they themselves are collecting so that we have a picture of what's going on. the importance of the legal authorities. we had a great debate. but the importance of the patriot act and the importance of the nsa activity legally intercepting communications were overseas these kinds

of legal authorities are important. and theand the importance of maintaining civil liberties of our citizens generally is why we recommend the fbi director have a special advisory panel available are continuing basis. these are some of the things we found some of the things we recommend as far as the future is concerned. the united states is likely to have an organization like the fbi that not only has a great history but the ability to accept change. it has not been easy. there have been tough moments to get the idea of intelligence and degraded

along with law enforcement into the work of the fbi. it has been difficult but they have made remarkable progress up until now. the knew director is behind the recommendations we have made. there is a bright future for the fbi, but it is important that there be one because the future of the fbi we will be the way in which this country is protected against terrorism. >> i'mare going to touch on three key areas with three tracks that i think are significant and have important implications. the 1stimplications. the 1st is the going concern with regard to hong kong violence. we use that term it's useful to expand that technology in terms of what are the different flavors of terrorism. foreign terrorism and

foreign actors who are directed and supported by foreign terrorist groups operating in the united states or elsewhere. the 2nd is domestic terrorists and those are primarily based in the united states and not under the direction, influence, or inspiration of foreign terrorist groups operating independently. we have this 3rd flavor homegrown violent extremists which are primarily based in the united states but inspired by foreign terrorist groups but not directed or directly supported by those groups. the reason why they are significant i we will get into a little while. the 2nd is the increasing emphasis on preventing violent extremism rather than countering radicalism.

the terms radicalism and violent extremism are violent radicalism are used interchangeably. basically you can be radical or extremists and not the violent and not break the law, but we track that. we are focusing more of late on those who are actually about two or are currently breaking the law versus those to the left kind of talk about the implications without. the 3rd area is the increasing availability of what some describe as technologies of mass empowerment. when you look at the ubiquitous component of highly sophisticated technologies, what are the implications for what

terrorist groups particularly in that category for what are they capable of the day find out everything about ten or 15 years ago. let me start with growing concerns with regard to violent extremists. of course,extremists. of course, our concerns are reinforced by the events in chattanooga. characterized by either lone wolves, individuals who are operating either self radicalized or are radicalized in a way that only has been absorbing versus communicating with other entities or small groups and radicalize each other. group for five. and they do not have that signature that typically we are losing and on. communicating with own actors of concern traveling and consorting with individuals of concern. those are the chapters that allow us to focus from the massive potential individuals to those that we believe present the greatest threat. the real challenge associated with the homegrown violent extremist his they are extremely difficult to detect or prevent.

if there is a silver lining traditionally we have looked at these groups as having relatively low capability via consequence events. small arms relatively small amounts of explosives can kill large amount of people that you are not looking at september 11 size or magnitude tax or worse which takes me to the next area but how do we differentiate individuals that were going to be concerned about and focusedfocus limited law enforcement and intelligence assets on versus the broader guys were of much larger set of people who may be disenfranchised and may harbor in the or other concerns for this country or our way of life. this gets to the question of what constitutes radicalization.

we have a constitution that protects free speech and free thinking. a lot of people who are considered radicals in there time who are a lot of us euros. a whole house of them. we have a society and culture of prizes and protects people's ability to think whatever thought they want as long as they are not a legally incurring and other people space. it does not necessarily progress to violent extremism,extremism, and there is no typical pathway we will we look at it. we saw indicators a lot of people are highly disenchanted and an extreme thoughts. most of them do not devolve

into violent extremists. what we found is in previous outreach initiatives we're talking about is lost extremists initiatives to the american muslim community to identify individuals and there communities for upon radicalization the softer side, left of attack on the left of legal act often have the unintended result of alienating communities cultivating a sense of paranoia and prosecution of persecution. if you look at the efficacy and is difficult to do as a government in terms of engaging with communities, in terms of what that counter narrative is because we are getting in to religious thought, ideology and thinking and it is not a

space bar's government officials are comfortable talking only do well. it is particularly difficult for western countries to parse and address the ideological foundations and theological aspects of the radicalization process. based on these tensions in the result command i'm not talking just the united states. they have had significant challenges where they have moved more and more to focusing on the individuals who are assessed to be conducting illegal acts or on the verge of versus looking to get the larger community to the left potentially a move to the right. and it is about taking care not to antagonize and alienate the majority of the population that cannot hold the extremist views or at a minimum are not prepared to behave and found ways because we want to avoid inadvertently contributing to more conversions to

violent extremism that we are able to have the divergence away from. i will briefly review the different characterizations of approaches. the dhs approach does not focus on radical thought were speech but instead on preventing violent attacks. the fbi approach is to reach people before they crossed the line between radical thinking to extremist violence. then one of the key strategies is to reach out to communities and build trust and rapport to stem the tide of violence which has been a big challenge. fbi relationship with these communities and the muslim

community in particular is a strange one at best because there looking to make cases. it is a difficult balancing act to work with communities that are opposed to violent behavior the way you draw the line between someone who has legitimate defensible radical whether right to have radical thinking does not plan on conducting any physical act. you train every hallway because the bureau is concerned about the possible making the move. the sum result of tensions between competing phenomena is essentially a catch-22. so as not to risk worsening the problem we have backed off earlier efforts to identify and avert those most prone to violent extremism and are now left with the more challenging proposition of having to wait to intervene and tell radical thoughts are at the precipice of violence leaving precious little time

for air. that is a tough space for us to operate in that is the reality of what we're doing. i will get to this 3rd and final category technologies of his apartment which gets back to this amazingly rapid evolution and ubiquitous availability of advanced technology and is increasing the network ofunit of terrorist organizations follow it out individuals with means to cause significant damage in ways that were limited to nationstates that many years ago. and i'm talking about five or ten years ago, capabilities now in the

hands of individuals where restricted weapons capabilities withwith export controls. there are celebrating a platform that that platform that you can use as a guidance navigational mechanism. so they're is a book. by benjamin witte's and and it highlights the strength. anyways might differ on there conclusions on how this might change the world in order. they offer discussion views to what that does not do what is interesting as they do go down the path of three different developing a rapidlyrapidly developing technologies. biotechnology, robotics, and cyber. they posit different scenarios literally by small groups all the way to individuals with regard to these advanced technologies and significant high consequence effects. you look at the sign of brothers. to mid level iq knuckleheads

who put a lot of time and effort in developing a tax profile for building devices that were to my sophisticated and certainly impact on a local scale command you're talking about now and to four or five years from now these individuals of moderate intelligence we will be able to do paid by numbers bio sequencing and develop biological agent with the dna synthesizer they can get off the internet. that is what were talking about. we have not seen it yet but the potential is they're. this is particular -- particularly concerning because we cannot defend against every attack. very fortunatelyvery fortunately the threshold of consequence that these individuals and small groups have been able to affect as tragic as it is a been relatively small. if these types of individuals we have aa very difficult and in some cases

impossible time protecting can have high consequence effects in large numbers of casualties while we are in a scary place and i fear that that dynamic is unfolding. i would say in some against the backdrop of all of our concerns about the potential , the conventional wisdom that these actors are not having high effect is going to fade. >> thank you. we're going to have time to get questions from the audience. if you would raise your hand i will recognize you. wait for the microphone. let me unpack a few things before you move on. the layout this framework of the areas you looked at in

the areas that are critical. going from the international program the role of intelligence and the fbi science, technology issues science, technology issues and information sharing. could you -- i'm guessing if i ask you what the strongest area where the fbi has made the most progress of the overseas mission. >> partially because there is still a lot more to do. when you go overseas and put your foot in the atlantic ocean he suddenly come across the state department. there is a certain bureaucratic resistance to expanding and providing more facilities and resources.

