through a newly6242established crowdsourcing process, to ensure more accurate and reliable6243broadband mapping. The FCC uses these maps when awarding funds, and6244other agencies are encouraged to use them for their programs.6245    Commissioner Trusty, accurate mapping is essential to ensuring6246broadband funds are allocated where they are needed most. I know you6247are committed to ensuring the FCC's Broadband Data Maps reflect6248consumers' real-world experiences. Significant progress has been made6249in improving both accuracy and accountability for Federal investments.6250What metrics should the Commission, working with this Committee,6251prioritize to continue refining and approving these maps?6252    Answer. One important metric is the stability in the broadband6253serviceable locations fabric. The ultimate goal should be for that6254fabric to require updates only to reflect new on-the-ground6255developments like new construction, which is consistent with the low6256level of changes currently being seen across different iterations of6257the fabric--approximately 1 percent. We've made significant progress on6258this issue and we need to ensure we maintain that consistency.6259    We also need to continue improving the broadband availability6260challenge process. Based on what we've been hearing from stakeholders,6261the Commission, working with this Committee, should explore ways to6262streamline the challenge process and make it less costly and more6263efficient to test locations, ensuring timely updates to the maps to6264reflect the realities of where service is provided.6265                                 ______62666267    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to6268                             Olivia Trusty6269    Question 1. PRC domestic law and cybersecurity infrastructure opens6270all devices made in the PRC or by PRC companies to the risks of the6271CCP's military civil fusion program, cybersecurity law, and6272counterespionage law, which require certain data be transferred to the6273government and infrastructure to be available to the government in6274times of conflict, regardless of whether it is located in the Mainland6275or abroad. In your view, does this domestic regulation mean that all6276PRC connected devices or PRC devices that transmit data or connect to a6277broader telecommunications infrastructure is at risk of CCP meddling?6278    Answer. This is consistent with what other agencies have found.6279Equipment and services closely tied to the foreign adversaries, like6280China, and can allow the CCP to surveil Americans, disrupt6281communications networks, and otherwise threaten U.S. national security.6282The Commission continues to make updates to the Covered List of6283equipment and services that have been determined to pose unacceptable6284risks to the national security of the United States and its citizens.62856286    Question 2. The FCC's Covered List includes large PRC6287telecommunications companies like Huawei and ZTE. Given the explosion6288of PRC-made connected home devices that plug into this6289telecommunications infrastructure, should this list expand to include6290connected consumer products like routers, smart TVs, and home security6291systems?6292    Answer. The Commission is concerned about the potential risks from6293technological devices linked to foreign adversaries, but we would defer6294to national security experts in Congress or throughout the Executive6295Branch to make specific determinations as to risks from certain6296equipment or services.62976298    Question 3. PRC manufacturers often produce devices sold under6299different brand names, making it hard to identify true origin. Or, PRC6300manufacturers engage in ``white labeling''--or manufacturing a product6301that another company then rebrands and sells under a non-PRC name. How6302does the FCC handle equipment authorization when the actual6303manufacturer is obscured?6304    Answer. The Commission has made clear that re-branding or ``white6305labeling'' of any covered equipment does not change the status of6306whether the equipment is covered equipment. Covered equipment is still6307covered equipment even if it is sold under a different brand. If the6308FCC learns of white-labeling it can and will revoke equipment6309authorizations and take enforcement actions against those entities6310involved.63116312    Question 4. When looking at the supply chain around these devices6313and the need for the actual physical OLED and LCD displays and6314components that go into them, there are concerns over the potentially6315lower quality of PRC produced components getting into devices under6316different brand names. Companies like BOE and Tianma being key examples6317with an outsized hold over the global display component supply chain.6318What is the FCC doing to raise awareness and counteract this aspect of6319the connected devices ecosystem?6320    Answer. I am monitoring this issue, and I am always willing to work6321with public and private national security experts to develop the best6322response to security concerns.63236324    Question 5. Many of the companies across the PRC connected devices6325supply chain like TP-Link, BOE, Hisense, Xiami, TIanma, or TCL, have6326manufacturing facilities capable of multiple purposes beyond connected6327device production. BOE in particular has potential to shift their6328fabrication plants from OLED display production, to potentially6329advanced semiconductor production. How is the FCC thinking through the6330various other lanes of national security that these companies may6331impact? How is the FCC coordinating with the rest of the U.S.6332Government to tackle these concerns as well?6333    Answer. The Commission is always working with other government6334agencies to monitor threats to the communications supply chain and6335network infrastructure from foreign adversaries.6336                                 ______63376338   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to6339                             Olivia Trusty6340    AI. The Trump Administration won't take no for an answer on a6341moratorium on state AI laws without a Federal standard. First, they6342tried to put it in the reconciliation bill, and we stripped it out by a634399-1 vote. Then they tried to attach it to the NDAA. Now they're6344directing agencies like the FCC to attempt to preempt state laws6345through an Executive Order.6346    Instead of trying to preempt laws that protect against AI fraud or6347theft, we need to be protecting consumers. Chairman Carr has been6348skeptical of the FCC's authority over new technologies in the past. In63492024, Chairman Carr said that ``Congress does not operate like a6350sieve--inadvertently spilling grants of new authorities. Congress's6351delegation of authority in these types of cases can no longer be6352implicit, it must be explicit.''63536354    Question 1. Does the FCC have the authority to preempt state AI6355laws under Title I of the Communications Act?6356    Answer. Under Executive Order 14365, the FCC has been directed to6357initiate a proceeding to seek comment on whether to adopt a Federal6358reporting and disclosure standard for AI models and preempt conflicting6359State laws. I'm open-minded about both the Commission's authority and6360the policy merits of any action regarding AI reporting and disclosure,6361and I look forward to reviewing the record before making any decision.63626363    Question 2. Is that what Congress intended when it rewrote a6364portion of the Communications Act in 1996, 25 years before ChatGPT was6365released?6366    Answer. I'm open-minded about both the Commission's authority and6367the policy merits of any action regarding AI reporting and disclosure,6368and I look forward to reviewing the record before making any decision.63696370    Question 3. Does the FCC have the authority to adopt a Federal6371reporting and disclosure standard for AI models?6372    Answer. I'm open-minded about both the Commission's authority and6373the policy merits of any action regarding AI reporting and disclosure,6374and I look forward to reviewing the record before making any decision.63756376    Public Interest Standard. Chairman Carr has publicly identified6377several kinds of reporting that he sees as not in the public interest,6378yet has not explained what kind of reporting is in the public interest.63796380    Question 1. Would you support the Commission opening a rulemaking6381specifying the contours of the ``public interest'' standard for6382broadcasters?6383    Answer. Historically, the public interest standard has been6384implemented for broadcasters through a combination of requirements6385specified under the Act and FCC rules and individual decisions creating6386a body of precedent regarding that standard in the licensing context.6387Although that approach gives considerable guidance to broadcasters, I'd6388keep an open mind if the Commission wished to consider alternative6389procedural approaches to construing and applying the public interest6390standard in the future.63916392    Local News. Harvard's Shorenstein Center found that broadcast6393stations owned by large ownership groups produced more news at the6394regional or national level rather than locally. On the other hand,6395independent stations produced more news content locally. I am concerned6396that further consolidation could lead to more news production outside6397of the station's community and result in the closure of local6398newsrooms.63996400    Question 1. What is the FCC doing to ensure that local newsrooms6401stay open?6402    Answer. To ensure local broadcasters can survive, the Commission is6403working to modernize and update the broadcast regulatory framework to6404help broadcasters better compete against Big Tech for viewers,6405programming, and advertising revenues.64066407    Universal Service. Schools and libraries serve as anchor6408institutions in communities around the country--they are where students6409learn, job seekers apply for employment, and veterans seek care.64106411    Question 1. Please explain the role that E-Rate plays in ensuring6412that these anchor institutions have the connectivity they need to serve6413their communities.6414    Answer. The E-Rate program provides discounts for6415telecommunications, Internet access, and internal connections to6416eligible schools and libraries. It helps to connect students, teachers,6417and consumers to jobs, life-long learning, and information in the6418global digital economy.6419                                 ______64206421   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to6422                             Olivia Trusty6423    Question 1. In your testimony you spoke about the importance of the6424USF working group instituting reforms to support rural communications6425networks. What steps should Congress take to make sure the USF program6426continues to help the most rural networks maintain the most secure and6427up-to-date networks?6428    Answer. While I generally defer to the USF working group to take6429the lead on modernizing universal service, our Alaska Connect Fund6430program illustrates some helpful principles, including support for6431ongoing expenses of operating networks in rural areas and seeking to6432meet Americans' connectivity needs where they live, work, and travel.64336434    Question 2. How is the Commission working to improve data sharing6435and coordination between Federal agencies with broadband programs to6436ensure that the broadband maps being used for BEAD and other Federal6437funding programs are as accurate and up to date as possible?6438    Answer. As discussed in a GAO report last Spring (GAO-25-107207),6439the FCC and other Federal agencies with broadband programs have been6440improving their coordination, but there still is more that can be done.6441The GAO report identified a number of recommendations, which the FCC6442agreed with and is working to implement.6443                                 ______64446445    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to6446                             Olivia Trusty6447    Question 1. What is the FCC's standard for evaluating programming6448under the public interest standard and news distortion policy?6449    Answer. Assuming the focus is on programming broadcast by FCC6450licensees, as directed by the Supreme Court, the FCC's approach to6451determining the public interest is a function of the purposes of the6452Communications Act, the requirements it imposes, and the statutory6453context. The public interest also includes the obligation for stations6454to meet the needs of their local communities and to not distort the6455news under the news distortion policy.64566457    Question 2. What conditions would trigger the FCC to investigate or6458take action against the speech of comedians, satirists, or commentators6459under the public interest standard or news distortion policy?6460    Answer. For clarity, unless the comedians, satirists, or6461commentators were Commission licensees they would not be governed by6462the public interest standard, including the news distortion policy.6463    In the case of FCC licensees that broadcast the speech identified6464in the question, because the initiation of investigations generally6465does not come up for a vote of the full Commission, I would direct you6466generally to the standards in provisions such as section 403 of the6467Communications Act and sections 0.111 and 0.311 of the Commission's6468rules.6469    As a general matter, any Commission action against a broadcast6470licensee under the public interest standard, including the news6471distortion policy, would turn on the evidence of whether a violation6472occurred, coupled with the burden of proof and required procedure6473governing the action at issue (e.g., declaratory ruling, cease-and-6474desist order, denial of a license, license revocation, financial6475penalty).64766477    Question 3. If there is evidence that FCC action, or the threat of6478FCC action, towards broadcast television impacts programming decisions6479on non-broadcast media through financial ties between companies, would6480you consider this to be censorship?6481    Answer. There are a wide array of legal and colloquial definitions6482of ``censorship,'' and a wide range of facts that might be relevant to6483applying a particular standard, so without more it is not possible to6484opine definitively.6485    As an FCC Commissioner, my primary focus is on implementing the6486Communications Act, consistent with the First amendment, long-standing6487legal doctrine, and Supreme Court precedent.64886489    Question 4. Please describe whether the FCC would consider the6490following scenarios on broadcast television as being in violation of6491the public interest standard or news distortion policy. If you cannot6492comment on these scenarios, please explain how programs can receive6493clarity about how to abide by the FCC's public interest standard and6494news distortion policy:64956496  a.  A comedian, commentator, or satirist insults the President in a6497        manner that is not obscene, profane, or indecent.64986499  b.  A comedian, commentator, or satirist makes offensive statements6500        pertaining to violence or assault.65016502  c.  An artist has a performance that could be considered an insult to6503        the President's policies or political positions.65046505  d.  A politician states that a murder victim ``deserved'' their death6506        because of their hatred for said politician.65076508    Answer. Given the range of obligations imposed on broadcast6509licensees, without more context and information it is not possible to6510definitively opine on whether a broadcaster's decision to broadcast6511such programming would violate obligations imposed on broadcast6512licensees under the Act or FCC rules or precedent.6513    If a broadcaster wants guidance about how to comply with its public6514interest obligations, including with respect to the news distortion6515policy, it can look to the obligations imposed under the Act and FCC6516rules and precedent. It also is free to seek guidance or an6517interpretation from the Commission regarding a specific factual6518scenario.6519FCC Independence6520    Question 5. If the President determines that broadcast programming6521content does not abide by the public interest standard or the news6522distortion policy, will you defer to the President's opinion? What if6523the President's opinion departs from FCC's precedent of interpretation?6524    Answer. As a FCC Commissioner, my job is to vote on matters that6525come before the Commission based on facts in the record, FCC precedent,6526and the law. I remain committed to that.6527Tribal Spectrum Windows6528    Question 6. Will the FCC commit to continuing to hold Tribal6529priority windows in future spectrum auctions?6530    Answer. I can commit to reviewing the record in future proceedings6531to determine if a Tribal priority window is in the public interest.65326533    Question 7. Please provide 1) the number of locations associated6534with individual Tribal areas; and 2) an aggregated rollup of the number6535of Tribal locations and Tribal broadband availability nationwide within6536the National Broadband Map, or to incorporate this information into a6537separate Tribal National Broadband Map that includes data on Tribal6538areas only?6539    Answer. This request is best directed to FCC Chairman Carr.65406541    Question 8. Will you direct ONAP to provide educational outreach6542and technical assistance to Tribes to assist them with submitting6543challenges to the National Broadband Map, especially for those Tribes6544that have not submitted challenges?6545    Answer. I support ONAP's continued efforts, consistent with its6546role and available resources, and in collaboration with the Broadband6547Data Task Force, to provide information and technical assistance to6548Tribes regarding the National Broadband Map and the challenge process,6549as part of the FCC's broader goal of ensuring that all Americans,6550including Tribal communities, are accurately reflected and served.6551                                 ______65526553     Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Gary Peters to6554                             Olivia Trusty6555    Question 1. Earlier this year, the FCC requested comments on the6556Bureau of Industry and Security's rule related to connected vehicles6557and connected vehicle technologies, specifically whether and how to add6558certain technologies to the FCC's covered entities list. I strongly6559support the Bureau of Industry and Security's rule and believe we must6560keep Chinese connected and autonomous vehicles and vehicle components6561from entering our market. I believe the FCC must work closely with the6562automotive supply chain to ensure any action it takes in this space6563does not conflict with the BIS rule and achieves our goals of6564protecting our national and economic security.6565    Will you commit to working with my office and the automotive supply6566chain industry as you decide what actions to take on this issue?6567    Answer. Yes.6568                                 ______65696570    Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Tammy Baldwin to6571                             Olivia Trusty6572    Question 1. During the hearing, I referenced the concerning trend6573of the FCC approving mergers immediately after enacting policies6574favored by the Trump administration. Specifically, I highlighted the6575timing of the Paramount Global and Skydance Media merger coming only6576after Paramount agreed to pay the President $16 million to settle a6577frivolous lawsuit and Paramount agreed to change its news editorial6578policies, and the approval of AT&T's purchase of U.S. Cellular's6579wireless license just one day after AT&T terminated their diversity,6580equity, and inclusion policy. Do you feel the perception that companies6581need to make political concessions to the Trump administration6582undermines the independent of the FCC?6583    Answer. My decision-making approach always involves applying the6584law and FCC policy to the facts before me, regardless of the parties6585involved. In the items I vote on, including the Paramount-Skydance6586Merger Order, the full justification for my decision is set forth in6587the item.6588                                 ______65896590    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jacky Rosen to6591                             Olivia Trusty6592    Question 1. What can Congress do to ensure that the U.S. has a6593strong and unified strategy in international communications policy,6594especially as we go into the next World Radio Conference?6595    Answer. In advance of WRC-27, Congress can work to promote6596alignment among public and private sector interests; encourage pre-WRC6597coordination with international allies; and ensure the U.S. delegation6598to the WRC-27 has the resources to support technical and diplomatic6599representation.66006601    Question 2. How does inconsistent spectrum policy damage our6602ability to promote U.S. leadership globally?6603    Answer. A consistent spectrum policy is important for promoting6604U.S. investment and innovation in allocated bands, and due to the6605spectrum provisions in the ``Working Families Tax Cuts Act'' and the6606Presidential Memoranda on ``Winning the 6G Race'', we're well6607positioned to promote U.S. leadership in spectrum policy.66086609    Question 3. How should we promote U.S. leadership on spectrum6610policy globally? What steps should we take to promote American6611innovation and build policy around trusted providers?6612    Answer. To promote U.S. leadership, American innovation, and6613network integrity, the focus should be on the following: ensuring a6614predictable domestic spectrum policy by maintaining FCC auction6615authority and a long-term spectrum pipeline; leading in international6616standard-setting bodies; maintaining strong interagency coordination;6617and developing a regulatory environment that promotes investments in AI6618technologies to increase spectrum efficiency and network security.66196620    Question 4. Earlier this month, I launched the bipartisan Senate6621Wi-Fi Caucus with my colleague, Senator Ricketts. Wi-Fi is a uniquely6622American innovation, allowing spectrum sharing in real time and6623enabling new smarter tech like IoT. The U.S. has long been a leader in6624innovative spectrum uses. How can we build trust and enable more6625efficient uses of spectrum, without compromising critical defense uses?6626    Answer. Artificial intelligence and capabilities, such as6627Integrated Sensing and Communications, or ISAC, can help increase6628spectrum efficiency without compromising Federal spectrum users.66296630    Question 5. What do you see as the future of U.S. spectrum6631innovation? How can we build on the successes of CBRS and other6632spectrum innovations?6633    Answer. The U.S. has long been a leader in innovative uses of6634spectrum and CBRS is a model of that. Putting spectrum to its highest6635and best use and finding opportunities to increase the utility of6636unlicensed spectrum, by accommodating more unlicensed devices, can6637promote more spectrum innovation.66386639    Question 6. Having secure and resilient communication networks is6640critical to our national security. However, I am concerned that recent6641actions taken by the FCC could place these critical systems at risk6642without proper oversight. As Ranking Member on the SASC Cybersecurity6643Subcommittee, I understand the need to be able to react quickly and6644with increased flexibility to cyber threats from our adversaries. How6645can the FCC balance the need for flexibility while ensuring companies6646are improving their cybersecurity posture?6647    Answer. The FCC can balance the need for flexibility in responding6648to emerging cyber threats and ensuring companies are improving their6649cybersecurity posture by engaging in public private partnerships and6650education campaigns to share threat intelligence information and share6651cybersecurity best practices.66526653    Question 7. How can we make sure we take a proactive response6654rather than reactive in securing our networks?6655    Answer. A proactive response to malicious cyber actors includes6656engagement in public private partnerships, education campaigns, whole-6657of-government efforts regarding deterrence, and investments in6658artificial intelligence to automate threat detection and response6659strategies.66606661    Question 8. What milestones, goals, or objectives should the FCC6662have in place to ensure that these providers are making timely and6663meaningful cybersecurity updates to their networks?6664    Answer. Malicious cyber actors are sophisticated and persistent,6665and constantly evolving their tactics to exploit vulnerabilities and6666weaknesses. Providers should remain vigilant, agile, and adaptable in6667responding to these threats, which may require routine or periodic6668updates to a provider's cybersecurity practices, depending on the6669provider's size, risk, and organizational posture.6670                                 ______66716672    Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Ben Ray Lujan to6673                             Olivia Trusty6674    Question 1. In the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004 Congress6675set the national audience reach cap to 39 percent. Congress set this6676limit, not the Federal Communications Commission, yet recently the FCC6677sought comment on whether to modify the national ownership cap. In6678November, President Trump posted on Truth Social said he ``would not be6679happy'' if the FCC lifted the national ownership cap to ``allow the6680Radical Left Networks to `enlarge' ''. Does the FCC or Congress have6681the power to raise the national ownership cap?6682    Answer. Congress certainly has the power