there is a long ways to go. i would rather -- it is more accurate to say the farthest they have gone is the intelligence of analytical capabilities and the idea of bringing in this knew class of people. prior to september 11 intelligence analysts -- i don't even think they use that term, but they were thought of as support people there has always been a tradition that there was a big dividing line between special agents and everyone else. the intelligence analysts prior to september 11 were in the other category.category. it has been the development of the idea of intelligence analysts has coequal -- almost coequal which is the area that is improving because it has only been with them last year we have the joint training with a

were in the same classes, same educational programs at quantico. >> which gets the lowest grade? >> science and technology. the computer programs and communications information technology as a whole is probably lagging behind. if lagging behind before the department of justice and in other parts. that is the one that meets the budgetary support. you would think when we went to the office in london and there was one secure telephone the whole place and little booth, the kind that superman is to change clothes and. and that -- and whereas if they have had more is a matter of intelligence analysts be able to pick up

the floor and talk to someone who is working in the same area and exchange information. if they haveif they have to go to a phone or wait for a phone or go to some other facility that interferes with there capability. >> i want to ask you one question. a lot of discussion. countering violent extremism you alluded to it. there are two different but related missions. the space for the fbi and homeland security figure it all out and can operate the line between people have extremist views and are potentially going to operationalize.

wewe can debate with the best bill is in the best structure. that is appropriately something they should be involved in. the other is a much broader issue with the idea of radical islam which may never default a different ideology, different worldview. that is a much broader mission. and a different topic. and arguably something where the united states has been completely out to lunch. i want to ask you about this other one people are embracing these use. the question is given as david said and 70 of these.

the tens and maybe i don't know. what is right and given all the other city things what is the right level of effort here? >> you make an important. the population you might consider at greater risk if your talking about radical islam looking at the muslim population the majority of which is not radical does not share radicalized use. it is a small percentage. you have a number of our conservative and have what many would consider to be radical thoughts but no intent and have demonstrated

no action in terms of affecting outcomes in a violent way. this gets back. and the chairman made the. if you want to deal with this kind of ideology. this gets back. and the chairman made the. if you want to deal with this kind of ideology. it is a dangerous place. when you dowhen you do a counter narrative against a conservative interpretation of theology ran into problems. we want to 1st do no harm. alienation. that is the peace that we have wrestled with and not done a good job. >> putting the big counter narrative issue aside what is the level of effort we should be looking at between

do nothing and the manhattan project? >> we have to take a risk informed approach. we cannot prevent every individual might go into a sports store and buy aside or rifle and go i shooting spree. we need to look at who posits the most significant threat. threat. the more significant the threat typically the more signatures activity. identifying anyone in with the consequence we will run out way before we are able to focus on the high consequence which is where we need to focus. for the most part we do but it is a difficult public highly emotional people respond psychologically in ways to events that there is

a low what is happening. you have to deal with that dynamic. >> let me ask you one last question. we look at this more narrow part. a grand narrative. working with people that are potentially -- and you looked at the legislation. talk abouttalk about some of the complications of working through that. ifif you do it will be a community. if you embrace the right people you link up with those were part of the problem. some of those of the things. >> i no some of the different studies that have been done. a recent one that was done. a very interesting study and talked about how very often

they objective is to link up the state and locals who no one isno what is going on the committee and support them. the federal government cannot be thepointy end of the stick on this one. of the rich right folks making the right alliances? a lot of risk of funding. grading to -- great at maintaining. able to show significant improvements. other organizations were able to show good improvement. figuring out how the government can best partner is a challenge. the other question is can the federal government who we will be -- the best person to take on the support will.

in your report he addressed the question of fbi, counterterrorism organization. maybe go to dhs. the fbi has embedded counterterrorism knowledge that is useful. different places you can put it. dhs is not doing the cbe. supporting state and locals. supposed to be connecting and doing that stuff that is the right place. >> so you operate in this more narrow space. a couple of key things. there are to be metrics that measure of what you are delivering on the focus but youwhen you engage in the communities what is the common interest?

the public safety of the committee.

about populations. does not tell you anything useful. his life profiling. that person was whatever. you look at these numbers.

there is a significant percentage that aare naturalized. it does not tell you anything. what you find is whatever categorization you make there are a tiny percentage of anything. >> the.he said that shows process was pleased to look at. what it does tell you in the naturalization process there are things that we are not doing which would much more clearly identify people you should not have given citizenship to which is the kind of stuff that is super useful. >> is one thing, the returning foreign fighters. people going overseas. you immediately have an indication someone that you need to look into and have

gone to syria, the middle east command come back which is one of the tests that the fbi utilizes. one other thing most of the people have been radicalized and guarded to violent extremists has certain characteristics. the same type as people who join gangs. low self-esteem, unemployed categories such as this. a gives you some indication of the kinds of people they usually get involved. >> there are different statistics on that. that maythat may be more true to those who are going of foreign fighter out and less true or al qaeda type operators.

educated and you have seen across the board a high incidence of the down and hours. not to say that there are not pockets. >> there are two aspects to the foreign fighter problem. there going to come back in the terrorists it is true. what is even more vital is the fact that they are recruiting going over the. it is like voting on american idol. it allows the claim that this is a caliphate. showing the pipeline down over and apart from the physical threat is an important part of diminishing the brand.

yes, ma'am. you will probably be our last question. >> susan craft. i have been covering this terrorist twitter problem trying to give more down to a question that was better. we have a question asked about facebook and other social media sites. 200,000 leads going on a day is it -- you seemed to dodge the question and talk about the dark space being a real problem. jamestown we talked about twitter and the message being dangerous but he also talked about the dark space. i'm wondering if the white house had asked them if the white house is letting

twitter go about -- letting twitter be more lenient because law enforcement has an interest in the open space and they are not cracking down on twitter when waiting on them as much. if that is a helpful tool because you can track them and i would love to talk about the state department's failed efforts in the counter narrative is they're have been a lot of "washington post" articles talking about is the complete lack of effort. they havethey have had programs but it seems like to have all been either failing or gone too far. >> let's run down the panel and i'll give you the option comment on social network with the state department's role or a little bit of both. >> sure.