to raise the national6683ownership cap, and the Obama FCC concluded that the FCC also has the6684authority to do so. This issue is pending in a 2017 NPRM in which the6685Media Bureau recently refreshed the record, and I look forward to6686reviewing the complete record in reaching any decision.6687                                 ______66886689Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Lisa Blunt Rochester to66906691                             Olivia Trusty6692    Question 1. Commissioner Trusty, you recently spoke about the need6693for the U.S. to keep pace with international telecommunications trends,6694including cybersecurity. Commissioner Trusty, do you believe the FCC6695has taken the appropriate steps to future proof the cybersecurity of6696everyday Americans in an increasingly complex telecommunications6697ecosystem?6698    Answer. The FCC has taken great strides to protect our6699telecommunications ecosystem from malicious cyber threat actors. This6700includes efforts to enhance the supply chain integrity of6701telecommunications components, coordinate with national security6702agencies on emerging threats, and information sharing with6703international allies on network security matters.67046705    Question 2. Is there anything specific you think the FCC must6706implement to protect consumers' cybersecurity in this space?6707    Answer. In the past year, the FCC has adopted a number of6708proceedings to help protect consumers' cybersecurity by improving the6709integrity of the communications supply chain integrity, boosting6710coordination with national security agencies and the private sector,6711and enhancing device and network security.6712                                 ______67136714    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to6715                             Anna M. Gomez6716    Question 1. PRC domestic law and cybersecurity infrastructure opens6717all devices made in the PRC or by PRC companies to the risks of the6718CCP's military civil fusion program, cybersecurity law, and6719counterespionage law, which require certain data be transferred to the6720government and infrastructure to be available to the government in6721times of conflict, regardless of whether it is located in the Mainland6722or abroad. In your view, does this domestic regulation mean that all6723PRC connected devices or PRC devices that transmit data or connect to a6724broader telecommunications infrastructure is at risk of CCP meddling?6725    Answer. The issues you cite highlight the risk that Americans' data6726and access could be compelled from PRC-based companies, including for6727products sold abroad. While not every device may present the same level6728of threat, there is always the potential for coercion or interference6729when a device transmits data, receives updates, or connects into6730broader communications infrastructure. That is why we should approach6731PRC-connected devices with heightened scrutiny and a risk-based6732posture.6733    The FCC can help reduce risk by strengthening the integrity of the6734equipment authorization ecosystem and by giving consumers clearer6735information about baseline cybersecurity. The Commission's bipartisan6736``bad labs'' action is an example of closing a real vulnerability in6737the authorization process by preventing untrustworthy actors from6738exerting control over testing and certification. The Cyber Trust Mark6739is another practical tool designed to promote baseline cybersecurity in6740wireless connected products and to help consumers make informed6741choices. That effort, however, has stalled, and returning to and6742advancing that work would provide consumers with clearer information6743while encouraging stronger cybersecurity practices across the market.67446745    Question 2. The FCC's Covered List includes large PRC6746telecommunications companies like Huawei and ZTE. Given the explosion6747of PRC-made connected home devices that plug into this6748telecommunications infrastructure, should this list expand to include6749connected consumer products like routers, smart TVs, and home security6750systems?6751    Answer. It is worthwhile to consider whether and how the6752Commission's existing tools, including the Covered List, can keep pace6753with the rapid growth of connected consumer products that plug into6754communications networks and handle sensitive personal data. Any such6755consideration should be grounded in clear statutory authority, a strong6756evidentiary record, and an understanding of how these products interact6757with networks and pose security risks.6758    At the same time, not every concern is best addressed through this6759approach. The Cyber Trust Mark was intended to complement other6760national security tools by promoting baseline cybersecurity and6761informed consumer choice, but its delayed implementation by this6762current FCC has postponed those benefits, and the Commission should6763work to get that program back on track.67646765    Question 3. PRC manufacturers often produce devices sold under6766different brand names, making it hard to identify true origin. Or, PRC6767manufacturers engage in ``white labeling''--or manufacturing a product6768that another company then rebrands and sells under a non-PRC name. How6769does the FCC handle equipment authorization when the actual6770manufacturer is obscured?6771    Answer. The Commission relies on accurate certifications, FCC6772recognized testing and certification bodies, and clear identification6773of the responsible party to ensure compliance with its rules. When the6774actual manufacturer is obscured, that undermines transparency and6775raises legitimate concerns about supply chain risk. Strengthening6776oversight of testing and certification, alongside renewed efforts to6777provide consumers with clearer security information through initiatives6778like the Cyber Trust Mark, would help address these challenges in a6779practical and scalable way.67806781    Question 4. When looking at the supply chain around these devices6782and the need for the actual physical OLED and LCD displays and6783components that go into them, there are concerns over the potentially6784lower quality of PRC produced components getting into devices under6785different brand names. Companies like BOE and Tianma being key examples6786with an outsized hold over the global display component supply chain.6787What is the FCC doing to raise awareness and counteract this aspect of6788the connected devices ecosystem?6789    Answer. Concerns about the quality and reliability of components6790used in connected devices, including displays and other key inputs, are6791part of a broader supply chain challenge with implications for security6792and consumer trust. While the FCC does not regulate component6793manufacturing directly, it can play a role by promoting greater6794transparency and cybersecurity assurance at the device level. The Cyber6795Trust Mark was designed to do just that by signaling that a product6796meets baseline security standards, but delays in launching the program6797and the recent withdrawal by its lead administrator after months of6798unexplained scrutiny by this FCC have slowed its impact. Moving forward6799with this initiative would help raise awareness and encourage better6800practices across the connected device ecosystem.68016802    Question 5. Many of the companies across the PRC connected devices6803supply chain like TP-Link, BOE, Hisense, Xiami, TIanma, or TCL, have6804manufacturing facilities capable of multiple purposes beyond connected6805device production. BOE in particular has potential to shift their6806fabrication plants from OLED display production, to potentially6807advanced semiconductor production. How is the FCC thinking through the6808various other lanes of national security that these companies may6809impact? How is the FCC coordinating with the rest of the U.S.6810Government to tackle these concerns as well?6811    Answer. The FCC has long coordinated with other Federal agencies on6812national security matters, and that coordination is essential to6813addressing risks related to supply chains, emerging technologies, and6814foreign influence. The FCC will continue to work closely with6815interagency partners on the broader set of national security challenges6816these technologies present.6817                                 ______68186819   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to6820                             Anna M. Gomez6821    AI. The Trump Administration won't take no for an answer on a6822moratorium on state AI laws without a Federal standard. First, they6823tried to put it in the reconciliation bill, and we stripped it out by a682499-1 vote. Then they tried to attach it to the NDAA. Now they're6825directing agencies like the FCC to attempt to preempt state laws6826through an Executive Order.6827    Instead of trying to preempt laws that protect against AI fraud or6828theft, we need to be protecting consumers. Chairman Carr has been6829skeptical of the FCC's authority over new technologies in the past. In68302024, Chairman Carr said that ``Congress does not operate like a6831sieve--inadvertently spilling grants of new authorities. Congress's6832delegation of authority in these types of cases can no longer be6833implicit, it must be explicit.''68346835    Question 1. Does the FCC have the authority to preempt state AI6836laws under Title I of the Communications Act?6837    Answer. The Communications Act does not provide the Commission with6838express authority to preempt state laws governing artificial6839intelligence. Title I does not contain a general preemption provision,6840and the Commission's ancillary authority is limited to actions that are6841reasonably tied to explicit statutory mandates.6842    Given those constraints, I am skeptical that the FCC has the6843authority to broadly preempt state AI laws under Title I. The6844Commission is seeking comment on this issue, and I look forward to6845reviewing that record. But any assertion of preemption authority would6846require a clear and compelling statutory basis, which does not appear6847to exist today.68486849    Question 2. Is that what Congress intended when it rewrote a6850portion of the Communications Act in 1996, 25 years before ChatGPT was6851released?6852    Answer. When Congress updated the Communications Act in 1996, it6853did not contemplate artificial intelligence as it exists today. The6854statute does not reference AI, machine learning, or algorithmic6855decision-making, and there is no indication that Congress intended to6856grant the FCC authority to broadly preempt state laws governing AI6857technologies.6858    Absent clear congressional direction, the Commission should be6859cautious about asserting nationwide preemption in this area. Decisions6860about displacing state AI laws are more appropriately made by Congress.68616862    Question 3. Does the FCC have the authority to adopt a Federal6863reporting and disclosure standard for AI models?6864    Answer. The FCC has authority to act on Federal reporting and6865disclosure of artificial intelligence within certain narrow areas, just6866as it has exercised its authority in the past under the Communications6867Act, as amended by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, to propose6868increased transparency through disclosure requirements related to6869political advertisements on television and radio. In contrast, adopting6870a broad Federal approach that would preempt state AI laws raises6871serious legal concerns and is a decision best left for Congress.68726873    Local News. Harvard's Shorenstein Center found that broadcast6874stations owned by large ownership groups produced more news at the6875regional or national level rather than locally. On the other hand,6876independent stations produced more news content locally. I am concerned6877that further consolidation could lead to more news production outside6878of the station's community and result in the closure of local6879newsrooms.68806881    Question 1. What is the FCC doing to ensure that local newsrooms6882stay open?6883    Answer. Large corporate parents of local broadcast stations are6884advocating that the FCC raise or waive the Congressionally established6885nationwide audience reach cap (a single ownership group can reach no6886more that 39 percent of the households in the United States) and the6887local ownership cap (a single ownership group can own no more than 26888broadcast stations in a single DMA) to facilitate further consolidation6889based on the misconceptions that the relevant market is the entire6890media ecosystem and that consolidation will allow economies of scale to6891support more local news.6892    The assertion that the relevant market is the entire media6893ecosystem because local broadcasters compete with national digital6894media platforms for advertisers and audience share is an6895oversimplification that ignores the complexity of the broadcast6896ecosystem. The