no social the government would allow the communication and is being nicer to twitter. it seems to me that it could be a way that they can glean intelligence. it also seems like a mighty double-edged sword as you allow them to communicate a lot. i have no specific intelligence what the government is doing but it seems like they're would be a fine line. >> on the counter narrative that is to be a cooperative effort by number of different agencies not the

least of which shallto employ saw the psychological warfare capabilities military has which is an important part. >> adding to that i don't think it is something the government does well and it needs to evolve to aa public-private type process where you have some government element to it but it is not solely government. the other.i would make is, at least the studies i havei have seen with regard to -- recruitment online, it is an important tool, but it is -- the studies have not shown i indication that solely online recruiting has resulted in conversions to violent extremism. you still need the physical presence of someone who we will close the deal which is important. >> there has been so much focus. we tend to think that that is the problem command i

don't think that's correct. katie. 70 million twitter followers why? that is a virtual community and a virtual community found by a certain level of common interest which does not mean anyone will do anything she says. what makes this dangerous is they're is a social network virtual community that links which is what maximizes the impact of social network. theynetwork. they are rooted in groups of people that are going to do something. compare with what we saw in the green revolution in iran. there was a massive social network which was moving all these ideas.

why waswhy was it? there people on the ground going into the streets. a linkage between human and virtual web which makes the virtual web powerful which tells you whether than concentrating on the phenomenon of the most significant thing that you can do to diminish the value is to diminish the value of physical network. this is notthis is not just in terms of network of people and our countries but this thriving, growing metastasizing menace in the middle east that is claiming a state. >> i would touch on that comment. what are the true size of the nature of the threat. therethey're is a huge delta that the psychological an actual threat. if you look at the numbers

of folks on twitter for one thing that is fascinating and surprising is how few attacks and. he is relatively small numbers. why didn't they focus on attacks to the united states? isis has its own agenda but if they were intent many of you with inspire magazine online recruitment and how to manual. this isthis is the winter of 2014 issue gives detailed instructions about how to make explosives in your mom's kitchen the cover of

the indicators and science. we have not seen near the kind of use. this number of actors. they can all be sleeper cells but you need to take with a grain of salt the level of hyperbole. i am the one who talked about technology enablers which is real command we have to be cognizant of that in terms of how the future state in terms of what is available can change the game. you're not seeing a lot of adherents in terms of action that is good news. >> you could have had a session and people could have come in.

you did not here that. you did not here an assessment. you heard options and a discussion about how to make arrested for -- risk informed decision of different things we can and should do. that is where good public policy decision should be. thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> secretary of state testifying on iran nuclear agreement joined by energy secretary and treasury secretary. the administration has been meeting with lawmakers.

live coverage at 10:00 a.m. eastern. a local efforts to expand broadband technology. a federal grand jury indicted one roof. that briefing.

>> this energy and commerce subcommittee hearing on communications and technology is just over an hour. [inaudible conversations] >> 1230. if we can go ahead and get started. apologies of the classified briefing get schedule later today the cutsback on

schedule about the same time this hearing was originally scheduled. we moved it up to now so that we can here from this distinguished panel of witnesses. i've asked my colleagues because we now have a vote scheduled we will dispense with opening statements which is anyone knows is unprecedented historical annals that they we will all be in the official record. unless there is objection i would like to proceed straight to our panel of witnesses.witnesses. this is an important hearing on promoting broadband infrastructure investment. you all are in the frontlines command we look to you. we will start right out

delighted to have you. >> thank you for your leadership on this issue and appreciate the opportunity to testify. we represent the companies that design own build command manage for communications companies. wireless carriers, infrastructure providers and professional services firm. our mission is to help members provide wireless facilities to meet consumers growing mobile data needs. the industry plays an essential role in meeting mandated demand. infrastructure makes wireless work enables delivery of data services.

wireless infrastructure as a catalyst for economic growth and job creation. the study found investments in our industry will generate 1.2 trillion in economic growth and create 1.3 million knew jobs in five years. this committee has shown great leadership trying to eliminate barriers infrastructure deployment. i commend you. most notably section 649 a has had an impact on the ground itelement a major local barriers to upgrading wireless infrastructure. they have done an outstanding job of implementing the law. we still face for -- the

spectrum is expensive, expensive, scarce command takes a long time the unity use. all the more reason to move quickly. technological advances to foster greater efficiencies. in the networks themselves there getting smarter directing capacity to where it's needed, these take time to develop and implement. the 3rd way is through the rapid deployment of infrastructure. wireless infrastructure driven by private capital addresses a wireless data conscious and is deployed ranging from traditional cell towers to white coverage and capacity to small cells. intensification of networks reduces scarce spectrum. allowing users please more out of existing spectrum. there is resistance congress

can help even more to remove the barriers. streamlining these barriers. streamlining the process of setting wireless infrastructure for land despite the law enacted by congress and the executive order by the president significant challenges remain. furtherfurther legislation will extend broadband coverage and increased employment in rural areas. bci supports f1618 recently introduced in the senate to address this issue and we look forward to continuing work to develop legislation. additional roadblocks remain some state and local entities require proof of need which are both illogical and costly. local communities should not be in the business of citing where services are needed. where is needed to serve consumers and local governments are not in a good position to be second-guessing technical questions. efforts to harmonize the rates would help promote broadband investment. the fcc has taken important

steps. states that regulatesstates that regulate should follow the fcc's lead. wireless infrastructure boosts every sector of the economy. demonstrating its effectiveness global competitiveness the challenges remain in reaching the full potential. they need to eliminate regulatory barriers so that industry can invest capital without resistance and not at cost and delays that we will slow the rollout of wireless broadband. member companies aremember companies are grateful for bipartisan recognition of the centrality of wireless infrastructure. i wouldi would add that we look forward to making continued progress and we thank you for joining us and for holding this hearing. >> thank you. we appreciate your testimony

the owner, we are delighted to have you here. i enjoy the time i was i was in your committee and toward your facilities command we are glad you could be hear to share your thoughts on the challenges you face. >> thank you, chairman members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to testify. i also want to thank the chairman for visiting the committee to see firsthand the obstacles that drives face in deploying broadband and i want to thank the ranking member for the request to have the government accounting office look into the challenges and barriers to employment prevalence. broadband provider which we refer to was founded in 1988

dollars 12,000 and members living in a reservation. whenwhen we 1st and purchased the exchange only 10 and percent of our residents have access to basic phone service. those looking to get connected had to pay tens of thousands of dollars before mountain dale today they offer phone service to 100 percent of our residents we also offer broadband service across the reservation. they work together to raise awareness tribal lands only served areas in the country. 40 percent lack access to

speeds. a number of obstacles that present challenges to broadband deployment. i have set those out with more detail. first population density is an obstacle. twenty person per square mile. maricopa county has approximately 414 persons per square mile. rugged terrain characterized by mountains and hard soil is typical of farmland. low, medium, and high rates of poverty prison a severe challenge for the delivery of broadband. the median income is $24,000 to $59000 in arizona. approximately 48 percent of