regulatory structure underlying broadcasting is designed6897to, on the one hand, ensure a diversity of viewpoints are represented6898by precluding one entity from dominating the voices available in a6899community and, on the other hand, support a balance of negotiating6900power between large broadcasting networks that produce news and6901entertainment content targeting a national audience and locally6902licensed broadcasting stations that produce news and entertainment6903content that is targeted locally.6904    The structure is further complicated by the impact of consolidation6905on broadcasters' negotiations with Multichannel Video Programming6906Distributers (MVPDs) for retransmission consent payments for the6907distribution of the broadcasters' content. These payments are an6908additional important source of support for free over the air6909programming. The MVPD community asserts that allowing consolidation6910into larger broadcast ownership groups will result in increased6911retransmission consent fees that will be paid by consumers.6912    These arguments further ignore the longstanding policy goals of the6913Commission's media ownership rules that require broadcasters to operate6914in the public interest. The public interest for local broadcasters has6915long been defined as facilitating localism, diversity of viewpoints and6916competition.69176918   Localism means providing programming that serves the6919        interests of the station's community of license;69206921   Diversity of viewpoints means that different broadcast6922        station owners or ownership groups bring such owners'6923        individual priorities in what programming to deliver to their6924        communities of license. It is focused on the absence of common6925        ownership, not any particular viewpoint.69266927   Competition means that having a diversity of viewpoints6928        competing to serve local communities will result in programming6929        that serves the interests of the local community because the6930        broadcasters need to compete for their audience.69316932    The economies of scale broadcasters intend to use to save money6933include, among many things, the following:69346935   Using single studios for broadcast for multiple stations;69366937   Sharing equipment;69386939   Sharing reporters across stations;69406941   Sharing management personnel across stations; and69426943   Stations reporting to executives that are responsible for6944        stations across geographically and demographically varied6945        communities of license. Such management decisions are driven by6946        profitably serving the corporate parent in light of all their6947        stations.69486949    There are no simple answers for how to balance the interests of the6950public in the continued provision of locally generated news with the6951challenges of changes to the media ecosystem. The Commission should be6952examining these issues in their full complexity and working with6953Congress to target changes to further longstanding public interest6954goals.69556956    Broadband Affordability and Universal Service. A broadband6957connection is essential for life today. But for millions of Americans,6958the cost of connectivity is out of reach. Just last year, the6959Affordable Connectivity Program ended, leaving 23 million households6960without the support they needed to get and remain online. Now, families6961in every state and community are struggling to afford the connections6962they need for work, school, health care, banking, and more.69636964    Question 1. What is the FCC's role in ensuring service is6965accessible and affordable?6966    Answer. Since I became a commissioner over two years ago, one of my6967top priorities has been working to close the digital divide and6968ensuring that everyone, everywhere has access to high quality,6969affordable broadband--regardless of income, background, or geography.6970    As outlined in the Communications Act, the duty of the FCC is to6971make available for all people of the United States, ``without6972discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin,6973or sex, a rapid, efficient, Nationwide, and worldwide wire and radio6974communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges.''6975    Access to reliable high-speed Internet is a catalyst for economic6976growth and development. I see investment in broadband as an investment6977in the next generation's ability to learn, in rural communities' access6978to healthcare, and in working families' ability to thrive in an6979increasingly digital world.6980    Moreover, global leadership on AI has been expressed as a clear6981bipartisan priority. For us to be leaders on AI, we must ensure that6982everyone, everywhere in the United States can access affordable6983broadband. We cannot expect to be leaders in this space if we do not6984build a strong digital workforce and equip people with the tools they6985need to develop digital skills.6986    To achieve these goals, the FCC should take initiative in6987addressing accessibility and affordability concerns for consumers.69886989    Universal Service. With the end of programs that aimed to connect6990families at home, like the ACP and Emergency Connectivity Fund (ECF),6991connectivity at community anchor institutions, including schools and6992libraries, is more important than ever before. Libraries in particular6993serve as the most welcoming place for the whole community to learn,6994grow, and seek care.69956996    Question 1. Has the end of ACP and ECF made FCC support for anchor6997institutions through the E-Rate program even more important?6998    Answer. Certainly. Broadband is the infrastructure of opportunity.6999Across the political spectrum, lawmakers have acknowledged the7000existence of the digital divide--the gap between those who have access7001to affordable, reliable broadband and those who do not.7002    For more than 25 years, the FCC's E-Rate Program has helped us7003narrow the digital divide by making telecommunications and information7004services more affordable for schools and libraries. It has connected7005library patrons, empowered teachers, and equipped students with digital7006skills.7007    The ACP and ECF programs previously provided broadband support to7008low-income households. Since funding for these programs has lapsed,7009families have had to make tough decisions like deciding whether to buy7010groceries or to pay their Internet bill. In the absence of ACP and ECF,7011the FCC's long-standing E-Rate program's support for anchor7012institutions became all the more important.7013    The Commission has long held that as technology changes, E-Rate7014funding needs to expand to cover new services, including those that7015provide off-site connectivity. Recognizing this need, the FCC under the7016last administration wisely chose to allow the use of E-Rate funding for7017hotspot lending to allow students and library patrons to use broadband7018at home and for Wi-Fi on school buses to allow children to complete7019their homework and continue learning on their commute to and from7020school.7021    Tragically, in September, the FCC rolled back funding for hotspots7022and Wi-Fi on school buses. The decision ignored our Nation's7023educational landscape today and the need to equip students with digital7024skills for the future. Failing to provide this type of support to7025anchor institutions will make it harder for students to learn, harder7026for libraries to serve their community, and harder for us to close the7027digital divide.7028                                 ______70297030   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to7031                             Anna M. Gomez7032    Question 1. In your testimony you said, ``Whether in broadcasting7033or streaming, media consolidation should not erode the independence of7034the press or diminish the voices of local communities.'' What role7035should the need to preserve local journalism play in evaluating7036proposed mergers under the FCC's public interest standard?7037    Answer. The FCC should consider the harms that will likely arise as7038a consequence of a merger, including the impact on local journalism.7039    Large corporate parents of local broadcast stations are advocating7040that the FCC raise or waive the Congressionally established nationwide7041audience reach cap (a single ownership group can reach no more that 397042percent of the households in the United States) and the local ownership7043cap (a single ownership group can own no more than 2 broadcast stations7044in a single DMA) to facilitate further consolidation based on the7045misconceptions that the relevant market is the entire media ecosystem7046and that consolidation will allow economies of scale to support more7047local news.7048    The assertion that the relevant market is the entire media7049ecosystem because local broadcasters compete with national digital7050media platforms for advertisers and audience share is an7051oversimplification that ignores the complexity of the broadcast7052ecosystem. The regulatory structure underlying broadcasting is designed7053to, on the one hand, ensure a diversity of viewpoints are represented7054by precluding one entity from dominating the voices available in a7055community and, on the other hand, support a balance of negotiating7056power between large broadcasting networks that produce news and7057entertainment content targeting a national audience and locally7058licensed broadcasting stations that produce news and entertainment7059content that is targeted locally.7060    The structure is further complicated by the impact of consolidation7061on broadcasters' negotiations with Multichannel Video Programming7062Distributers (MVPDs) for retransmission consent payments for the7063distribution of the broadcasters' content. These payments are an7064additional important source of support for free over the air7065programming. The MVPD community asserts that allowing consolidation7066into larger broadcast ownership groups will result in increased7067retransmission consent fees that will be paid by consumers.7068    These arguments further ignore the longstanding policy goals of the7069Commission's media ownership rules that require broadcasters to operate7070in the public interest. The public interest for local broadcasters has7071long been defined as facilitating localism, diversity of viewpoints and7072competition.70737074   Localism means providing programming that serves the7075        interests of the station's community of license;70767077   Diversity of viewpoints means that different broadcast7078        station owners or ownership groups bring such owners'7079        individual priorities in what programming to deliver to their7080        communities of license. It is focused on the absence of common7081        ownership, not any particular viewpoint.70827083   Competition means that having a diversity of viewpoints7084        competing to serve local communities will result in programming7085        that serves the interests of the local community because the7086        broadcasters need to compete for their audience.70877088    The economies of scale broadcasters intend to use to save money7089include, among many things, the following:70907091   Using single studios for broadcast for multiple stations;70927093   Sharing equipment;70947095   Sharing reporters across stations;70967097   Sharing management personnel across stations; and70987099   Stations reporting to executives that are responsible for7100        stations across geographically and demographically varied7101        communities of license. Such management decisions are driven by7102        profitably serving the corporate parent in light of all their7103        stations.71047105    The Commission therefore must ensure that any proposed mergers7106further the Commission's goals of ensuring localism, diversity of7107viewpoints, and competition.71087109    Question 2. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law included over $147110billion for the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), which provided7111subsidies for Internet service to low-income households, helping more7112Americans get connected. The ACP ended in June 2024 due to a lack of7113funding. What reforms should the USF working group implement to make7114sure affordability remains a top priority?7115    Answer. Affordability has been one of my top priorities since I7116became a Commissioner over two years ago. The Universal Service Fund7117(USF) is a key part of ensuring both access and affordability. The USF7118has become all the more important in the absence of ACP funding.7119However, the USF must be reformed to ensure long-term sustainability of7120the fund and its programs.7121    USF reform should prioritize expanding the existing Lifeline7122support program. While Lifeline provides a crucial benefit for7123consumers, $9 a month is insufficient for families struggling to afford7124broadband. This subsidy should be increased to match the ACP's previous7125offering of $30 per month per household. I also strongly believe that7126any changes to the contributions base should not increase costs for7127consumers.7128    Another technical reform for the program should eliminate the7129requirement for broadband providers to be deemed Eligible7130Telecommunications Carriers in order to participate in the Lifeline7131program. The ACP and ECF did not include this requirement, which7132enabled more providers to participate in the program.7133    Importantly, Congress should be the one to reform the USF. I was7134encouraged by the proposals put forward last Congress by the7135bipartisan, bicameral USF working group. I stand ready to provide7136technical assistance to this Congress, and thank you for your7137leadership on this important issue.71387139    Question 3. What can we do to make our broadband data collection7140more efficient, including by ensuring that the Commission is addressing7141legitimate challenges to the broadband maps?7142    Answer. To win the AI race and give every American the tools they7143need to succeed in a more inclusive digital economy, we must have7144accurate and reliable data showing where broadband is and is not7145available nationwide. Over the last few years and throughout multiple7146Administrations, the FCC has worked diligently to implement the7147Broadband DATA Act, resulting in the most granular broadband7148availability data in our history.7149    In the past, the Commission relied on census block-level reporting,7150which assumed that if even only a single location in a census block was7151served, the entire block was served. That approach overstated7152deployment and made it difficult to identify communities that were7153truly unserved or underserved. Today, using the authority Congress7154provided, the FCC collects broadband availability data on a location-7155by-location basis and publicly discloses it through the National7156Broadband Map.7157    The current framework also allows state, local, and Tribal7158governments, as well as consumers and other stakeholders with on-the-7159ground knowledge, to challenge reported data. The Commission regularly7160updates the map to reflect these challenges and supplements this7161process with audits and verification efforts to improve accuracy.7162Because this is an iterative process, the map continues to improve over7163time.7164    At the same time, the FCC has learned important lessons through7165this implementation and is always seeking opportunities to make the7166data collection and the challenge processes more efficient, more user-7167friendly, and more responsive to legitimate concerns raised by7168communities. That is why the Commission is seeking comment on potential7169improvements to its mapping, challenge, audit, and verification7170processes. I look forward to reviewing that record.7171    Accurate broadband maps are an ongoing effort, and I urge Congress7172to ensure the FCC has the resources it needs to address legitimate7173challenges and continue improving the data that underpins our broadband7174policy decisions.7175                                 ______71767177    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to7178                             Anna M. Gomez7179FCC Public Interest Authority7180    Question 1. What is the FCC's standard for evaluating programming7181under the public interest standard and news distortion policy?7182    Answer. Any actions that the FCC takes based on broadcaster7183programming must be grounded in the First Amendment and Section 326 of7184the Communications Act, which prohibits the FCC from censoring7185broadcasters.7186    The Commission has long construed its public interest standard to7187include consideration of whether the action at issue (e.g., broadcast7188license renewal or adoption of rules applicable to broadcasters)7189furthers localism, viewpoint diversity, and competition.7190    A violation of the Commission's news distortion policy ``must7191involve a significant event and not merely a minor or incidental aspect7192of the news report.'' In weighing the constitutionality of the policy,7193courts have recognized that the policy ``makes a crucial distinction7194between deliberate distortion and mere inaccuracy or difference of7195opinion.'' As a result, broadcasters are only subject to enforcement if7196it can be proven that they have deliberately distorted a factual news7197report. Expressions of opinion or errors stemming from mistakes are not7198actionable.7199    I released the following news distortion policy statement: Press7200Statement--Commissioner Gomez on CBS Fishing Expedition.docx72017202    Question 2. What conditions would trigger the FCC to investigate or7203take action against the speech of comedians, satirists, or commentators7204under the public interest standard or news distortion policy?7205    Answer. The FCC is prohibited by law (Section 326 of the7206Communications Act) from engaging in censorship or infringing on First7207Amendment rights. Those protected rights include, but are not limited7208to, a broadcaster's selection and presentation of news or commentary.7209    The FCC has authority to investigate when a broadcaster:72107211   Violates the Commission's news distortion policy. News7212        distortion ``must involve a significant event and not merely a7213        minor or incidental aspect of the news report.'' In weighing7214        the constitutionality of the policy, courts have recognized7215        that the policy ``makes a crucial distinction between7216        deliberate distortion and mere inaccuracy or difference of7217        opinion.'' As a result, broadcasters are only subject to7218        enforcement if it can be proven that they have deliberately7219        distorted a factual news report. Expressions of opinion or7220        errors stemming from mistakes are not actionable.72217222   Violates the Commission's rules prohibiting obscene or7223        limiting indecent or profane programming. It is a violation of7224        Federal law to air obscene programming at any time. It is also7225        a violation of Federal law to broadcast indecent or profane7226        programming during certain hours. The FCC defines indecent7227        speech as material that, in context, depicts or describes7228        sexual or excretory organs or activities in terms patently7229        offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for7230        the broadcast medium.72317232   Violates the Commission's children's programming rules. The7233        Children's Television Act requires each U.S. broadcast7234        television station to air programming specifically designed to7235        serve the educational and informational needs of children. It7236        also limits the amount of time broadcasters, cable operators,7237        and satellite providers can devote to advertisements during7238        children's programs.72397240   Violates the Commission's sponsorships identification rules.7241        When a broadcast station transmits any matter for which money,7242        service, or other valuable consideration is paid or promised7243        to, or charged or accepted by such station, Federal law and FCC7244        rules require the broadcaster to announce, at the time of the7245        broadcast, that such matter is sponsored, paid for, or7246        furnished and the identification of the sponsor.72477248   Violates the Commission's political programming rules. The7249        FCC's political programming and campaign advertising rules7250        generally govern the circumstances under which broadcast7251        stations and other regulatees air political-related7252        advertisements. Broadcast stations, cable system operators, DBS7253        providers, and SDARS licensees are required to maintain public7254        inspection files, of which political files are a part.72557256    Question 3. If there is evidence that FCC action, or the threat of7257FCC action, towards broadcast television impacts programming decisions7258on non-broadcast media through financial ties between companies, would7259you consider this to be censorship?7260    Answer. Yes. I am concerned that this FCC's unprecedented threats7261against broadcasters are already suppressing free speech by sending the7262message that media companies, including non-broadcast licensee7263affiliated entities, hosting content critical of the Administration7264will invite government retaliation. That is censorship and not what7265America stands for.72667267    Question 4. Please describe whether the FCC would consider the7268following scenarios on broadcast television as being in violation of7269the public interest standard or news distortion policy. If you cannot7270comment on these scenarios, please explain how programs can receive7271clarity about how to abide by the FCC's public interest standard and7272news distortion policy:72737274    a. A comedian, commentator, or satirist insults the President in a7275manner that is not obscene, profane, or indecent.7276    i. Answer. No, this is protected speech.72777278    b. A comedian, commentator, or satirist makes offensive statements7279pertaining to violence or assault.7280    i. Answer. No, this is protected speech.72817282    c. An artist has a performance that could be considered an insult7283to the President's policies or political positions.7284    i. Answer. No, this is protected speech.72857286    d. A politician states that a murder victim ``deserved'' their7287death because of their hatred for said politician.7288    i. Answer. No, this is protected speech.7289FCC Independence7290    Question 5. If the President determines that broadcast programming7291content does not abide by the public interest standard or the news7292distortion policy, will you defer to the President's opinion? What if7293the President's opinion departs from FCC's precedent of interpretation?7294    Answer. No. I swore and oath to support, defend and bear true faith7295to the U.S. Constitution and my actions as a Commissioner will be7296consistent with that oath.7297Tribal Spectrum Windows7298    Question 6. Will the FCC commit to continuing to hold Tribal7299priority windows in future spectrum auctions?7300    Answer. I support holding Tribal Licensing Windows in future7301auctions. The Federal government's Trust Responsibility to Tribal7302Nations is a legal obligation established by the Constitution, Tribal7303Treaties, and more than a hundred years of Supreme Court precedent.\1\7304As part of the Federal government, the FCC bears this responsibility.7305---------------------------------------------------------------------------7306    \1\ See U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 3; Cherokee Nation v.7307Georgia, 30 U.S. 1, 16 (1831); Seminole Nation v. United States, 3167308U.S. 286, 296-97 (1942); See generally, Cohen's Handbook of Federal7309Indian Law Sec. 5.04(3) (Nell Jessup Newton ed., 2012).7310---------------------------------------------------------------------------7311    Pursuant to this responsibility, the FCC engages with Tribal7312Nations and Native Hawaiians on a government-to-government basis, a7313practice known as the Trust Relationship, and is charged with carrying7314out the law in a manner that supports Tribal sovereignty.7315    With regard to spectrum policy, the unique legal framework and7316relationship between the Federal government and Tribal Nations requires7317us to ensure that Tribal Nations, including Native Hawaiians, have a7318fair and meaningful opportunity to secure spectrum rights essential to7319their economic development, public safety, and cultural preservation.7320With respect to spectrum access over Native Hawaiian Homelands, the FCC7321granted a waiver of the ``eligible entity'' requirement that allowed7322the Department of Hawaiian Homelands to obtain licenses during the 2.57323GHz Tribal Priority Window.7324    I believe that holding a Tribal Licensing Window is consistent with7325and acknowledges our Trust Responsibility, and I support holding such7326windows in future auctions. A Tribal Licensing Window can occur before7327or concurrently with an auction because the tools that we would utilize7328to facilitate such a window have already been created by the7329Commission.7330    Furthermore, and importantly, Tribal Licensing Windows help us7331close the digital divide and extend connectivity to the least served7332areas in the United States such as Tribal Lands. Absent a Tribal7333Licensing Window, Tribal Lands become part of larger license service7334areas and are often the last areas to see service, if at all. But with7335a Tribal Licensing Window, Tribal Nations get access to a license7336limited to the boundaries of their Tribal Lands which allows them to7337begin providing connectivity to residents rather than being forced to7338wait for a carrier to develop