persons living on a reservation live below the poverty level compared to 50% verizon. these50 percent for arizona. these economic circumstances are not unique to our travel community. this continues to negatively impact tribes. our committee and others like it continues struggle. because of the allotment policy obtaining rights-of-way is complex and raises cost substantially and delays deployment. access to capital is a barrier. trouble lands can be leveraged as collateral for securing loans because they are held in trust. this private capitol is often not available meaning the only when your available is the federal government specifically the utility service. loans were critical to gr g.i. when it took over its

service area and remains critical. the combination of these challenges has resulted in average cost per loop be over 2,873. because travel nations face unique challenges we often need unique solutions. having tried athaving tried at the table and engaging in government to government consultations critical. too often policies have an intense consequences of price because were not properly consulted in the beginning. the current effort to reform the universal service fund is a good example. usf is when properly scoped a critically important source of funding that can help make it possible to deploy broadband to our reservations. tribes have offered a proposal that would target specific support to lands through a broadband factor

that can be added to proposals for standalone broadband fun. inclusion of this travel broadband factor would promote a targeted use of universal service funding to advance the policy objective. the office of native american has been a welcome addition to the commission's outreach efforts to ensure that tribes are included in the development of proposals to employ more broadband. sometimes the fcc forgets about tribes which is why we appreciate the letters sent from a bipartisan group of members of this committee mining the commission that tribal leaders need a seat table. i appreciate the opportunity to speak with you and hope to be an ongoing resource for the committee. thank you. >> you can count on that. we that. we appreciate your testimony. people don't have a craig moffett.

>> thank you for your kind invitation to participate. by way of introduction i have been a financial analyst for the past 14 years. before that i spent 11 years advising telecommunications companies. so this is now my 25th year and i have spent much of that focused on issues of broadband deployment. i thought i would share general observations particularly focusing on the economics of `-- competitive broadband. i would start by saying the obvious. that should be taken as a given but the issue of

return on capital is either ignored or misunderstood. it is not a matter of whether a business is risen are profitable but that are of whether a business is sufficiently profitable toward the high levels of is required for a structure. 2014 the largest phase of the cable industry and a healthy return. the physical aspects all and healthy returns in excess of cost of capital with returns ranging from 13 to 33 percent which are usually high. onon the other hand it should be noted they earned returns below the cost of capital.

long-term return as to earn returns well an axis of the cost of capital during the maturity of the network to offset for years or even decades of losses. by contrast large telephone companies do not attractive returns. for example, a decade after 1st undertaking the homebuilder out verizon has not yet come close to the return. the paltry 1.2 percent return. for the nonfinancial types of that is the equivalent of borrowing money at 5% in order to earn 1%. that's a good way to go bankrupt. no one would undertake to replicate those disastrous returns. at&t began deploying and much less robust and less costly fiber is also earned poor returns. committed to make five are available for 12 and a half million homes in order to make the acquisition of

directv more palatable. but it is hard to believe that we will be much better this time around.around. there have been changes in the market. developed bendable fiberr the labor costs. google has popularized the demand. demand. they can target areas with the companywhere the company has the best chance of earning an acceptable return some critics call that redlining but it typically means it will be billed to the lower income communities and has been successful. you can think of it as a way of ensuring all the children are above average. the broader take away is they're are concerns to be had from over building. let that can.

marketmarket forces are unlikely to yield the fully competitive broadband market .. among some to regulate incumbent

networks. that is if the not unreasonable assumption that any attempts to foster competition will be ultimately unsuccessful and regulation in this case the cable operators are therefore require. the counterargument that regulation will only step investment among incumbent providers amble there for mick the problem worse and will in the process generate unwelcome unintended consequences is equally well-intentioned and well supported by the historical evidence. that is to say there are no easy answers here. i will conclude by adding a few it is not observations about the cable industry. everyone understands the cable video business is facing pressure. cord cutting has been talked about but it's finally showing up in a meaningful way in the numbers and program in cost or eating that way at cost. the video business in the broadband business are on opposite sides of the same coin. it is after all all on infrastructure.

rashana video profit pool would therefore naturally turn a pricing response of broadband or cable operators have greater leverage. it may sound nefarious but not intended to be so. simply not duration the cable operators have benefited from the fact that their infrastructure can support two separate businesses and each can be delivered a lower cost if that were not the case. the aca american cable association is made this case eloquently in arguing absent reforms to restrain runaway programming cost growth video will be unprofitable and broadband will be left to carry the entire burden of incremental deployment. all things equal that will mean that new broadband will become increasingly challenged and therefore will become less and less likely or simply to add this is my own editorial they will simply have to sharply raise the price of broadband. now i would simply observe the pressures in the video business are relatively broad-based and attributable to more than programming and cost inflation

and this they therefore been unavoidable scenario that i will leave my remarks there. while my remarks sound gloomy they are not meant to. notwithstanding my view that there are politicized statistics i would suggest otherwise. it's simply the case abroad and infrastructure that is very difficult to support two of you in some cases even one upped and i submit that cleared alakman to the microeconomics of rock band business demand to see that the policy table so thank you mr. chairman and subcommittee members for your time and the opportunity to testify. >> thank you very much mr. moffett. we will go to michael slinger erector of global -- google fiber cities. we welcome in the floor is yours. you will need to pull the microphone very close and push the button until the light stays on. >> chairman walden recommender ed sheeran members of the subcommittee thank you for the invitation to testify about investment in broadband infrastructure.

we believe the successful agenda will benefit consumer small business is in the economy. my name is michael slinger and i currently serve as the director of google fiber city teams. in this role like oversee the operation of business strategy to bring gigabyte speeds across united states. we have long believed that the next chapter of the internet will be built on gigabit speeds. the gig delivers enough bandwidth for everyone in the home or small business brother devices and fast connections on lease entrepreneur ship. if today we were riding a bike having eight -- could be writing a race car. that's why we launched google fiber which provides download and upload connections of up to 1000 megabits per second. our goal is to make the web faster and more affordable more relevant and more useful for everyone. we launched the service five years ago and today's available in kansas city kansas kansas

city missouri austin texas and provo utah. deshermer in the process of building our network in six markets in exploring bring it to another floor on top of that. in rolling out google -- google fiber we go from scratch one street one house at a time. this means repairing infrastructure and working closely with cities to make sure we are ready to work together to build a brand-new network. this experience has given us inside into barriers to deployment. i will outline thoughts on policy changes. first policymakers can ease gaining access to existing infrastructure. to construct high-speed networks broadband providers need access to existing utility infrastructure such as paul's conduits on a consistent cost-effective and timely basis. while the fcc has taken important steps to improve rules relate to infrastructure access our own experience of building new broadband networks

demonstrates more work needs to be done to reduce those barriers. second, policymakers can the east rights-of-way the expense and complexity of obtaining the access to public jurisdictions and increased the cost of broadband employment -- deployment. policy that facilitates partnerships between different entities and companies doing local construction will be beneficial. we see a lot of benefit instituting policy which may involve the installation of an oversight conduit and buy any new network. third, policymakers can help resolve the challenge of high rates for access to video programming. this would help smaller players in the business negotiate fair terms for access to popular broadcast cable content and make it easier to attract and retain subscribers. finally i would be remiss if i failed to mention the importance of balanced spectrum policies. federal agencies should pursue a

balanced approach to spectrum reallocation that allows for licensed and unlicensed commercial use frequencies. i will note as we think about deploying gigabit. >> networks when to keep in mind 30% of americans still don't use the internet at home. this means they there are disadvantage when it comes to education job opportunities social and civic engagement. one of her main priorities in building digital inclusion into our deployment plans from the beginning. we are guided by a couple of main principles make the internet more affordable make access to the community and teach people how to get on line. just last week as part of the connectome initiative announced by the president obama and hud secretary castro we bring our service to affordable housing properties for $0 per month with no installation fees. we are partnering with community organizations on computer labs and letters to programming.

thank you again for the invitation to speak at this hearing and to share our views on how we can remove barriers give americans more choices and help reach the goal of nationwide broadband abundance. >> thank you mr. slinger. we appreciate your testimony now without our final witness today deb socia associate director next 30 and please go ahead with your comments. >> good afternoon. thank you for opening this hearing on such an important topic. my name is deb socia and i'm the executive director of next century cities a bipartisan city to city collaborate formed last october. we have grown to 100 member cities all of them are dedicated to ensuring access to fast affordable and reliable broadband. high-speed access is essential to america's economic future. it's as simple as that. with what can be complicated as

making it happen on the ground. cities face a range of technical economic and political challenges including obstacles at the state and federal levels. providing for this critical need has emerged as a core responsibility for local government. many cities and towns from around the country taking diverse and creative steps to secure their internet teacher. when it comes to providing access to high-quality internet everyone has a role to play. its initiatives bans political parties and issue that crosses the urban world divide in an issue that on many sectors of our society. there's no single pathway to next-generation broadband network. several of the most innovative solutions have emerged in unexpected places. the small towns in idaho and mt. vernon washington have each developed a ticket that open access network radius local governments are directly involved in building physical infrastructure and leasing access to competing private

providers. just outside of baltimore westminster maryland has initiated a public-private partnership with a provider of fiber internet service and with the introduction of google fiber in kansas city experiencing speeds and affordable rate. cities like los los angeles and i and chattanooga tennessee have built their own networks and now have some of the fastest most of what competitive access available. next century city is dedicated to helping all committees achieve high-quality access regardless of the path they choose to pursue. if a membership represents an inclusive cross-section of america from small rural such as winthrop minnesota to large urban areas like l.a. and boston boston. what unites these is a commitment to the imperative rock band access for continued growth and understanding that local governments are best situated to understand and provide for the needs of their residence. it's exciting time to time for

creative local solutions to usher in a new generation of innovation as the internet continues to transform all aspects of society. next century city is only developed the policy agenda showing how multiple stakeholders can help communities develop the crucial infrastructure needed today consistent with our mission this new resource provides guidance that will be useful to communities regardless of how they choose to pursue their broadband goals. part of the policy agenda looks at steps local and state government can use to ensure high-quality access. locally governments can institute policies that minimize disruption as well as take other steps to ensure their cities are fiber ready. at the state-level policy agenda addresses changes such as modernizing state regulations and making investments in the middle mile infrastructure. we are here in capitol hill and i want to emphasize a recommendation we heard from mayors about steps the

government could take to empower local communities. first and foremost congress can encourage competitive local markets through national legislation and other avenues. in addition you have the ability to provide the national platform for the issue of broadband is a necessary infrastructure. hearing such as this helped to elevate this discussion and attract national attention to this critical issue. finally the policy agenda discusses how congress can better require information about available internet access including speed up connection price for consumers and areas of operation for service providers. as is clear from everything we have heard so far today the need for fast affordable and reliable broadband internet access is undeniable. innovative leaders in communities across the country recognized as urgent need and developing the critical broadband infrastructure that will allow residents and their cities to thrive. it's evident by the over 100 next century cities i am

speaking on behalf of today communities they represent over 18 million americans. thank you for providing this platform for communities to develop opportunities for collaboration with federal policymakers. what are we to working with members of this committee and your colleagues to ensure that communities across the country at the next-generation access to all americans need and deserve. >> missa or thank you for your testimony and your insight. i will start off with questions. as you probably know the job creation act directed to gsa government service agency to develop a master contract to simplify replacement of wireless antennas on federal buildings. lasted a minute straight year of the tsa the master contractors completed and available by executive agencies. in your opinion to believe gsa has done everything in its power to give life to section 6409

which are referenced in your testimony for the middle-class tax relief act? have they done everything they can? >> i don't believe they have. i met federal agency in a fight implemented something that congress instructed me to do i would be embarrassed recent --. to date nothing has been done. three years after congress enacted this legislation progress has been slow in gsa has not been practiced to the agencies in the wireless industry members are having to negotiate for each and every site individually just as they have in the past. tsa has not implemented the intent of congress in me cannot wait three more years for what's needed today is an urgent lack of lands.

gsa i think it's been driving its heels. i think there might be need for further legislation. >> or maybe a hearing with one witness. i appreciate that in for the rest of the panelists there are issues you are writing. let us know because this is one way raise because it's important and we concur with what commissioner atul steen said it i don't think they have gotten it right yet. ms. socia network operators were tipping an offer in exchange for the obligation to serve anyone upon reasonable request. the models we have been discussing carriers deployed to areas where there's an economic case for the bill. how do we allen's our network economies with the threat of redlining practice and refusing service to areas deemed a poor financial risk and as i heard about the incredible buildup google is doing what i applaud

east of the mississippi getting access into our tribal lands and access into our remote in rural amenities whether it's wired or wireless remains a big problem. so i wonder how we can address that? >> the interesting thing about when you think about profit but think that is problem across-the-board with building out to these more rural locations and therefore requires an influx of capital. there's is no way to do this without support the ways that our cities are looking at what profit genoways a company might look at whether profit is. it's about education and public safety. it's about economic development and transportation and all of these opportunities that are presented when you have access. so what is that worth and how do we ensure that our tribal lands in our rural communities can benefit in the same ways our communities are able to back. >> before i go to mr. moffett

this is an issue and getting wireless phone coverage in areas of fontana upstate new york. just getting access and connectivity remains a real issue. the job is not done so mr. moffett from your perspective what do we do? >> i would certainly agree with ms. socia's comments that is not realistic to think those projects are going to be self-funding in rural areas. that said i think the targeting of the funds that are available to connect america funds can be improved such that those funds are more carefully directed to new greenfield projects that really are bringing broadband to places that haven't been served in the past. there's why some controversy around whether an area is either partially served or sufficiently served and secondarily i think it's also important that those

connect america funds be made available to all manner of companies so they can be more competition of potential providers. >> a quick answer mr. slinger to try a model out in rural remote areas of the country to make that work? >> as you know fiber may not be the right solution technologically for rural areas and we want to make sure there is sufficient spectrum available for wireless technologies as well as we are experimenting with technology and is well with fixed-wing aircraft out of new mexico. we think in rural areas that may be new technologies that can bring internet to those areas. >> i hate to cut you off but we are all tied for time so i will turn to my colleague from

california. >> thank you mr. chairman first of all for having this important hearing and a high level of operation relative to witnesses and invitations. we appreciate it. jonathan it's great to see you former commissioner of the fcc and everyone that accepted our invitation to be here today. to mr. slinger and ms. socia thank you for your important advocacy. i wish the congress had passed it i guess i think we have more of that policy actually to use the expression and embedded in our federal roadways but how do you think a the executive order is working? i want to get my questions out first, okay because time is very brief and if you think there are

any additional steps that congress should take two and sent that deployment of conduit as part of the federal highway projects and that system which i don't know right now doesn't seem like the highway project system is going anywhere. it looks like it's being driven off the road in congress but here maybe we can concentrate on that. mr. moffett i listened carefully to what you said and i think it's highly pessimistic. it's depressing to listen to your description of every last sector of the telecommunications marketplace and my question to you would be where do you see a bright spot. governor lewis thank you for being here. there was a report that just came out in terms of rock band penetration in our country.