a business case to do so.73397340    Question 7. Please provide 1) the number of locations associated7341with individual Tribal areas; and 2) an aggregated rollup of the number7342of Tribal locations and Tribal broadband availability nationwide within7343the National Broadband Map, or to incorporate this information into a7344separate Tribal National Broadband Map that includes data on Tribal7345areas only?7346    Answer. I understand that the Chairman's office is providing7347materials responsive to this question. I would be glad to assist your7348office with any follow up questions on this material.73497350    Question 8. Will you direct ONAP to provide educational outreach7351and technical assistance to Tribes to assist them with submitting7352challenges to the National Broadband Map, especially for those Tribes7353that have not submitted challenges?7354    Answer. The Office of Native Affairs and Policy (ONAP) is7355responsible for planning and leading outreach to Tribal Nations and7356organizations at the Federal Communications Commission. The goal of7357such outreach is to increase Tribal Nation awareness of and7358participation in the FCC's proceedings and programs, such as the7359National Broadband Map, which ensures that Native views and interests7360are accounted for in the decision-making process. I support ONAP7361providing educational outreach and technical assistance to Tribal7362Nations in order to encourage their participation in the National7363Broadband Map, including assistance with submitting challenges to the7364map. I believe this is a prime example of the value and role of ONAP at7365the FCC.7366                                 ______73677368    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Gary Peters to7369                             Anna M. Gomez7370    Question 1. Earlier this year, the FCC requested comments on the7371Bureau of Industry and Security's rule related to connected vehicles7372and connected vehicle technologies, specifically whether and how to add7373certain technologies to the FCC's covered entities list. I strongly7374support the Bureau of Industry and Security's rule and believe we must7375keep Chinese connected and autonomous vehicles and vehicle components7376from entering our market. I believe the FCC must work closely with the7377automotive supply chain to ensure any action it takes in this space7378does not conflict with the BIS rule and achieves our goals of7379protecting our national and economic security.7380    Will you commit to working with my office and the automotive supply7381chain industry as you decide what actions to take on this issue?7382    Answer. I am committed to working closely with your office and with7383the automotive supply chain industry as the Federal Communications7384Commission considers this issue, particularly given the serious7385national security and consumer privacy risks that can arise from7386connected vehicle technologies tied to China.7387    Protecting Americans' sensitive data and safeguarding our7388communications and transportation ecosystems requires close7389coordination with Federal partners, including the Bureau of Industry7390and Security, and careful engagement with industry to ensure actions7391are effective and do not conflict with existing rules.7392    These challenges transcend party lines, and I believe our approach7393to national and economic security, especially where consumer privacy is7394at stake, should continue to be bipartisan and grounded in7395collaboration across government and industry.7396                                 ______73977398   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Baldwin to7399                             Anna M. Gomez7400    Question 1. In 2021, Congress enacted the Infrastructure Investment7401and Jobs Act which created ``broadband labels,'' similar to food7402nutrition labels, that would allow consumers to quickly understand the7403costs and services provided. However, in October, the FCC adopted7404proposals to reverse several elements of the ``broadband label''7405requirements. Can you walk us through why you objected to these7406proposals and what approach you believe the Commission should have7407taken?7408    Answer. The broadband labels are about empowering consumers. The7409goal of the labels is to provide critical information to consumers to7410help them understand their Internet bill and service, thus empowering7411them to make informed choices about the services they buy. But in7412October 2025, the Commission proposed to remove several requirements7413that provide transparency.7414    First, the FCC proposed to undo the requirement that service7415providers read labels to customers that shop for broadband over the7416phone. The Commission proposed to do this by redefining the meaning of7417``point of sale'' to exclude phone calls. In the 2022 Broadband Labels7418Order, the Commission defined ``point of sale'' as ``both ISP websites7419and any other channels through which their service is sold, including7420ISP-owned retail locations, third-party owned retail locations, and7421over the phone.'' \2\ That definition acknowledges the reality that7422some consumers looking for broadband service do not currently have it7423and thus rely on phone calls to find information about potential7424service plans. The practical result of the change the Commission7425proposed is that if a consumer calls a broadband service provider to7426ask about what is included in the cost of broadband Internet access7427service in their area, the company would no longer be required to7428provide the details to which they would have access via the label7429because the FCC believes sales do not occur over telephone calls.7430---------------------------------------------------------------------------7431    \2\ 2022 Broadband Label Order, 13714, para. 88.7432---------------------------------------------------------------------------7433    The Commission also proposed to eliminate the requirement that7434providers itemize fees that they choose to pass through to customers.7435These are fees that broadband providers are not required to pass on to7436customers, but they choose to add to customers' bills so they can7437collect them without including them in their marketed price. With this7438proposed change, the FCC would allow companies to no longer explain7439these fees, line by line, or disclose them in detail, thus reducing7440price transparency for consumers.7441    In the October NPRM, the FCC also proposed to eliminate the7442requirement that companies display broadband labels on customers'7443online account portals. This matters because at the time the NPRM was7444adopted, a broadband label is only available to consumers in two ways:7445at the ``point of sale'' when they are shopping for broadband service,7446and via an online account portal once the consumer has become the7447customer of a broadband provider that offers online account portals.7448Notably, a broadband label is not required to be displayed on a7449customer's monthly bill.\3\ I believe that if this proposal is adopted,7450much of the information that Congress wanted to ensure consumers could7451access to make fully informed decisions about the cost of their7452broadband service would no longer be available to them via their online7453customer portal.7454---------------------------------------------------------------------------7455    \3\ 2022 Broadband Label Order, 13717, para. 98.7456---------------------------------------------------------------------------7457    And finally, the FCC proposed to no longer require that a company7458provide its customers the label in a language other than English even7459if the provider marketed the service to that customer in a language7460other than English. This means that companies that have sought out and7461convinced customers to choose their service in Spanish, French,7462Vietnamese, or any language other than English would no longer have to7463provide this important consumer information about the service their7464customers are paying for, in that language. For this proposal, the FCC7465did not even explain why it was necessary or at the very least not7466harmful to consumers.7467    If these proposals were to be adopted, the label would only be7468available to consumers at the point of sale which would no longer7469include purchases made over the phone; would no longer be available to7470consumers via their online customer portal; would not disclose every7471fee that a broadband provider chooses to pass through to customers; and7472would no longer be available in a language other than English even when7473the provider marketed the service in that language. I opposed these7474proposals because I believe that they are antithetical to transparency,7475consumer protection, and the spirit of the law that Congress directed7476us to implement.7477    Instead of scaling back the information that consumers already7478receive, the Commission could have focused on making the labels more7479accessible to consumers--are they easy to find? Are they buried deep7480inside a company's website? I believe that information is power, and7481that the FCC plays an important role empowering consumers with the7482information provided in the broadband labels.7483                                 ______74847485  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to7486                             Anna M. Gomez7487    Question 1. The October decision to gut the Martha Wright-Reed Just7488and Reasonable Communications Act will increase the rates paid by7489incarcerated people and their families by up to 83 percent compared to7490the 2024 final rule. In fact, more than three quarters of prisons7491across the United States were already in compliance with the 2024 rate7492caps required under the law, meaning that most prisons can and do7493provide services under the 2024 rate cap. The FCC's reason for this was7494that the 2024 final rule created ``unintended consequences.''74957496    a. Can you outline any facts supporting this vague threat of7497undefined ``unintended consequences''?7498    Answer. The facts were slim. As far as I could discern from the7499record of the proceeding, the Commission heard from two IPCS providers7500that the 2024 rate caps resulted in reduced access to revenue and the7501safety and security measures that providers offer to correctional7502facilities, which left some prisons considering stopping the provision7503of IPCS.\4\ But to be clear, the 2025 FCC Order does not cite to any7504incidents demonstrating unsafe conditions at correctional facilities as7505a result of the 2024 rate caps. Instead, the Commission relied on7506providers' claims of isolated facilities warning that they would not be7507able to pay for safety and security measures for IPCS services.7508---------------------------------------------------------------------------7509    \4\ Letter from Michael Pryor, Counsel for Securus Technologies,7510LLC, and Marcus Trathen, Counsel for Pay Tel, Inc., to Marlene H.7511Dortch, Secretary, FCC, WC Docket Nos. 23-62 and 12-375 (filed Apr. 3,75122025) (Securus and Pay Tel Apr. 3, 2025 Ex Parte).7513---------------------------------------------------------------------------7514    The 2025 Order cites a letter that points to a single facility in7515Arkansas that reported terminating access to IPCS--the Baxter County7516Sheriff's Office, which posted this decision on February 25, 2025 on7517its website.\5\ Additionally, in that same letter, Pay Tel asserts it7518``was forced to cease IPCS services to four small jails in Arizona and7519New Mexico,'' and Securus asserts it was ``forced to end service to7520three smaller facilities for economic reasons,'' without specifying the7521location.\6\ Finally, both providers point to statements made by a7522North Carolina Sheriff and the Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers7523Association that budgetary constraints in their jails would ``lead to a7524reduction in service.'' \7\ That is all the evidence provided.7525---------------------------------------------------------------------------7526    \5\ Securus and Pay Tel Apr. 3, 2025 Ex Parte, at 3. See also John7527Montgomery, Inmate Phone System Will Not Be in Use After March 30th7528(Feb. 25, 2025), https://www.baxtercounty7529sheriff.com/press-releases/inmate-phone-system-will-not-be-in-use-7530after-march-30th.7531    \6\ Securus and Pay Tel Apr. 3, 2025 Ex Parte, at 4.7532    \7\ Securus and Pay Tel Apr. 3, 2025 Ex Parte, at 3.7533---------------------------------------------------------------------------7534    This slim evidence is belied by the fact that, by one estimate, 767535percent of prison systems across the country had already been in7536compliance with the 2024 rate caps, and only three states -Florida,7537Kentucky, and Oklahoma--have rates above the interim rate caps the7538Commission adopted in the 2025 FCC Order.