we are 24th in the world that i think it could part of that number is a representation of native americans on reservations in our country. it's a shameful record. it's a shameful record and i think if there is going to be something that moves up to the top of the list to your in a bipartisan way is to see that we bring to the parts of the country where there are reservations that you get first class service for first-class citizenship. you really do. i mean for students to have to be driven by their parents 65 to 75 miles away to sit in a car in the to get some kind of connection to do their homework something any member of congress who is a parent here would ever put up with that. and we shouldn't have that in our country. i hope that mr. slinger and

governor lewis will form a partnership and then come back and report to us. i would really like to have you meet and see what you can come up with because you both need each other and we need those of you. and to miss out or the use of port and a snack century city support the local having local municipal systems? >> we support whatever it is our local communities need to do in order to get where they are going. >> that doesn't answer my question though. it's too broad. >> i understand. many of our neighbors signed on to the preemption. the two cities that filed petitions chattanooga and wilson were two of our cities and we have we believe deeply in the

idea that competition is important and we believe deeply in the idea that local folks should be able to solve their local problems in a way that makes sense. >> i come from a government so i agree with you and i think they should have the opportunity to do that as well. jonathan i regularly hear from constituents who are frustrated with the tower siting process. now here is one for you. everyone wants great service, the service in the whole wide world but no one wants a wireless tower in their backyard or where they can see it anywhere near where they live. so how do you respond to this? the people are saying that performs me to be made to take away local jurisdictions say over the placement of cell towers. it's really it's like trying to

get socks on an octopus. they wanted, they don't want it and yet there are some have to send us. those are my questions and you have 13 seconds to answer them. you don't have any time because i'm overtime that you can respond in writing and that way i will get more meat on the bones i think. thank you for being here and please mr. slinger and governor luis come together and if my office or other offices can help facilitate let you know. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you for the panel today. it's always a great discussion we have in subcommittee. i would like to go back to some of the questions that the chairman was posing and also the gsa dragging its feet and getting some of these things

done. especially lew talk about streamlining the process to providers to obtain federal lands and protect the lands. just out of curiosity on average how long does it take for a negotiation process at the federal government compared to the private industry? >> takes four years and sometimes they can drag out longer for many years. generally private companies will avoid federal lands because it takes so long. you don't seen a return on the investments that craig was talking about so they will go right next door if there is nonfederal land thereby. >> you were saying on average it's for predicate can drag out even longer? any ideas or examples of how long it has taken over four years? >> i have heard it for years and longer.

sometimes it never gets done. there is never finality to it or decision-making process in place. the gsa was supposed to take steps to standardize the process and it hasn't been done. >> let me follow up on that. maybe infinity and beyond what additional costs have occurred when the government is unable to streamline its process and a broadband structure buildout? >> there is lost revenue. there is a huge cost trying to go through that ross is to get the site acquisition done. 30% above the landmass is federal property and a lot of great viable buildings in dense urban areas could use a facility to do with the capacity demands so it's a shame that these negotiations take so long. not only do you use revenue companies lose viable places and consumers lose access to service they need.

>> think you. mr. slinger i think in your testimony talked about the percentage of the population that doesn't have access to broadband. but her senate with that he? >> what we are seeing now is 60 million americans and some of our cities we work and now 25 to 30% of people never had an internet connection at home. they may have access to cell phones that they don't have an internet connection at home. >> two quick follow-ups because again i represent urban tiberi rural ambu may look at the numbers for the percentages when you have what her senator that would be urban suburban very rural and was at 60 million? how would that write down and also how many people would that include that would not want to have access to broadband? >> i don't have a breakdown of

rural but in urban areas i can save 25 to 30% of residents don't have anything at home at all. no internet connection. >> governor if i could turn to you and thanks very much for being with us today and your testimony. again you said you have a very rural population. i think you said you have 20 persons per square mile and it's a great concern in your area along with the rural areas in the country about having that essential brought and for constituents. he talks about the u.s. and if that would help you but are there areas that would be a benefit to you and your community? >> thank you for that question. first of all i would like to recognize that i have two of my councilmembers here.

and also from our telecommunications blended nelson and pamela thomas. >> thank you. >> thank you. i would say one critical issue is right to way. right away as a challenge where it's a complex issue that has to do with the nature of tribal lands. it goes back to the allotments policy that had devastating effect on tribal lands and so the short answer if they do not get right of ways we have to build around them and of course that is very capital expensive. obviously this is pretty costly compared to establishing it

right away but sometimes this is our only course of action. that is an issue that we really need to look at grade another is b.e.t. c. designation process which is overly complicated so streamlining of the process would you welcome to many tribes. >> thank you very much and my time has expired create. >> i will now recognize the gentleman from new jersey mr. pallone for five minutes. >> i want to get one question to mr. adelstein about infrastructure or in disasters like hurricane sandy but then i want to get a question to governor lewis so i'm trying to split this up. three years ago hurricane sandy devastated my district. the force of the storm knocked out some indications for days. mr. adelstein you testified about the wireless infrastructure being deployed and up raided across the country and issa port this to plummet but my constituents are

concerned about whether the equipment works in a disaster so what should and should do to make sure people can call for help and reach loved ones in an emergency and what do you think that the fcc's work to improve resiliency? >> at the top priority for industry. we want to make sure customers get access when they needed the most. we saw cooperation between t-mobile and t. -- at&t and share their network operation centers. i would say in terms of the structures themselves not one of them might down during the storm storm. the issue was things that were beyond the control of power companies access to roads and trees that fell but what makes it difficult sometimes we can't even get generators sited on these things. going back to the issue this committee the generator violates a noise statute.