\8\ This means that the7539majority of the prisons in the country can and do provide IPCS services7540within the 2024 rate caps.7541---------------------------------------------------------------------------7542    \8\ Letter from Bianca Tylek, Executive Director, Worth Rises, to7543Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (filed Sept. 15, 2025).75447545    b. Would you characterize the rates set by the 2024 rule as just7546and reasonable to families of incarcerated people and telecom7547providers?7548    Answer. I believe the rate caps set in the 2024 Order were just and7549reasonable to both the families of incarcerated peoples and IPCS7550providers.75517552    c. Can you explain why you strongly opposed and voted against7553Chairman Carr's order that violates clearly defined statutory7554requirements governing the implementation timeline for my Marth Wright-7555Reed Just and Reasonable Communications Act?7556    Answer. The October 2025 Order claims that the FCC lacked7557sufficient data to support the decisions made in 2024, and yet without7558receiving additional or new data, the FCC decided to grant higher rate7559caps and provide additional benefits such as a two-cent additive and an7560inflation factor to the monopoly companies that have provided the7561supposedly insufficient data. The 2025 Order allows IPCS providers to7562recover costs that have nothing to do with making the calls, which7563violates the Martha Wright Reed Act.75647565    d. Do you know how old the survey was used that justified an7566additional two-cent-per-minute additive?7567    Answer. To the best of my knowledge, the survey is over 10 years7568old as it was conducted in 2015.75697570    e. Did the survey collect data from prisons, or solely jails?7571    Answer. To the best of my knowledge, the survey included data7572solely about jails.75737574    Question 2. In 2022 I was proud to lead the Senate to a unanimous7575vote in support of the Martha Wright Reed Act to lower predatory rates7576for phone and video calls with incarcerated people. Last year the FCC7577acted, as directed, to adopt rules implementing that law. The record7578showed that loved ones calling people in prisons, for example, would7579pay 6 cents per minute for calls.7580    You--and Chairman Brendan Carr--voted for that decision. While7581Chairman Carr expressed concern over whether very small jails required7582different rates, he nevertheless both voted for the 2024 rule and when7583the FCC's unanimous decision was challenged in court, directed his7584General Counsel defend the rule--resulting in Chairman Carr's General7585Counsel, ironically, filing an extremely strong brief defending the7586FCC's decision in April.7587    Then, suddenly, on June 30, 2025, FCC staff suspended all the rules7588implementing the Martha Wright Reed Just and Reasonable Communications7589Act without any valid reason, or even an explanation. This sudden,7590unexplained surrender was perplexing and surprising--since not a single7591industry filing submitted before the June 30, 2025, ruling asked for7592such a dramatic change.7593    Chairman Carr's spineless surrender foreshadowed his flip-flop in7594reversing the FCC's position on the litigation--months after directing7595his General Counsel to draft and file a strong brief defending the FCC.7596Then, Chairman Carr ordered the FCC to notify the Federal circuit court7597that the FCC would adopt a new order, and Chairman Carr promised to7598share the draft proposed order with the court when it was released to7599the public.7600    However, four days before the draft order was released to the7601public, Chairman Carr issued a press release that included quotes from7602outside organizations.76037604    a. Are you troubled that the FCC Chairman appears to be engaging in7605undisclosed contact with outside stakeholders that have key equities7606regarding pending FCC orders, and that this contact appears to involve7607Chairman Carr improperly sharing information with parties appearing7608before the agency?7609    Answer. I am not aware of any undisclosed contact. To protect the7610fairness of FCC proceedings and ensure that FCC decisions are not7611influenced by impermissible off-the-record communications, the FCC's ex7612parte rules require stakeholders to disclose their communications with7613agency staff directed to the merits or outcome of a proceeding.\9\7614---------------------------------------------------------------------------7615    \9\ See FCC, Ex Parte Resources (Jan. 5, 2026), https://7616www.fcc.gov/proceedings-actions/ex-parte/general/ex-parte-resources.7617---------------------------------------------------------------------------7618    An ex parte is ``a communication directed to the merits or outcome7619of a proceeding that, if written, is not served on all of the parties7620to the proceeding and, if oral, is made without giving all the parties7621to the proceeding advance notice and an opportunity to be present.''7622\10\7623---------------------------------------------------------------------------7624    \10\ Id.7625---------------------------------------------------------------------------7626    In ``Permit-but-disclose'' proceedings, such as the IPCS rate caps7627proceeding, ex parte presentations to Commission decision-making7628personnel are permissible but subject to certain disclosure7629requirements such as the requirement that a copy of written7630presentations and a summary of oral presentations must be filed in the7631record. Additionally,76327633   Copies of written presentations or summaries of oral7634        presentations must generally be filed no later than two7635        business days after the presentation.\11\7636---------------------------------------------------------------------------7637    \11\ 47 C.F.R. Sec. 1.1206(b); See also FCC, How to File a Notice7638of an Ex Parte Presentation (Jan. 5, 2026), https://www.fcc.gov/7639reports-research/guides/how-file-notice-ex-parte-presentation.76407641   Copies and summaries should be filed electronically using7642        the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS).\12\7643---------------------------------------------------------------------------7644    \12\ Id.76457646   The summaries of oral presentations must list all persons7647        present and describe the substance of the new data or arguments7648        presented (or provide a citation to prior written filings7649        containing the data or arguments) and not merely list the7650        subjects discussed. Generally, more than a one or two sentence7651        description is required.\13\7652---------------------------------------------------------------------------7653    \13\ 47 C.F.R. Sec. 1.1206(b)(2); See also FCC, How to File a7654Notice of an Ex Parte Presentation (Jan. 5, 2026), https://www.fcc.gov/7655reports-research/guides/how-file-notice-ex-parte-presentation.76567657    b. Has Chairman Carr provided you a clear and honest explanation of7658how private actors with business before the FCC were informed of the7659Chairman's plans and actions--even before the circuit court reviewing7660the FCC's 2024 rule was notified of Chairman Carr's flip-flop7661surrender?7662    Answer. I have not had any conversations about this with Chairman7663Carr.76647665    c. Given Chairman Carr's current belief--which repudiates his own7666prior beliefs when serving as a Commissioner--that then-Commissioner7667Carr was wrong when he passionately and forcefully defended the7668importance of the FCC maintaining its independence as an independent7669Federal agency, do you believe that Chairman Carr coordinated his7670actions with political appointees at the White House or the U.S.7671Department of Justice?7672    Answer. The FCC was created by Congress as an independent, expert7673agency to implement communications law. However, an executive order7674released on February 18, 2025, claims to eliminate the FCC's7675independence and directs the agency to ``submit for review all proposed7676and final significant regulatory actions to the Office of Information7677and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the Executive Office of the7678President before publication in the Federal Register.''76797680    Question 3. This Committee's Chair, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, has7681been very critical of the FCC's decision to take actions at the Bureau7682level, which appears designed to avoid judicial review and sidestep the7683regular order of business.7684    In June 2025, the FCC's Wireline Bureau acted in just this manner,7685overturning a full Commission order which implemented legislation7686adopted unanimously in the Senate and overwhelmingly in the U.S. House7687of Representatives.76887689    a. Are you considered that Chairman Carr is empowering unelected7690and unappointed staff at the bureau level to block and overturn FCC7691rules necessary to ensure compliance with Federal law?7692    Answer. In this instance, the Bureau waived the rules established7693by the full Commission in 2024. It is not uncommon for a Bureau to act7694on delegated authority, at the direction of a Chair. That is because7695the volume of decisions that the FCC must make in order to implement7696the law is vast and it would become prohibitive for the full Commission7697to gather to vote on every decision. However, a Bureau cannot make new7698or novel decisions even on delegated authority. A Bureau implements the7699decisions that the full Commission has made, but does not have the7700authority to make new decisions. Similarly, a Bureau cannot reverse the7701decisions on which the full FCC voted. In this instance, the Bureau, at7702the direction of the Chair, waived enforcement of the 2024 rules, but7703eventually it was the full FCC that decided to reverse the rule. I7704dissented from this reversal.77057706    b. Did Chairman Carr explain to the other Commissioners whether he7707directed the Wireline Bureau to take this action?7708    Answer. My office received notice less than 24 hours before the7709Bureau's decision was released.77107711    c. Are you troubled that Chairman Carr may abuse bureau level7712action to conduct major actions, such as merger approvals, in a7713secretive manner that undermines transparency and bypasses full7714Commission processes, policies and procedures?7715    Answer. While it is common for a Bureau to act on delegated7716authority at the direction of a Chair, a Bureau cannot make new or7717novel decisions or reverse the decisions the full FCC has made. A7718Bureau's role is to implement the full Commission's decisions. However,7719I am concerned that a Bureau's waiver of a rule posits a hurdle for7720stakeholders seeking recourse in court. Stakeholders can only seek7721review of a final Commission decision. Stakeholders cannot go to court7722to seek judicial review of a bureau order waiving a rule because itis7723not a final agency decision. This is a concern with bureau level7724decisions in the merger context as well.77257726    d. Have you requested that Chairman Carr ensure the FCC provides7727the parties impacted by his reconsideration of the FCC's compliance7728with the Martha Wright-Reed Just and Reasonable Communications Act,7729with due process, including access to judicial review of the bureau7730level actions that reverse full Commission decisions?7731    Answer. All stakeholders should have full access to judicial review7732and recourse through our court system. I am concerned that this7733Administration's use of delegated authority is leaving parties without7734recourse because they will have to wait for an agency to make a final7735decision on their requests, a process that can take years. Inaction can7736lead to a delay on accessing judicial review. And justice delayed is7737justice denied.77387739    Question 4. I am concerned that Chairman Carr has only paid lip-7740service to ending the pernicious practice of kickbacks or site7741commissions in the procurement of contracts for carceral facilities.7742For example, while I welcomed the FCC barring site commission payments,7743Chairman Carr paired this action with authorizing a new fee that7744appears to effectively be a site commission by another name.7745    Answer. In addition to increasing per minute rates, Chairman Carr7746added two cents per minute to every phone and video call in the7747country. Supposedly these fees are to reimburse facilities for costs,7748but Chairman Carr failed to require providers submit evidence7749confirming the provider incurs costs necessitating reimbursement7750through a de facto site commission fee.77517752    a. Do you share my alarm that Chairman Carr's new fee may result in7753facilities being reimbursed for costs that never actually occurred?7754    Answer. Yes, I do.77557756    b. Can you elaborate on the threat of waste, fraud and consumer7757abuse that will likely result from forcing Americans to pay fees7758authorized under the pretext of reimbursing facilities for7759unsubstantiated costs that lack documentation?7760    Answer. I am concerned that the October 2025 Order will result in7761adding costs to the IPCS rate caps for functions that have nothing to7762do with the provision of IPCS. In 2024, the Commission allowed costs7763for CALEA compliance and Communications Security Services to be7764incorporated into the rate caps.