i don't think any neighbors would complain about the noise of the generator and yet counties will not allow us to put them there and then complain when the system doesn't work. we need proactive thinking about having facilitating access to it and one more point to add the best thing you can do is redundancy. all of the work done by the committee to promote deployment is promoting redundancy and ensuring there will be adequate facilities and more likely they will survive the disaster. >> you want to comment on the cease work because chairman camilla --. >> we work mostly with chairman wheeler and the members of the commission and looking out a corporate arrangement where we can provide incentives for the

industry to deploy this kind of equipment. i think you industry is doing a lot taking investment in things like backup power and working in a corporate fashion. we believe the goals are shared to ensure that these networks are resilient and redundant. >> thank you. that he go to governor luis and i should say i love the reservation. i haven't been there for a long time and it's about time i go back grade on the one hand i was thinking relative to many tribes you might have more ability and the remote areas were poorer tribes if you will to achieve similar goals that you mentioned. so i just wanted to ask about hunting. you mentioned the universal service funds. i guess the gentleman from google talked about this connect palm initiative. i think the president was at the choctaw reservation last week

talking about that. what are the sources of wandering? is the universal service fund useful to you now and what would we have to do to improve its? look at the federal government do in terms of funding for tribal infrastructure? particularly for those tribes that might have more difficult the? i'm thinking of the pueblos in new mexico or the tribes at the grand canyon smaller and less funding available. how were these funds helpful to you the once a helpful to the wants of we do have in these programs that we these programs that we do have are they? >> thank you congressman pallone and you are always welcome. with usf funding stable funding mechanisms are critical. where they have to develop the climate bank -- plans are land federal funding sources to be

there to begin with. providing funding for the structure build outs and that is critical to the long-term sustainability of these telecommunications providers. >> are you using funds from universal service now? >> yes we are. >> how does that work? how do you do it? >> that's critical to the overall this is plan. relying on that source of income moving forward, it's critical. it's a long-term business outlook and with regards to the long-term capital told out as well. >> thank you mr. chairman. the gentleman's time has expired and the chairman recognizes mr. shimkus for five minutes. >> i appreciate you all being here. i want to go to adelstein and

the governor. the environmental review process on federal lands is a burden so have you thought through how local municipalities can do their zoning outside of federal lands and how we can marry that with what goes on there and can you comment on that? >> yes some counties are great and we heard from google that those communities make it easier to get access and that is where the investment goes. a specific community aren't seeing the investment they would get if they weren't throwing up road locks. they are not going to have service in their backyard so we were corporately with local communities and every single facility that has been cited in cooperation with the local government but to have it be

dragged out or took the work of the committee to say you don't have to get another zoning hearing to put up a 4g antenna that is party there. increasingly communities are recognizing this. the smart ones are moving ahead in the last 20 cents 2013. there are streamlined deployment and those states are receiving more investment to get the word out about the way the fcc's implementing the laws you pass. commissioner clyburn asked us to go out -- the. >> with me ask mr. lewis on the federal robberies because that's a another challenge. the question is can we force a zoning issue to get you guys owning a ability like we do municipalities? >> senator byrd via wood -- the agency could keep the money they

get to pay for the cost of processing it. there would be common forms and contracts by the need for more let's lishan. there's an expectancy of lease were no so when somebody invests their. >> that make it governor lewis to respond. >> federal lands in indian country has been a long issue in regards to our unique situation as the nature of indian land in regards to fracks and land interest that are just so critical and sometimes are one of the major obstacles to build outs with regards to right of ways. if we can somehow streamline that process to the bureau of indian affairs and department of interior that would really help out tribal infrastructure buildout in the future. >> my largest congressional district is 33,000 people.

when do you think google would hit that community on your timeline? >> did you want to name that amenity? >> i'm not the chairman of the committee so i don't have as much power. we have published this so we can ask mr. adelstein said get fiber deployment whether it's google or any provider tim picture they have the permitting process that allows for a large volume of permits to go through to make it easy for people to get onto telephone poles. >> so it's the same type of debate with the rural or the federal land deployment. the ease of being able to have access and a timely response and it's all about return on investment. so with the rural area can't make the call based upon the formula then you have to be able to dip into our u.s. or other

forms of low interest loans to make it and also time is money. any delay and what we talked about here affects the ability for someone to go to the cap bull market can make it pitch that they will get their return on investment. >> that is correct as well. >> i yield back my time. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania mr. doyle. >> thank you for this excellent hearing and is excellent panel. jonathan welcome back great rodkin infrastructure comes a critical component for every facet of our daily lives. all levels of government communicate with citizens increasingly leverage the network to improve the delivery and efficiency of service. this work in partnership with carnegie mellon university and

google is a connective platform that will integrate traffic cameras and information kiosk to create a living laboratory for next-generation technologies. this platform will be used to improve traffic had earned in real-time allowing city's department to officially predictable road wear and schedule maintenance and allow people to explore and interact with the city more effectively. available in ubiquitous ripe infrastructure provides a basis basis for the next generation solutions. i for one and a big fan of making every tool in the toolbox available to local governments to make sure they have access to the best networks in the best platforms in order to improve the lives of people living there there. mr. chairman i would love to work with you on putting together some legislation to address some of these challenges challenges. let the start with ms. socia. how can localities leverage shared infrastructure to

increase the deployment of broadband to cities like pittsburgh to address our own municipal needs? how can we and other municipalities use what we are building to expand access more broadly and what if anything stands in the way of the municipality leveraging the infrastructure? >> really interesting work has been done as you have suggested. many of her cities are using smart infrastructure to do interesting work to determine particulates in the air and checking asthma rates and using street lights that have cameras in them for public safety. we are seeing a lot want that happened and i think there are barriers for cities to doing this work is well and some of them are the state regulations that prohibit their building out their own infrastructure. in some cases as was mentioned earlier it was issues of how densely populated the circumstances

>> i am curious about the discrepancies that exist. in pittsburgh for it since i can get 500 megabits per second but it would cost me $400 a month. when we look at cities like chattanooga and kansas city and boston and other cities residents can get a dig for less than $100. i'm curious maybe mr. moffat and mr. slinger and ms. socia could comment on why you think these discrepancies exist. >> thank you for the question.

my observation would be you are right there are a wide range of economic models and it's a challenge because there is no near-term variable costs. it's a cost bus models so you see companies experimenting with different prices in part because they are trying to iraq but that quantity demanded will be at different prices. the challenge but obviously you tend to have lower prices where you have multiple competing networks and again it raises the questions of whether the providers are earning a sufficient return of the market share at the prices they are charging. in many cases they are not traded this is a difficult area to do economic research however because you will find there are a lot of companies that have different of this than profitability. >> i want to get to mr. slinger. >> i would say if you look at the cities in which we are operating or cities we have announced we are seeing in

prices drop. >> we now go to the gentleman from louisiana mr. scalise for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. adelstein you talk in your opening statement of a lot a lot of the work that's been done to expand spectrum within this committee where we have come together to make more spectrum available and our chairman has been a great leader in that effort too. one part of that equation absolutely is expanding more spectrum and of course the other part of that is your members very few build it out and to build that infrastructure to take advantage of the spectrum. if you could share with us some of the challenges or hurdles that your members face to make the investment that they can make to take advantage of that spec and to make more spectrum available in the marketplace. >> spectrum has been quite a hurdle.