\14\ In the 2025 Order, the FCC7765expanded the types of costs that providers can recover from the7766families of incarcerated persons and included five additional7767categories: Law Enforcement Support Services, Communication Recording7768Services, Communication Monitoring Services, Voice Biometric Services,7769and Other Safety and Security Measures.7770---------------------------------------------------------------------------7771    \14\ 2024 IPCS Order, 39 FCC Rcd at 7825-7826, para. 3397772---------------------------------------------------------------------------7773    Based on information provided by IPCS providers themselves, the Law7774Enforcement Category includes expenses for ``search warrant7775processing'' and ``FOIA request processing.'' \15\ The Communications7776Recording Services Category includes expenses for ``storing recorded7777communications, transcribing such recordings, and converting recordings7778into digital formats to support investigation and litigation7779activities.'' \16\ And the Communications Monitoring Services Category7780is now predominantly ``used to aid investigations related to detention7781facilities,'' ``aid corrections and law enforcement agencies in7782investigation and litigation activities,'' and ``provide for skilled7783investigators.'' \17\ None of these functions serves to facilitate the7784actual provision of IPCS.7785---------------------------------------------------------------------------7786    \15\ 2024 IPCS Order, 39 FCC Rcd at 7857, para. 394.7787    \16\ 2024 IPCS Order, 39 FCC Rcd at 7861, para. 398.7788    \17\ 2024 IPCS Order, 39 FCC Rcd at 7864, para. 403.7789---------------------------------------------------------------------------7790    Additionally, in September of 2025, the FCC adopted a Notice of7791Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that proposes to allow correctional7792facilities to use jammers to block communications from contraband7793phones. The policy goal for this NPRM is to combat criminal activity7794aided by contraband phones in correctional facilities. While I support7795advancing this policy goal, should this proposal become a rule, I am7796concerned that the expenses that a correctional facility will incur in7797order to jam signals from contraband phones will inevitably be7798incorporated into the IPCS rate caps and thus passed on to the families7799of incarcerated people. Once again, asking the families of incarcerated7800people to cover the costs of functions that are unrelated to the actual7801provision of IPCS.7802                                 ______78037804    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jacky Rosen to7805                             Anna M. Gomez7806    Question 1. What is the threat to free speech and our democracy if7807journalists and broadcasters do not have a clear understanding of what7808is a violation of the public interest standard under this FCC?7809    Answer. The First Amendment to the Constitution provides (emphasis7810added):78117812        Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of7813        religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or7814        abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right7815        of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the7816        government for a redress of grievances.78177818    A key way in which broadcasters serve their local communities is7819through the provision of local news. Local broadcast journalism is a7820central element of the United States' civic infrastructure that keeps7821our democracy strong.7822    This FCC appears to be initiating investigations into potential7823violations of the ``public interest'' standard without defining what7824that means by making vague references to the Commission's news7825distortion policy as potentially applicable to any reporting that is7826critical of the Administration.7827    A violation of the Commission's news distortion policy ``must7828involve a significant event and not merely a minor or incidental aspect7829of the news report.'' In weighing the constitutionality of the policy,7830courts have recognized that the policy ``makes a crucial distinction7831between deliberate distortion and mere inaccuracy or difference of7832opinion.'' As a result, broadcasters are only subject to enforcement if7833it can be proven that they have deliberately distorted a factual news7834report. Expressions of opinion or errors stemming from mistakes are not7835actionable.7836    The fear of an FCC investigation or threats to revoke a license7837will chill free speech because they likely cause the license holder to7838instruct their employees to ``be careful'' or ``not provoke'' the7839Administration. This is because revoking a broadcaster's license will7840end the broadcaster's business, including the provision of local news,7841as it cannot broadcast without a license. Additionally, litigation can7842be financially debilitating even if the broadcaster ultimately7843prevails.78447845    Question 2. Is there statutory authority or legal precedent for the7846FCC to revoke broadcast licenses because a station reported on law7847enforcement activity?7848    Answer. No. The Commission's authority to revoke broadcast licenses7849is constrained by the First Amendment and Section 326 of the7850Communications Act, which specifically prohibits the Commission from7851censoring broadcasts.78527853    Question 3. As a member of the USF Working Group, I'm interested in7854how we can ensure people not only have access to a reliable Internet7855connection, but that they can also afford it. What parts of the7856Affordable Connectivity Program were successful, and what should7857Congress consider when reforming Lifeline, the affordability component7858in USF?7859    Answer. Affordability has been one of my top priorities since I7860became a Commissioner over two years ago. The Universal Service Fund7861(USF) is a key part of ensuring both access and affordability. The USF7862has become all the more important in the absence of funding for the7863Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP). The USF must be reformed to7864ensure long-term sustainability of the fund and its programs.7865    The ACP was the most successful tool our country has ever had to7866address the digital divide. There are a few aspects of ACP that the USF7867Working Group should consider adding to the Lifeline program as it7868develops a proposal. The Lifeline support amount was set at a level7869sufficient to support plain old telephone service and is simply7870insufficient for broadband. While Lifeline provides a crucial benefit,7871$9 a month is not enough for families struggling to afford broadband.7872This subsidy should be increased to match the ACP's offering of $30 per7873month per household.7874    Further, many broadband providers currently do not qualify for7875Lifeline support because they are not considered ``Eligible7876Telecommunications Carriers.'' This requirement stands in the way of7877more providers being able to offer an affordability support to the7878consumers that need it.7879    And most importantly, any reforms made to the USF contributions7880base should not increase costs for consumers.78817882    Question 4. How do demand-side support programs ensure the success7883of broadband deployment programs like BEAD?7884    Answer. When it comes to broadband, access is only one piece of the7885puzzle. Affordability and digital literacy are the others. The pandemic7886highlighted the importance of affordability, a lesson we cannot forget7887now. Failure to ensure affordability would disproportionately impact7888those who need connectivity the most, deepening economic and social7889inequalities. And to participate in the AI economy, digital literacy7890skills will be paramount.7891    Through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Congress invested7892billions of dollars in broadband infrastructure. Now, support for7893affordability and digital literacy are key to ensuring that this7894massive investment in infrastructure is put to its best use. Even if we7895build the fastest, most efficient network we possibly could, our7896efforts to close the digital divide will fall flat without support for7897affordability and digital literacy. And without this support, we risk7898having stranded investments and an unsustainable network. For these7899reasons, demand-side support programs are a crucial complement to BEAD.7900                                 ______79017902   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ben Ray Lujan to7903                             Anna M. Gomez7904    Question 1. In the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004 Congress7905set the national audience reach cap to 39 percent. Congress set this7906limit, not the Federal Communications Commission, yet recently the FCC7907sought comment on whether to modify the national ownership cap. In7908November, President Trump posted on Truth Social said he ``would not be7909happy'' if the FCC lifted the national ownership cap to ``allow the7910Radical Left Networks to `enlarge' ''. Does the FCC or Congress have7911the power to raise the national ownership cap?7912    Answer. Only Congress has the power to raise the national ownership7913cap. As you correctly note, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 20047914(2004 CAA) set the national audience reach cap at 39 percent and did7915not provide the Commission with authority to modify the cap.7916    The Telecommunications Act of 1996 created both an initial national7917audience reach cap and a process that required the Commission to7918consider whether such cap continued to be in the public interest. In79192003 the Commission raised the national audience reach cap to 457920percent as part of the required review. In response, in the 2004 CAA,7921Congress modified the relevant sections of the Telecommunications Act7922of 1996 in three key respects. First, it directed the national audience7923reach cap be set to 39 percent in the Commission's rules. Second, it7924removed review of the national audience reach cap from the required,7925now quadrennial, review. Finally, it prohibited the Commission from7926forbearing from the national audience reach cap. The forbearance7927prohibition language makes clear that the other two actions, lowering7928the audience reach cap and removing it from the established review7929process, were intended to prohibit the Commission from modifying or7930otherwise relaxing the 39 percent audience reach cap.7931                                 ______79327933Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Lisa Blunt Rochester to79347935                             Anna M. Gomez7936    Question 1. Commissioner Gomez, Chairman Carr ended the FCC's7937promotion of DEI in January, 2025. Since then, the FCC has approved7938mergers and major transactions conditioned on companies eliminating7939internal DEI programs, an approach Chairman Carr has publicly7940celebrated. DEI initiatives have long supported opportunities for7941women, veterans, people with disabilities, and religious minorities.7942Veteran hiring preferences in the Federal government are one clear7943example.7944    Commissioner Gomez, can you explain how conditioning FCC approvals7945on the elimination of DEI programs undermines job opportunities and7946weakens America's long-term economic competitiveness?7947    Answer. Conditioning FCC approvals on the elimination of voluntary7948Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs risks undermining job7949opportunities by discouraging lawful, good-faith efforts to promote7950fair access to employment and to recruit from the broadest possible7951pool of qualified workers. Diversity and inclusion initiatives are7952fundamentally about fairness and equal opportunity, and many companies7953adopt them voluntarily to reduce barriers and reflect the communities7954they serve. When companies are pressured to abandon such efforts as a7955prerequisite for regulatory approval, particularly without any finding7956of unlawful conduct or failure to meet a defined public interest7957obligation, it sends a troubling signal and chills legitimate workplace7958practices.7959    This approach also raises concerns about the appropriate scope of7960the Commission's transaction review authority and its implications for7961long-term economic competitiveness. Using FCC approval processes to7962influence internal workplace policies unrelated to the transaction at7963hand introduces uncertainty, deters investment, and risks politicizing7964routine regulatory decisions.79657966                                  [all]