you saw $41 million was spent for a limited amount of spec and white tape. better than the cbo estimate. >> hopefully cbo recognizes the value of spectrum. >> the fact is that was a 12% increase in available commercial mobile sector. if you're a 12% increase in throughput and 700% we are down to 680%. a long way to go to build out to meet the needs of people and as i said local communities often are saying no to these facilities. we have the business case in rural areas as we have discussed today in the overall return on investment is difficult. we can't afford to have regulatory drag on these

investments. slowing them down making it more expensive when there is enough capital toga to meet these needs already. that is where we are at in this country and as slow as it is it's immediately available when you see that same structure and reuse it. all of these burdens on federal lands and urban areas the fcc has done a great job in the committee has done a great job in trying to address that but we need to work with our partners in state and local governments as well. >> we have been grappling with trying to remove those burdens not just spectrum and a whole lot of areas related to energy production were federal land and in the local area some of those restrictions make it really hard to experience a lot of the economic opportunity. thanks for that answer. mr. moffett in your analysis if you could share with us some of the similar challenges where some actions that may be congress or the fcc can take to

further expand the opportunities for wi-fi broadband? >> as i said earlier i think there are opportunities can connect america funds and making those available to a wider range of companies who are bringing broadband to rural areas but there is an overarching question here and it relates to the question that ranking member issue asked earlier about what are the bright spots? if you think about this is the larger value chain of microeconomics breathing from the content companies and internet providers to the infrastructure providers where the bright spots are is clearly outside of infrastructure. the app developers and the companies are earning extraordinary returns. there is a very knee-jerk and familiar regulatory impulse to say let's try to protect the companies that are making high

returns from the ones that are making low returns. as an economist that's a very odd structure. >> final question mr. slinger when google fiber was being deployed its been reported you all were able to work with local governments and maybe some expedited approval processes so that not just you but other entrance were able to move things through quicker. he could talk in general about the ability for government to take more of a regulatory approach and how it the regulation in the sense of helping expedite the expansion of technology has helped you and helps others to develop even more broadband? >> i'm going to go back to the fiber check list which we published in 2014. some of our major areas obviously are having access to the poll to make the poles

ready. one thing that has been suggested was if municipalities took a proactive step in doing home maintenance while they are doing home maintenance get rid of the old wires that aren't needed that would allow new entrants google fiber or other entrance to get in quick lien attach it poll. that is one thing that would really help and policy and access to their right-of-way. there's more we can do with federal highway to make sure no one is ripping up a road to construction repaving that we putting conduit that anyone can use. those are smart things that allow new market entrants and also lead to more competition. >> thanks for your answers. >> the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. unfortunately we are going to have to pull this to a close because we are down to four minutes left in the vote. this is not the last hearing. we expect to continue this work

going forward in your testimony has got us to a good starting place. we have a lot of follow-up to do. there are members that didn't get a chance to ask questions. we do have information to submit for the record including from cca tech freedom and mr. olson i believe you have a document you want to -- articles on broadband deployment and with that i am afraid we are going to -- ms. matsui to want just a minute or two? >> just a minute or two. i was curious i want to ask mr. slinger some questions. i find what you're talking about very interesting because i look at this and what you say is all very important that about deploying broadband infrastructure and i'm from sacramento so we have wonderful areas that are doing great rings. i'm looking at a particular area and are sitting that is

economically deprived and we have a light rail station that's going to be completed their with fiber. but yet we have schools and libraries that are deprived and people there who have no access. if we were to do something they are and i don't know whether we can have a special project but i'm looking at this for economic development. is that something that we can provide access that you say that you need? is that something that you were somebody else can take on as a project working with us because i'm trying very much to help this area. they feel very deprived looking at the rest of my district that feel like they are on the move and they are not on the move and i want to get them on the move. is there something we can do there? >> there is a lot that we do early-stage with all the cities we look at to make sure they have the right kind of digital

inclusion plans in place to make sure the cities have a focus on it and again there is no silver all it. we want to make sure that all providers and local community groups take this on and add fiber and the technologies to make sure people understand the relevancy of the web and hopefully get more people on line. >> thank you very much and thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you. we will have to call it to conclusion. we have votes on the house floor so thank you to all of you for your testimony, your counsel and we look forward to being back in touch with you as we move oregon to others who have ideas for the congress and now we can expand access to affordable broadband broadband -- broadband across the country wherever it is not. i understand we have some tribal letters for the record as well from mr. lujan which we are happy to accept and what that he will adjourn.

[inaudible conversations] attorney general loretta lynch announced today that a federal grand jury has indicted dylann roof who allegedly killed my people at a historic life church in charleston south carolina. that's next on c-span2. secretary of state john kerry testifies on their radnich the agreement tomorrow terry at a

federal grand jury has indicted dylann roof the suspect in last month shooting at a historic lack church in charleston south carolina and federal hate crime charges. he's accused of killing nine people during a bible study in charleston and was charged on 33 federal counts. attorney general loretta lynch spoke about the indictments at a briefing at the justice department. >> good afternoon everyone and thank you for coming. i'm joined here today by the head of the department of civil rights division and mark juliano deputy director of the of the eye. we are here today to announce that a federal grand jury in south airliner has returned a 33 count indictment against dell and storm ref charging him with federal hate crimes and by her

arms charges for killing and attempting to kill african-american parishioners at emanuel episcopal church in charleston south carolina because of their race and in order to interfere with their exercise of their religion. several months prior to the tragic events of june 17 roof conceived his goal of increasing racial tension throughout the nation and seeking restitution for perceived wrongs that he believed african-americans that committed against white people. to carry out these twin goals of fanning racial flames and exacting revenge he further decided to seek out and murder african-americans because of their race. an essential element of his plan however was to find his victims inside of the church specific than african-american church to ensure the greatest notoriety

and attention to his actions. as alleged he set out the evening of june 172015 to carry out this plan and drove to the emanuel episcopal church in charleston south carolina known as mother and manual. mother and manual was his destination specifically because it was a historically african-american church of significance to people of charleston south carolina and the nation. on a summer evening dylann roof found his target. african-americans engaged in worship. he was welcomed by ministers of the church and prisoners. he joined them in their bible study groups. the parishioners had eyeballs. dylann roof had a 45 caliber glock pistol loaded with hollow point less. and as set forth in the indictments while the parishioners of mother and manual were engaged in religious worship and bible studies dylann roof drew his pistol and opened fire on them ultimately killing

nine church members. as you know the state of south carolina is prosecuting roof for the murders attempted murders he is alleged to have committed. we commend south carolina state authority for their tremendous work and their quick response. it's important to note however that south carolina does not have a hate crimes statute and as a result the state charges do not reflect the alleged hate crimes presented in the federal and to return today. specifically the federal indictment returned today charges roof with nine mergers and three attempted murders under the matthew shepherd and james bird hate crimes prevention act. this federal hate crimes law prohibits use of a dangerous weapon to cause bodley injury are attempting to do so on the basis of race or color. the shepherd byrd act was enacted specifically to

vindicate the unique arms caused by racially motivated -- violent charged with three attempted murders under a second federal hate crimes statute that prohibits the use or threat of force to obstruct any person free exercise of their religious belief. ..